HL Deb 13 May 1965 vol 266 cc195-205

4.0 p.m.

Debate resumed.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, reverting to the draft functions of Traffic Wardens Order, and having listened to the noble Lords, Lord Stonham and Lord Newton, I feel that we should give this Order some examination. Frankly, from what was said by my noble friend Lord Newton I was not quite sure whether he was advocating greater powers for traffic wardens in some directions but in other directions reserving all powers to the police. I must confess, I was a little confused at the end of his remarks. Perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, could give some clarification on one or two points.

This Order—to use Lord Stonham's words—is for an extension of the traffic wardens' powers to control and regulate moving traffic. We are in fact giving new powers to the traffic wardens, but we are, quite rightly, not granting them any great extension of powers such as are reserved to the police under the Road Traffic Acts. Under Section 22(6) the power remains to a constable to demand a man's name and address, and this will not be a power exercised by the traffic wardens. I do not think it is a good thing to give a man authority to do a job and at the same time to restrict his using any powers of direct sanction to carry out that job. I should prefer that such powers should be exercised by the police rather than by an outside body like the traffic wardens. We in this country are jealous indeed of the liberties of the subject and their encroachment by any member of the Executive. Indeed, even police powers are subject to legislative supervision.

There are two questions I should like to ask the noble Lord, Lord Stonham. If the traffic wardens are to have these new powers, is a new standard of physical fitness to be demanded of them, so that they may exercise those powers? The London traffic wardens are worthy men but are mostly wounded ex-Servicemen. Many of them wear thick glasses because at their advancing age their eyesight is not very acute. Therefore, before one gives a blanket power to traffic wardens one should have a blanket standard of physical fitness. Alternatively, if there is to be a selective standard of physical fitness to which only a limited number of wardens can conform, we should not give a blanket power to all wardens but should give it only to those who are physically qualified.

Are the wardens to have special training in order that they may be able to fulfil the new duties which are now to be given them? I know that in one Bedford police division training facilities are already available. Can we have an assurance that no man will be able to exercise the new powers unless, first, he is up to a standard of physical fitness, so that he is capable of carrying out his duties, and, secondly, has undergone a training course? I consider that this is a rather faltering and halting half-way situation. What one day we shall have to come to in this country is a traffic police, properly trained, mobile, virile young men, possessed of full police powers. That will come, but we have not got there yet. This is probably a reasonable compromise step, but is not very satisfactory.

I read in the Press that the motoring organisations have suggested to the Minister that military police should be used in congested areas during holiday periods and at week-ends. I understand that the Minister is considering the matter. I sincerely hope it will not be given favourable consideration. Even if the military police were not given powers of arrest, unfortunately they would be in uniform, and the ordinary citizen of this country has an inherent dislike of being ordered, commanded or pushed about in peace time by people in Service uniform. It would be alien to the spirit of freedom in a country if a civil Minister were to authorise military people in uniform to have powers of command—I do not say powers of sanction in law—over civilians. I sincerely hope that when the Minister comes to reply he will tell us that his "Chief" will not look very favourable upon such a proposal.

LORD SOMERS

My Lords, before the noble Lord replies, I should like strongly to re-emphasise what my noble friend Lord Balfour of Inchrye said about the training of traffic wardens. To-day the regulation of traffic is such a highly technical matter that mere intelligence is not enough. One must go thoroughly into the subject and study the problems involved before one can think of taking on the regulation of heavy traffic in built-up areas, for example, during the rush hours.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL

My Lords, as a member of the Special Orders Committee which reported that this Order needed a little more attention than many other Orders which come before us, I would reinforce the plea of my noble friend Lord Newton that, for the reasons he gave, the matter should be reconsidered. Many newspapers have suggested that as the A.A. and the R.A.C. scouts already direct traffic, it is all right for wardens to do so. I would not disagree with this, and in fact I am all in favour of the idea behind the Order. But to the great British public a warden has an official status, whereas an A.A. or a R.A.C. scout has not. Therefore, if a warden gives a signal—which he has every right to do—cars will obey his signals and will proceed with more speed and less caution than if an ordinary traffic signal were in their favour.

Might I ask why the Order does not apply to Scotland? If traffic wardens in Scotland already possess these powers, I should raise no objection. If they do not possess them, would it not be better to keep the two countries on similar lines, so that the traffic wardens are armed with the same powers, thus avoiding anomalies as between the two countries?

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, the various objections and suggestions which have been made are of great interest and will obviously be studied by the noble Lord who is to reply; but I would suggest to the House that they are on a long-term basis. This Order is a new development. It should be treated in the nature of an experiment and as a matter of great urgency. In view of the pressing demands on the police force and the present state of crime to-day, anything which can relieve the police for other duties should not be delayed. Therefore, I hope the Order will commend itself to the House.

4.10 p.m.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, I am extremely grateful to my noble friend Lord Strabolgi for his remarks and for the support he has given. He has, indeed, given in a sentence or two the entire justification for the Order and, as I believe the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, would agree, we should give this a trial. So many people, quite rightly, were dubious in 1960 about this new idea of traffic wardens. Everybody had misgivings. Now we have come, in the limited field in which they have so far operated, to feel that generally they have done a good and worthwhile job. There has not been a tremendous increase in their numbers. The total of wardens, men and women, at the present time in the whole country is of the order of 1,160, of whom some 130 are women and close to 50 per cent. are employed in the Metropolitan Area. But the fact that women have been employed as traffic wardens with considerable success does, I think, give an answer to some of the points that have been made.

The noble Lord, Lord Newton, put two very proper and pertinent points to me which seemed at the time to make sense to your Lordships, but I feel that that was due rather more to his personal charm than to the correctness and good sense of his argument. They are, however, the two most important questions which have been raised. He alleged that the verbal content of the Order was extraordinarily woolly, and put a question to me on the words: any other functions normally undertaken by the police in connection with the control and regulation of road traffic. I thought that the position would have been perfectly clear to everyone, and I am grateful for this opportunity of removing an apparent doubt.

The noble Lord asked me if there was any Statute which gave a definition of police functions; and thought that if there was a somewhat similar definition should be included in this Order in relation to road traffic. Police constables have a Common Law duty deriving from their duty to preserve law and order, to keep the Queen's Highway reasonably clear, and to permit Her Majesty's subjects to go to and fro upon their lawful occasions. There is no other statutory definition of police functions and, therefore, the noble Lord will, I am sure, acquit the Order now of being as woolly as he thought. The functions of the police, of course, are the actions they take to carry out these duties on behalf of Her Majesty's citizens and their actions change as traffic habits and conditions change; and, of course, they change in accordance with the orders they receive from the chief officers of police for the different police areas. In addition, as your Lordships are well aware, particular statutory functions may be created from time to time relating to specific duties.

The second question which the noble Lord addressed to me was with reference to functions connected with the control and regulation of road traffic by wardens. Here, again, traffic conditions and the needs of motorists vary frequently from place to place, and, indeed, from day to day, season to season and area to area. Wardens are intended to be used by chief constables to meet local difficulties and local situations as they arise. We cannot foresee all the difficulties and suggest in advance ways of dealing with them. Therefore, we do not want in an Order of this kind to specify and define a precise list of duties, which might then be exclusive and thereby limit the powers of chief constables to do precisely what is needed to meet a given situation. The form of words that we have used in the Order will enable chief constables to experiment, and in the view of the Home Office—we have, of course, discussed this with the chief officers of police and with the local authority associations, the County Councils Association and the Association of Municipal Corporations—this flexibility is essential if the service is to develop, and if the best ways of using it are to be discovered.

The noble Lord, Lord Newton, made one error, and I tried without complete success to intervene when he was speaking. It is the case that traffic wardens may legally direct traffic just as A.A. scouts and, indeed, lorry drivers can legally direct traffic, but if they do so they are acting outside the scope of their functions under the Road Traffic and Roads Improvement Act, 1960, which is the authority for paying the police grant in respect of their services. With this Order, of course, the duties of traffic wardens in regulating traffic will come under the police grant, and it will therefore remove that disability.

I do not want in answering this question to lay down precise limits to the duties which they would perform, but the kind of functions of traffic wardens which we had in mind as possible duties in regulating traffic, would be: point duty at the simpler crossroads; diverting traffic to prevent traffic jams; placing road signs under police direction; directing parking; directing traffic trying to move on and off the highway; advising and assisting motorists coming to town about routes and parking places; and, of course, other things like acting in emergencies, and regulating traffic in the vicinity of road accidents.

There was one pertinent point which the noble Lord, Lord Newton, raised, when he said, quite rightly, that under other existing legislation a schools traffic patrol has the authority to stop a vehicle, and if the driver of a vehicle fails to stop he thereby commits an offence which is punishable by Statute, with a fine up to a maximum of £20. Similarly, under different legislation if orders of that kind given by an employee of the Ministry of Works in the Royal Parks are disobeyed, there can be a fine up to a maximum of £5. The noble Lord was quite right in saying that under the 1960 Act traffic wardens can act as school patrols, and if they are acting in that capacity and their instructions are disobeyed an offence is committed which is punishable. He said, "It seems very silly that that is the case now in that particular narrow field, but you have not taken this opportunity of creating similar conditions for traffic wardens in this Order."

I usually agree with the noble Lord, Lord Airedale, and on this occasion I am glad the noble Lord, Lord Newton, has his support. The blunt and plain answer that I give is that that is other legislation, and that, for a variety of reasons into which I need not go now, it was not possible to go any further with this Order. We want to try it out; and if it is found that different, further or additional powers are needed, then my right honourable friend the Home Secretary will most certainly consider it, because we shall watch this situation very closely indeed. But I want again to go back to 1960 and to refer to the climate of opinion then, and to the better climate of opinion towards wardens now, and say that this is a further step which we regard as important, and we want to try it out.

The noble Lord, Lord Newton, quoted the Civil Service Union. He said it was not good enough for them, either, and he asked me to consider withdrawing the Order to enable Article 1(1) to be amended. It is perfectly proper for the Civil Service Union—indeed, it is their duty—to comment on any matters which affect the employment, pay and conditions of their members. It is very proper that they should do so, and anything that they say under those heads will, of course, be carefully considered. But when they go into what I might call realms of policy, as to whether the employment of traffic wardens on these duties is a proper thing, then, in my view, they are going rather far. This matter, the policy point, has been considered very carefully with all police bodies, including the Police Federation. It is acceptable to them, although the employment of traffic wardens with the full powers of police constables—or, indeed, powers beyond those we are now asking for—would not have been acceptable to the Police Federation at the present time.

I come now to deal with the points which were raised by the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye. If I understood him correctly, he agrees with this Order at the moment inasmuch as he would be unwilling to give more power to wardens than we propose to give at the present time, and I am very glad to have his support in this matter. He asked two questions which were almost one: Is there to be a new standard of physical fitness for wardens, and are the wardens going to have special training? On this latter point he was supported by the noble Lord, Lord Somers. The present position is that Section 2(5) of the Road Traffic and Roads Improvement Act requires that all traffic wardens must be adequately qualified for appointment and suitably trained before they undertake their duties. Obviously, new and additional duties will require extra and different types of training, but I would mention that selection and training is a matter for the local chief officer of police—the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police or the chief constable—to decide, and clearly the amount of training is going to vary from area to area according to the duties which it is decided the traffic wardens shall undertake.

I have been astonished, though, to hear noble Lords say, or imply, that traffic wardens are elderly gentlemen who wear thick glasses, who cannot see anything, and things like that. All I can say, from my own observation—and I have seen a good many of them—is that they look, physically speaking, a pretty fine body of men. I have been astonished that, particularly in the Metropolis, we have been as fortunate as we have to get such a good looking lot of chaps. As to their efficiency, those noble Lords who have discussed this subject with me have paid tribute to it, and I can confirm this from my personal experience. But I can add something about the Metropolitan Police. There is no doubt whatever that they must be physically fit for their job, and we can give an assurance about that.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, I quite agree that they must be physically fit for their job, and I think they are, even though some of them have glasses for shortsight. That does not matter in dealing with parking offences. But the point I want to make is, if they are to have new duties, will there be a requisite physical standard of fitness to meet those new duties? It may be a different standard of physical fitness.

LORD STONHAM

My Lords, this point will be drawn to the attention of the authorities concerned. It would be idle for me to give a positive assurance on a matter which I have not had the opportunity to consider, but it is a matter of common sense; it must be so.

I should like to say a word about the training in the Metropolitan Police Area, which is the only one we can be positive about, because it is the only one for which my right honourable friend the Home Secretary is directly responsible. They have a training course for the basic corps of traffic wardens which comprises theoretical and practical instruction into the relevant parts of road traffic law, the law of evidence, local authority schemes, making reports, giving evidence in court, general deportment on the street in relation to the public, police organisation and procedure with particular regard to traffic problems and enforcement, methods of work and complaints procedure. When a newly appointed warden has completed his course, and before he actually starts on his duties alone, he accompanies an ex- perienced warden on his beat for a period. I think we can be assured that training is adequate.

The noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, also referred to a statement by my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport. I did not hear what my right honourable friend said, but I understand that it was an off-the-cuff answer in a television interview, and that my right honourable friend, in answer to a question as to whether he would consider using military police in the control of civilian traffic, said he would consider the proposal. I am quite sure that my right honourable friend would consider any proposal that might help, but, in that consideration, I am quite sure he will pay full regard, first, to the fact that it is not his immediate responsibility; secondly, to the sentiments which the noble Lord himself expressed; and, thirdly, to the fact that, in the whole of the country, there are only 300 "Redcaps" doing this duty, some of which are in the strategic reserve. Therefore, although I do not know (and, of course, cannot presume to know) what my right honourable friend would decide, it seems to me that that is not going to be a very likely proposal.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that answer. The reason I raised the point was because the word "consider" has so many different meanings in political life at the present time.

LORD STONHAM

So do other words that I can think of—I said that, my Lords, to stop anyone else saying it.

Lastly, the noble Duke, the Duke of Atholl, quite properly (and I am sure in a very friendly spirit) asked me about the position in Scotland—because, as he has read the Order, he will have noticed that this applies only to England and Wales. So far as the position in Scotland is concerned, they have not got on very fast with the system of traffic wardens. There are traffic warden systems in operation in Edinburgh, and quite recently they were started in Glasgow and Kilmarnock. But that is all so far. Although this Order does not impinge on Scotland, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is aware of what we are doing and has been consulted; and let us hope that this will be one of the examples—rare, if you like—when England is in front and shows Scotland the way.

The essence of this Order is to improve road safety and the efficiency of traffic control. All your Lordships know that I am against certain sorts of punishment; but if I ever feel homicidal it is towards some of the people one meets driving cars on the road ruthlessly and without regard to anyone else, at excessive speeds and with a disregard of all kinds of signs and control. They are among the people that I should like to see most severely punished. It is hoped that this modest Order will be a beginning to the improvement in road safety that we all so greatly desire.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Forward to