Windscreen Cleaning Nuisance (Hansard, 14 May 1991)

The Minister of State, Home Office (Earl Ferrers)
My Lords, it is not illegal to offer services in the street so long as it is not for gain or reward. However, to obstruct the highway or to use threatening or insulting behaviour is a criminal offence. There are no plans to make windscreen cleaning itself an offence.

§ Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes
My Lords, does my noble fiend accept that, whereas I am not opposed to enterprise or initiative, it is the unexpected and uninvited nature of the service which causes alarm and anger? A torso suddenly appears in front of the windscreen, followed by waves of grey water which totally obliterate the driver's view. It is a nuisance and a potential hazard. Does my noble friend agree that if they would only ask whether the service was required it would not be so objectionable?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I have a great deal of sympathy with what my noble friend says. However, it is difficult to pass legislation telling people that they have to ask whether they can do something. Nevertheless, if they use threatening behaviour, demand money with menaces or cause criminal damage, those are offences.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, is the Minister aware that since I wrote to him about this matter on 14th November last year the situation has got worse? Is he aware that many people now feel intimidated by the gangs of people—sometimes eight or nine of them—who come up to a car and when waved away shout abuse and use threatening gestures? Is he also aware that when this subject was mentioned on LBC Newstalk the programme was inundated with calls from listeners complaining about how they had been treated by such people and about the danger to motorists and others? Finally, can the noble Earl confirm that the police already have powers under the Metropolitan Police Act 1939 to deal with this awful nuisance?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, on the last point the noble Lord is entirely correct. It is not so much a question of the law as of collecting evidence. I agree that intimidation is very disagreeable, but one does not have to be a windscreen wiper to intimidate people. The other day I was intimidated in the street by a beggar who pushed me when I did not give him a pound. That is just as intimidating.

§ Lord Nugent of Guildford
My Lords, would my noble friend, with his expert knowledge of these matters, advise setting about the offender with a walking stick?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, they are very useful on appropriate occasions.

The Viscount of Falkland
My Lords, if at traffic lights a person came up and offered to tell one a joke or to play a musical instrument would that be considered to be a service which one could accept or reject? Would that fall into the same category of service to be offered?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, that would be for the courts to decide. My interpretation is that if that were to happen and the person did not ask for a reward for doing so it would not be an offence.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, with due respect to my noble friends and others who have supported the suggestion, does my noble friend agree that there are already too many criminal offences on the statute book and that it should be a general rule of thumb that if one wants to introduce a new one one should suggest two more for repeal?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I am sure that my noble and learned friend did so when he was Lord Chancellor. On the substance of the point, it is not the law which is at fault; the problem is finding the evidence on which to prosecute people.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, will the noble Earl accept that I feel threatened? There is a group which operates permanently on the Embankment and late in the evening they are quite aggressive. They do not say anything that one can pin down but one feels threatened. How far do they have to go before one can report them for threatening behaviour?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, that is a matter for the police. I accept that some people are threatening. I remember that in the days of National Service there used to be a charge of dumb insolence, which meant that one could be extremely offensive without having said anything. Equally one can be very threatening without saying anything. How threatening one has to be before one is charged would be a matter for the police.

§ Lord Hutchinson of Lullington
My Lords, would the noble Earl be prepared to ban all Questions which contain the phrase "introduce legislation to ban"?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I think that that would be going a little too far.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, does my noble friend recall that when a lot of money was spent by the garages on improving forecourts we were told that we should receive tremendous service, windscreens would be wiped and so on? Nothing has happened to implement that intention. I wonder whether there is a garage which still does that. Does my noble friend agree that, if so, it ought to be a protected species and not be vilified as these people are?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, if there were such a garage I am sure that even the Government would not claim responsibility. This problem falls under the heading of what one might call initiative.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, is the Minister aware that I do not want my windscreen washed and nor do I want services offered free in the street? Is he also aware that, just like many events in life, it is humorous and enjoyable when in moderation but becomes irritating and annoying when taken to excess? Is he further aware that the Question asks whether he will ban such action? Does he not think that to ban it would be a bit sledgehammerish in the circumstances? Can he perhaps persuade the Metropolitan Police to exercise a certain gentle dissuasion in the affair?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I am so glad that the noble Lord and I see eye to eye on this. It would be a pity to ban such action for the very reasons that I have given. The answer is that you have to obtain evidence and, if you obtain evidence, the law is in order.

§ Lord Montagu of Beaulieu
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that, given that most motorists drive with dirty windscreens, these enterprising young men are perhaps contributing to road safety?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, that is the other side of the coin.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords, does the noble Earl accept that by banning such action the Government might in future put noble Lords in a difficult situation because when this place is finally closed down we may all be looking for jobs cleaning windscreens?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I am sure that if that were so the noble Lord would not need to fear because he would get a larger pourboire than most of the people who dance up and down trying to offer their services.

§ Lord Mowbray and Stourton
My Lords, referring to what my noble friend Lord Montagu said, is my noble friend the Minister aware that if a motorist had a dirty windscreen he would cause a major obstruction because it would take a long time to clean and the lights would be changing once or twice?

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, he would then be causing an obstruction in the street, which is an arrestable offence.