Traffic Calming (Hansard, 9 May 1994)

§ 11. Mr. Garnier
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what evidence he has that traffic-calming schemes have reduced accidents in urban areas.

§ Mr. Key
Traffic calming has reduced accidents in 20 mph zones by as much as 70 per cent, and has been particularly effective in reducing accidents to child pedestrians and cyclists.

§ Mr. Garnier
The most effective and popular traffic-calming scheme in Market Harborough is the completion of the A1-M1 link, but the benefits of the traffic-calming scheme currently being undertaken within Market Harborough are not widely understood. Will my hon. Friend use all his powers to ensure that the disadvantages of the scheme are fully mitigated by its benefits?

§ Mr. Key
Yes. I shall also bear in mind the fact that work starts today on a traffic-calming scheme on a length of wide road—Fairfield road—in my hon. Friend's constituency. Vociferous opposition has been expressed in respect of work in zone 3—Fairfield road, Logan street—so we have modified the scheme in consultation with the local highway authority. As my hon. Friend rightly said, the best future for traffic calming in Market Harborough lies in the completion of the A14—the A1-M1 link—which will be opened next month, and in the successful completion of the bypass demonstration project. Market Harborough is one of only six towns that have been part of an experiment to ensure that, when towns are bypassed and traffic flows reduced by up to 70 per cent., the towns' centres return to the life that they knew in the past, and that wide, unattractive roads do not go through the middle of our cities.

§ Mr. Enright
Is the Minister aware that, precisely when he was praising sleeping policemen, the Minister for Transport in London was busy denigrating them? Will he hold a referendum on the matter?

§ Mr. Key
No. I have no intention of having a referendum on that matter. Good heavens, if we had a referendum those in favour of road improvement might win the argument!

§ Mr. Dunn
Does the Minister agree that, in addition to traffic-calming measures, the proper working and maintenance of motor cars is essential? Does he agree that many of our constituents could not afford to maintain their motor cars if they faced a 50p increase in the price of petrol as suggested by the Liberal Democrats?

§ Mr. Key
My hon. Friend makes an important point. The management of our roads includes creating, as far as possible, a pollution-free environment. That is being achieved because motor cars are becoming much cleaner and because of our commitment to the Rio arrangements and increasing the price of fuel. Given that cars will be much more efficient, that need not bear down on less-affluent members of the community.

§ Mr. Pike
I recognise the impact on accidents to which the Minister referred in his original response, and the fact that most traffic-calming schemes cost relatively little. But why does not the Minister provide local authorities such as Lancashire with enough resources to carry out all the traffic-calming schemes that they wish to introduce this year?

§ Mr. Key
We have maintained the money for traffic-calming schemes at £50 million and it is entirely open to local authorities to prioritise spending in these areas. This year, we have introduced for the first time a package approach to local authority joint funding with the Department of Transport. That means that local authorities have much more flexibility to design overall transport packages including road, rail, bus, cycle, and pedestrianisation features. That is a sensible and practical way forward.