Traffic Lights in London (Hansard, 5 February 2003)

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, Transport for London is responsible for new traffic lights on both borough and TfL roads in London. New traffic lights on borough roads are funded from a central fund held by Transport for London to which the boroughs contribute on a per capita basis. Transport for London receives a block grant—GLA transport grant—of over £1 billion a year in support of its functions, but the Government do not provide any specific funding for traffic lights.

§ Lord Higgins
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Is it not clear that the expenditure from all the sources mentioned is not only wasteful but damaging? Is it not also the case that the new traffic lights are causing considerable congestion which did not exist previously and are resulting in pollution? They are affecting traffic not only in London but beyond; for example, on roads to the ports and the coast. Moreover, much of the congestion is affecting not only cars, trucks and so on, but public transport— which London is supposed to be in favour of encouraging. Is the Minister aware that, in the chaos south of Westminster Bridge the other night, there was 206 a queue of nine buses which were stationary for a considerable length of time? Will he refer this whole issue of traffic lights—which seems to have got completely out of control—to the Transport Research Laboratory?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I think that the noble Lord is confusing two entirely different issues. His Question related to the cost of installing traffic lights in London. I answered factually about who pays the cost of installing them. He is now asking a supplementary question about the phasing of traffic lights. It is a perfectly legitimate question; but most of the complaints about traffic lights have been the result of changes in policy by Transport for London—which is its responsibility, not that of the Government. If the Question is about additional traffic lights, there are very few extra sets of lights. I believe that the problems described by the noble Lord, Lord Higgins, are problems of phasing.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, the noble Lord said that there were only a few extra traffic lights. Has he not been extremely fortunate in his recent experience? I know that the noble Lord is a great deal closer to the Mayor of London than I am—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, perhaps he would venture to explain the mind of the Mayor, and say whether it really is his intention, as it would appear, to turn the whole of London into a red light district.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I do not usually seek to emulate the noble Lord's wit. If he wants to ask me a serious question, I shall try to answer it.

§ Baroness Hamwee
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, to the extent that there are some extra traffic lights, they are frequently to assist pedestrians—for example, at pelican crossings? I can cite an example on the South Circular road outside a primary school, where there are good reasons for installing a new crossing. As the Question seems to be focused on public spending, does the Minister further agree that attempting to protect pedestrians is a good way to approach public spending—in that it produces savings to the public purse—and that the re-phasing of traffic lights in central London by Transport for London has been in order to bring the phasing into line with the rest of the country and to give pedestrians sufficient time to cross?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the noble Baroness is entirely right. It seems to be a feature of questions in this House relating to traffic in London that they are almost entirely from the point of view of private motorists rather than that of pedestrians or cyclists. It is useful to have that correction. The noble Baroness is right in saying that, in so far as there are a 207 significant number of extra traffic lights, they are additional provision to protect pedestrians. That is certainly true of the ones that I have seen.

§ Lord Crickhowell
My Lords, if the Minister believes that the problem is merely one of phasing and that it merely affects motor cars, will he take the trouble to go as far as Trafalgar Square—preferably not in his ministerial car—where he will discover that the siting of the new traffic lights on the west side of the square has caused a jam every day this week, all the way up Haymarket to Piccadilly, largely consisting of buses.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, as with all these matters, I shall happily ensure that Transport for London and the Mayor are informed of the comments made in this House.

§ Lord Faulkner of Worcester
My Lords, would my noble friend be interested in knowing that I took a bus from outside this House at 12.30 today and arrived in the Strand exactly nine minutes later, without any delay whatever in Trafalgar Square, where the traffic lights work and the construction of the islands is now largely complete?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
Yes, my Lords, I think that the No. 77A and the No. 11 buses along the Strand are much quicker now that they do not have to go round Trafalgar Square. I do not think that I shall inform the Mayor of London about that!

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, is it just a case of "silly us"—of our being rather naïve in thinking that all these changes were about easing congestion? If they are about installing more traffic lights to aid pedestrians, then both problems cannot be resolved at the same time. I have certainly experienced new installations of traffic lights a mere matter of yards apart, where the only place one can safely stop between the sets of lights is on a pedestrian crossing.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, everybody has their own experience. There are 700 Members of this House and nearly all of them travel in London. I am sure that the Mayor would be interested to know of the experiences of all of us, but these are not issues of government policy.