Agenda item

The Chair welcomed to the meeting County Councillor Charlie Edwards, Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, Phil Durnell, Director of Highways and Transport, Michael White, Highways Regulation Manager, and Jackie Brindle, Road Safety Manager from Lancashire County Council, Andy Pratt MBE, Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner, and Mark Hutton and Kirsty McCreesh from Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service.

At the Education and Children's Services Scrutiny Committee meeting held on
18 January 2022, a recommendation from this meeting suggested:

"The following county councillors be appointed as rapporteurs - County Councillors Berry, Woollam, and Swarbrick to further explore information behind the data on children seriously injured or killed on Lancashire roads to report back at the March meeting of the committee."

County Councillors Berry, Woollam, and Swarbrick provided a brief overview of the report provided at Appendix A.

County Councillor Edwards spoke to the committee explaining that the county council and members, as community leaders needed to do everything they can to engage, empower, and educate residents on road safety. He went on the inform that the county council's corporate priorities had changed to reflect the importance of climate change, population health, and active travel and that making the roads safer to promote active travel was a core priority.

County Councillor Edwards advised that there had been a review of the
Lancashire Road Safety Partnership (LRSP) in terms of purpose, and what each organisation brings to the partnership. There had also been a review of best practice from other local authorities, such as a peer review with West Yorkshire Road Safety Partnership which could be shared with the committee. He was aware that funding was a major part in being able to fulfil all the LRSP objectives and provided the committee with an example of ideas that had been suggested to look at different ways to obtain funding.

The committee was informed that the government had recently provided local authorities with the ability to bid to be able to enforce restrictions which they had not been able to do previously to assist the local constabulary. Parking enforcement officers were previously contracted to a different company, however, this had been brought in-house, which provided the county council with more flexibility to be able to be responsive where they saw an increase in demand. County Councillor Edwards asked the committee to promote reporting instances of problem parking or poor road safety, as the county council required an evidence-led approach to where they deploy resources.

Andy Pratt MBE advised that as Chair of the LRSP, the vision was to reach 0 people being killed on Lancashire roads. There had been a conference held at County Hall for parish and town councils, there was interest expressed to aid in delivering road safety in these rural areas, from this it was agreed that the vice-chair of parish and town councils would attend LRSP meetings. There had also been a seat on the partnership given to the Driver Vehicle Standards Agency to allow for more collaborative working. He explained that the primary work for young people was education and that the Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service and Road Safety Team at Lancashire County Council work with schools to achieve this.

Members were asked to each provide Andy Pratt with three community roadwatch volunteers aged 18 years old+, these volunteers would operate the radar cameras on vehicles. It was recognised that having more volunteers involved would support in changing the culture around road safety. Lancashire Constabulary took over 600 cars off the road in the last six-month period.

Mark Hutton, Area Manager within Prevention and Protection from the Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service provided the committee with information of their role on the LRSP. Their brand was used to deliver packages to engage young people and a promote change in behaviour. He explained that they delivered face to face engagement to all year 2 students (Key Stage 1) a fire safety package and re-visited the schools in year 6 to deliver 'Road Sense', whereby the content is driven by the data and intelligence provided by the LRSP. It was explained that year 6 pupils were chosen specifically as this was the age that they started to travel independently, but the package also focussed on the importance of wearing seatbelts, helmets when cycling, not being distracted as a pedestrian e.g. use of mobile phones and earbuds, and how to be a good passenger in a car. At Key Stage 3, teen-safe packages were delivered such as water safety, anti-social behaviour, wildfires, engaging with older people (dementia friendly), and 'restart the heart'. Finally, in years 10 and 11 they delivered the road safety 'Wasted Lives' package, aimed at young people who may become a driver or user of a moped and how everyone who travelled in a vehicle has a part to play in making a journey safe and understanding consequences. They also spoke about thematic work which was undertaken for example focussing on travel to and from places of worship. Mark Hutton continued to explain that their packages aimed to make young people influencers at home, to be able to encourage parents/carers and they could look at amending their year 6 package to reflect this. The Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service looked to approach 'influencers' who young people would listen to more.

Jackie Brindle reflected that it had been a positive experience being involved in the scrutiny exercise. The Road Safety team were involved at all ages starting at pre-birth, by engagement with pregnant women to ensure that car seats were installed correctly, preparation to start school and information to parents about road safety, practical training on pedestrian and cycling safety such as 'Bikeability'. It was clarified that young people were not only targeted to keep themselves safe, but older residents who also caused the collisions. There had been a new campaign launched called 'Slow Down Save Lives' at the parish and town council conference and where there was not this presence, the Road Safety Team would engage with county councillors. The team were also looking at community road safety champions, competitions to design future road safety signage, a road safety role models campaign, and modernise peer-to-peer messaging including the youth council who could provide new ideas.

Comments and queries from the committee were as follows:

·  On the school community promoting reporting instances of poor driver behaviour, it was explained that the aim of the meeting was to help parties work together. However, this was contingent on LRSP making it easier for the school community to do so and there was work being done to improve the reporting tool. Operation Snap had also begun in Lancashire, this used dashcam footage from vehicles, mobile phone, and bodycam footage. There were two dedicated officers at Lancashire Constabulary Headquarters who reviewed all the footage sent in, however, approximately 50% cannot be used to prosecute due to the quality of evidence. It was proposed that pupils at St Mary and St Benedict's Roman Catholic Primary School take part in being upskilled at taking footage of poor driver behaviour on their way in or home from school. The different routes for reporting concerns were clarified, for general road safety concerns outside schools, head teachers could contact the Road Safety Education team and their information was available on the school's portal, dangerous driving should be reported to Lancashire Constabulary, speeding concerns should be reported on the LRSP website, and other road condition concerns needed to be reported on the county council's 'Report It' website. The app 'Love Clean Streets' was discussed, as a new method of reporting to the county council. However, it was recognised that there were multiple routes to report concerns and a single point of contact would be looked at.

·  It was suggested to work with student councils within schools to interact with young people.

·  On the challenges around enforcement, members were advised that there was a focus from the fire and rescue service on cultural change. Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) was explained to the committee, where behaviour was driven by trauma with psychological and physiological effects. Lancashire Fire and Rescue Services provided trauma informed practice. It was highlighted that Lancashire County Council officers would like to work with the Lancashire Youth Council for ideas for intervention but recognised there needed to be a balance of road safety whilst young people can still enjoy themselves.

·  In terms of the time frame to stop allowing vehicles from parking outside schools, it was acknowledged that there were actions needed from the peer review. However, there were some schools who already had restrictions outside and those schools needed the enforcement officer's engagement, some schools might have restrictions but the lines had faded, the county council approved a budget of an additional £500,000 to refresh and repaint road markings, and finally there were schools where there were no restrictions and for these schools there would be lengthy legal processes needed including public consultations. Although the solution would be different for each school due to location.

·  Members asked for communication to be shared with county councillors with useful contact information including surveys.

·  The officer's process from receiving an email containing a road safety concern and responding to that email would be circulated to the committee. Timing of an investigation of a school would be during term-time and not in severe weather conditions. It was acknowledged that more could be done to communicate the outcome and on occasions where a comprehensive report was produced, this could be shared with the county councillor.

·  In terms of available funding for creative solutions around active travel, there had been refresher sessions for Bikeability and family Bikeability, but engagement was poor at that time. However, it was recognised that more families had taken up cycling during the pandemic, therefore the Road Safety team would revisit this. There was a sub-group within the LRSP for cyclists as a target group and the county council's Waste Management team was also engaged as part of a bicycle recycling scheme. A core-focus of the county council's bids to government for funding towards active travel was Liveable Neighbourhoods.

·  It was explained that Speed Indicator Devices (SpIDs) were effective for
two-week periods and provided accurate data. The county council were looking at different ways to improve relationships with resource available for when approached by parish or district councils for support implementing SpIDs. There had been draft guidance produced by Lancashire County Council which was under consultation. It was requested that there was engagement with the Road Safety team before purchasing and positioning of these signs.

·  The committee voiced support for the use of road safety mascots. 

·  It was acknowledged that mental health was also a factor contributing to children being killed on roads. There had been a piece of work on the M65 in collaboration with Public Health England and there had been conversations with Network Rail. There would also be conversation with National Highways. 

·  On the recruitment of parking enforcement officers, there were vacancies which had been advertised. It was recognised that health and wellbeing was vital in this role for retention of staff. 

·  On the size of 20 miles per hour signs, repeater signs were specific sizes due to Department for Transport regulations. There was a pilot scheme in Sandylands, Morecambe for low traffic neighbourhoods and part of this was improving the signage making them more prominent.

·  Members expressed concern about the quality of the footpaths, which could sometimes force pedestrians and mobility scooters into the road.

·  There had been improvements in the number of planning consultations which Highways officers responded to, in order to develop relationships and work with developers to co-design and collaborate.

The Chair thanked everyone for their contributions to the meeting.

Actions:

·  West Yorkshire Road Safety Partnership peer review be circulated to committee members.

·  With regards to Operation Snap, a test to be undertaken on how to best capture quality evidence for further dissemination.

·  LRSP contact directory be shared with all county councillors..

·  List of all surveys/reviews currently being undertaken around road safety provided to members.

·  Road Safety officer's investigation process be circulated to the committee.

·  The Road Safety team to revisit refresher sessions for Bikeability and family Bikeability.

·  The Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport and the Director of Highways and Transport contact National Highways regarding support in specific areas of Lancashire which would benefit from mental health signage and amendments.

Resolved: That from the rapporteur report, consideration be given by the
Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport on the following suggested recommendations:

  i.  A review be considered to identify road safety best practice across the UK which could inform a potential strategy in Lancashire.

  ii.  A county-wide communication strategy be drafted on current initiatives (such as school walking buses) and information available in Lancashire on road safety, including across partner organisations to widen engagement with schools and parents/carers.

  iii.  A package of information on road safety for county councillors be made available to utilise in their communities.

  iv.  A bite size briefing on road safety be provided for all county councillors.

  v.  A review of current partnerships be undertaken within the Lancashire Community Transport scheme to identify potential options to broaden scope of the current services e.g. to provide travel to school.

  vi.  Consideration be given to examine the potential use of commuted sums from developer contributions to further support future of healthier, safer environments.

  vii.  Closer engagement be considered with all school crossing patrols to identify anecdotal information to feed into decisions and/or future initiatives that support road safety around schools.

 viii.  A review be undertaken on how the Parent, Teacher, Friends Association (PTFA) could further strengthen road safety support in schools.

Further to this, the following recommendations were identified from the committee meeting discussions for consideration by the Cabinet Member:

  ix.  Increased engagement with the Lancashire Youth Council on ways/groups to disseminate messages around road safety initiatives and systems in place to report concerns.

  x.  All councillors be provided with links to the Community Road Watch webpages with a view to increasing pool of volunteers to join the Community Road Watch Scheme.

  xi.  Consideration be given on ways to further engage with schools and pupils around road safety and parking outside schools (e.g. mascots, competitions).

  xii.  Consideration be given on how potential drop off points could be included in planning applications for new schools through discussion with the Local Planning Authorities.

 xiii.  Review to strengthen messages/raise awareness with parents and carers be undertaken on the costs to the county council associated with anti-social parking outside schools.

xiv.  Guidance be considered to support county councillors in reporting/evidencing school road safety concerns.

  xv.  Consideration be given on how central government could be lobbied for changes that cannot be made locally to further support road safety.

xvi.  All county councillors be requested to download the Love Clean Streets app.

xvii.  Thanks be extended to the councillors involved in this review with a request to continue to review road safety with a view to providing updates to the committee as required.

xviii.  Update be provided in six months' time to the committee on the progress of the recommendations.