§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Barber.]
§ 1.38 p.m.
§ Mr. F. P. Crowder (Ruislip-Northwood)I am glad to have the opportunity of raising in this House the question of a controlled pedestrian crossing across Field End Road, immediately south of Eastcote Station approach.
I have in my hand a document containing 300 signatures of my constituents who live in the vicinity of that bridge and crossing, and who, in view of the danger to children and pedestrians, urge that certain plans which have been approved by the Middlesex County Council, which provide for a pavement on the west side of the bridge, a deep lay-by outside the station entrance for buses, and a further bus pull-in for northbound traffic south of the bridge and adjacent to the shops in Queen's Parade, should be put into effect at an early opportunity.
These things are a little difficult to visualise, and only a few days ago I received some photographs which I have passed on to my right hon. Friend. Of course, I fully appreciate that here today he cannot hope to give me a complete answer on this question, but I would ask him to consider and study these photographs in conjunction with what I have to say.
The bridge as it is at present is a point of considerable danger to all pedestrians and traffic, because anyone wishing to proceed from King's Parade to the shops at Queen's Parade is forced to make a double crossing of a constant stream of fast traffic approaching from a humpbacked bridge, because of the lack of pavement facilities. Those people who prefer to risk walking over the bridge without involving themselves in this crossing are, therefore, of course, exposed to the normal risks of a pedestrian walking with his back to the traffic in a busy main road.
Recent events have given some indication of the seriousness of this danger point. I was thinking of calling it a potential danger point, but, in view of the fact that only last month a man was 1320 knocked down and taken to hospital, and two children received minor injuries there, it is shown to be a danger point. Those accidents indicate something of the difficulties which my constituents living in Eastcote are experiencing at this point.
It may be due to increased trade—one hopes so—or due to the increased number of cars upon the road, but there is every indication that in recent months road traffic has speeded up tremendously. A pointer to the state of traffic in this area is given by the opening of auction rooms there on Tuesdays and Fridays, which engages numerous visiting cars which would not otherwise be in the area. This, of course, causes further congestion and difficulty to be experienced by pedestrians.
My constituents who live in the area are very firm that the position at the south side of the bridge is a positive death trap. At peak periods, where the bus stops, pedestrians and young children wait to cross the road literally at their peril. There is a genuine feeling that there was never a better case for a controlled pedestrian crossing.
I say at once that, motoring as I do some 16,000 or 17,000 miles a year, all of that in the suburbs and the London area. I am fully convinced that we have far too many controlled pedestrian crossings and too many impediments to stop the motorist as he goes on his way. I assure my hon. Friend that, as a motorist feeling in that way, I should be the very last person to make such a request to him unless I thought it was really necessary. I have spoken to him about the matter before this debate, and, I am quite certain that, given time, he will attend to it. Though he may not, of course, be able to give a full answer today, we shall much appreciate hearing further details from him if need be in future.
§ 1.43 p.m.
§ The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation (Mr. G. R. H. Nugent)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. F. P. Crowder) on securing the opportunity on the Adjournment of the House today to ventilate this problem of his constituents at Eastcote Station Bridge.
I say at once that I sympathise with his constituents who are finding difficulty 1321 and danger at this point. Although I have not had long to acquaint myself with the problem, I can see that, as the road is now laid out, there is a real difficulty and danger there, more particularly because there is a pavement on one side of the road only and, therefore, as my hon. Friend has said, pedestrians wishing to cross from one side to the other in the course of their shopping are put to special danger.
I have been able, in the time available, to look into this matter to ascertain what is happening about the application from the Middlesex County Council to make this road improvement scheme. I am glad to tell the House that we are able to approve the scheme. I cannot say, because I have not yet had time to look at it in detail, whether it includes all the features to which my hon. Friend referred. It certainly includes the additional pavement on the side where it does not now exist.
I will look into the scheme in detail and ascertain whether it includes the other features to which my hon. Friend referred. My hon. Friend's constituents will, at least, have the comfort of knowing that this work will shortly he put in hand and will go, I hope, some way to remove the dangers they have to encounter there. As regards the pedestrian crossing. I have not been able to consider that in detail, but I will certainly do so and write to my hon. Friend on the subject.
I must warn my hon. Friend and the House, however, that our general policy on pedestrian crossings is, inevitably, to be reluctant to agree to new ones. Pedestrian crossings have shown that they have great value as a safety measure provided that they are used in relatively restrained numbers. It may be helpful to the House if I recall briefly the history of their use. The pedestrian crossing was introduced over twenty years ago by Leslie Hore-Belisha, when he was Minister of Transport, and it immediately became a valuable device in helping pedestrians to cross the road safely. As the 'thirties went on, the number of crossings increased and continued to increase during the war years, until, towards the end of the 'forties, the 1322 number of pedestrian crossings was very large indeed. They were to be found everywhere and often very close together.
Unfortunately, experience showed that the more pedestrian crossings there were the less were they respected and, therefore, the less safety did they give to individual pedestrians. The Government of the day, our predecessors, took the view that the only way to make these pedestrian crossings safe again was drastically to reduce their number. That was done in 1951, the number being reduced by about two-thirds. Those that remained were more effectively marked by the zebra stripes. The result has been that those which remain are better respected. There is, therefore, more safety for pedestrians using them and we are deriving real benefit from this safety measure.
After that experience, we must, quite clearly, be extremely careful not to increase the number of pedestrian crossings except where the need is established beyond a peradventure. That is so only in cases where there is a very dense traffic flow and a very heavy pedestrian user at a particular spot. In very many places in London, Greater London, and all our great cities, there is difficulty in crossing the road, but, clearly, if we made a pedestrian crossing in every such place we should very rapidly lose again the great value which they have.
It must, therefore, be in the light of that experience and those principles that I consider my hon. Friend's request for a pedestrian crossing here. I undertake to do it sympathetically, but I am sure that he and his constituents will realise that, unless these principles are carefully maintained, not only shall we not achieve safety at this point but we shall jeopardise the safety which pedestrian crossings generally can give. However, I will certainly look into the request of the hon. Member and of his constituents for a crossing at this point and when I have carefully examined it in every respect I will write and let my hon. Friend know the outcome.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at ten minutes to Two o'clock.