§ 2.35 p.m.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are aware that, at least in London, pedestrians frequently are unable to see traffic light signals when wishing to cross roads; that this results in confusion and accident, when pedestrians are half-way across and lights change; what proportion of road crossing lights are so affected; and whether they will make a statement.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD LINDGREN)My Lords, at most junctions controlled by traffic light signals a pedestrian who wishes to cross the road should be able to stand in a position on the footpath where he can see the relevant signals. I do not think that London is any different in this respect from other towns. Most important is that pedestrians should watch the traffic. If my noble friend has any particular examples in mind in London where there might be confusion or danger to pedestrians, we should be glad to take them up with the Greater London Council. We shall also consider whether further guidance can be given to pedestrians when the Highway Code is revised.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that Answer, may I ask him whether he is aware that there are many junctions in London where pedestrians are unsighted in this way? But, leaving that for the moment, I should like to ask my 904 noble friend two points arising out of his reply. Would it be possible at all junctions where there are traffic lights to have marked for pedestrians the "Wait" signal or the "Cross" signal? Secondly, if that were possible, would it also be useful to make it obligatory on pedestrians to cross at such crossings?
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, to the engineer everything is possible, provided that he is given sufficient finance. I am afraid that, so far as a great number of these crossings are concerned, the financial cost of my noble friend's last suggestion in relation to its value has up to now prevented our considering it desirable. With regard to the pedestrian, there is always the possibility of the jaywalker being prosecuted, but that is not one of the offences that are taken up enthusiastically by the police in London.
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, are the Government aware that there are a number of crossings in London where the lights are perfectly visible to pedestrians, but where they give insufficient time for pedestrians, particularly the old and infirm, to cross? I have had considerable experience of this in the last few weeks.
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, this is one of the problems where one has to mix traffic with pedestrians. One ought to emphasise that the basic reason for the existence of traffic lights is to facilitate the flow of traffic, as well as the safety of the pedestrian. It is true that the phasing of lights in order to improve the flow of traffic has sometimes been made a little sharp. The noble Lord has mentioned his own case, and if there are others that he or any other noble Lord would like to call attention to, we shall be glad to look at them.
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, would the noble Lord also remember that there is such a thing as aiding the pedestrian?
THE MARQUESS OF WILLINGDONMy Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that the point where the lights are situated leading from Leicester Square to Haymarket is the most dangerous turning for pedestrians in the whole of London?
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, in this life everything becomes more complicated. In the old days of the simple 905 traffic lights at crossroads things were comparatively easy. Now we have these sophisticated lights which, by phasing, control up to as many as five flows of traffic where there are perhaps four roads leading to one roundabout. It is difficult, but the only basic requirement is for the pedestrian to walk parallel with the flow of traffic, and to watch the traffic all the time.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, arising out of that reply, am I to understand the noble Lord to say that the primary purpose of traffic lights is to speed up the flow of traffic, and that safety of pedestrians is a secondary consideration? Surely the safety of pedestrians should be equal in importance to the flow of traffic.
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, I said—at least I intended to say, and Hansard will show whether I did or not—that the primary purpose of traffic lights is to facilitate the flow of traffic. After all, traffic lights supersede the policemen who used to control traffic. But they are also there for the safety of pedestrians. The lights are placed there in order that the motor car driver or lorry driver can see them, and not necessarily pedestrians.
§ BARONESS HORSBRUGHMy Lords, would the noble Lord say, then, whether anything is done to facilitate the passage of pedestrians?
§ LORD LINDGRENYes, my Lords all the time.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, should the pedestrian be considered only second in importance to the lorry?
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, it is not a question of the pedestrian being considered second in importance to the lorry. This country depends on its industry and commerce, and perhaps in so far as production is concerned transport delays are some of the most costly things.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, just to finish off this discussion—and I am sorry that my noble friend has been kept so long on this Question—may I ask him this question? He talked about the flow of traffic. Is he aware 906 that in going down Bond Street to-day, from Fenwick's Corner to the bottom of Bond Street, at about a quarter to twelve, I passed ten lorries or vans off-loading in Bond Street and traffic could not possibly get by?
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, that is another question. I hope that none of them was exceeding the twenty minutes allowed.