Abuse of rear reds on the h/s

[Guest]

We have a police officer in north west that kicked off big style about rear reds when we started last january on his patch.He went in to RCC a few times jumping up and down. On a recent job we were with him in live lane and he said to turn ambers off and just use reds

[skinner]

[Biffo]

Don't we all!!
_________________
He who dies with the most toys, WINS!!!

[nick]

Wisdom wrote

[Guinness Man]

We have had several vehiles hit on the hardshoulder to date does anyone know what lights were being used when these incidents took place? It would be interesting to know because normally I would have expected some feedback by now from these incidents and maybe an amended procedure or two.

[hazrat]

Red lights only in the live lane!

When the public are used to red lights meaning a police vehicle in the hard shoulder. NOT IN LIVE LANE.

Big mistake me thinks

think the police and HA need some joined up thinking on this one

[V_max]

[TO]

Earlier in the debate someone used DRA as an argument.

I thought a DRA stands for Dynamic Risk Assessment, not Do what the Roody hell I want All of the time. If the decision has already been made to put reds on all the time then your not making a DRA.

It will take time to educate people in there use but I've had no problems on nights or dangerous places. I go home safe because me and my colleagues are smart not because I rely on all my red lights. If relying on the equipment is what its all about then those using the rear reds would also have a box out but I know they don't.

Ambers on the h/s unless a proper DRA is taken, not just because I know better attitude. Lets make the service one to be proud of and do things properly and safe. Remember the uses of all our lights etc are only on 12 month trials, abuse them, then what are you going to use to stay safe if there taken away, don't be a one trick pony.

[skinner]

Yes the trial of the rear reds finished when the procedures changed, and also was longer than 12 mths,

But this caption from the Traffic Mtg 2004 act april 22nd this goes further indepth.

Viscount Astor: The Minister has been kind in giving us an explanation of the duties of traffic officers, which has helped to set out what their role will be. When the Bill was debated in another place, the Government accepted an amendment which would bring about a standard uniform for traffic officers. However, having listened to the Minister, it is clear that those officers will be advising, or even telling, the motorist what to do when they are in their vehicles. Have the Government given any thought to what will be written on those vehicles? Clearly they are not police vehicles, but will they have blue lights? Will they carry a sign stating "Traffic Officer"? What will be written on them? When the motorist receives the message at high speed, will it be clear who is giving him that message? Will there be a blue or a yellow light? Will there be something to ensure that they have the necessary authority to carry out the role that noble Lords are suggesting?

Lord Davies of Oldham: It is intended that traffic officers will be designated by having red lights on their vehicles. They are different from the police. They are not police, but of course they have authority to redirect traffic which itself may be moving at considerable speed. Therefore, it is important that that authority is instantly recognised.

Lord Rotherwick: I wanted to clarify one point. The Minister pointed out, importantly, that signs on motorways state "Police—Left" or "Police—This or that". If the traffic officer in question is putting out the sign, what will it say? Will it say, "Traffic—Stop" or "Traffic—Diversion", with the first word insinuating that the sign is being placed by a traffic officer rather than a policeman, or will the traffic officer use the word "Police" when using signage to tell motorists what to do?

Lord Davies of Oldham: He will not use the word "Police"; he will use the words "Traffic Officer". That is what he is. Members of the Committee are not looking totally convinced by the quality of my argument at this stage. That may derive from the fact that we are all used to the colloquialism whereby police officers are often referred to as traffic officers when they are in control of police cars on motorways.

We do not see anything wrong with the public associating the traffic officer and his authority with the role of the police guiding traffic. In fact, in that respect the traffic officer is taking over aspects of police work, and that is why we want to use a phrase which is as close as possible to the public's understanding. These officers have areas of authority, but it is equally clear that they must be recognised as different from police, because they do not have direct police powers.

22 Apr 2004 : Column GC5

3.30 p.m.

Viscount Goschen: Will the Minister say what efforts the Government will make to educate the motorist about the powers of these new officers? A number of members of the Committee warned on Second Reading against a dilution of the instant recognisability and authority of the police, such as the blue light, and a number of other types of officer, such as community support officers, being seen in uniform. I am not clear about the powers of a community support officer who wants to search an individual. Is the individual obliged to undergo such a search?

We know that these officers will be using a red light. Will motorists have to yield to a vehicle with a red light? We all know, as motorists, that we have to yield to vehicles with a blue light, be they ambulances, fire engines or police cars. If there is a vehicle with a blue light repeatedly flashing, the motorist must pull over. Will that be the case with red lights? How will the motorist know what to do?

Baroness Scott of Needham Market: While the Minister is answering that, I have a question of my own. I declare an interest as chair of the Local Government Association Transport Executive. My point concerns recognisability and public perception. While it is very clear in the public mind that a motorway is a motorway, and that is one kind of road on which such officers will operate, it is much more difficult in the case of trunk roads. Some of them are under local authority control because of recent detrunking arrangements, and some will remain under the control of the Highways Agency. So it will be perfectly normal to have two very similar roads in one area: one, under Highways Agency control, will have the officers, and the other will not. That may add to confusion in the mind of the public.

Viscount Simon: May I ask a further question on rear-facing lights which are red? At the moment, as these officers are not police officers, they will not have to be obeyed. My understanding is that some time in the future it is proposed that these so-called traffic officers will have rear-facing blue lights. Legislation will have to be introduced because they are still not police officers.

Lord Davies of Oldham: I think I can give a categoric response to the contribution from my noble friend. There is no intention that they will have blue lights because, as a number of noble Lords have pointed out, a blue light, particularly one flashing in one's rear mirror, indicates one proper authority to which we are all used to responding—but not too often, I hope.

Traffic officers will not be involved in pursuit, nor in monitoring traffic which is moving, so there is no question of their light flashing, to motorists' concern, in their rear-view mirror. The traffic officer is there to give warning of problems ahead. They do not have powers of arrest, so they will not go in pursuit of anyone who may contravene traffic regulations in relationship to their work. That is done by police officers and only by police officers.

22 Apr 2004 : Column GC6

Traffic officers will exert proper authority around an incident. They will have to be obeyed; they will have the statutory power to stop and direct traffic but not, as I think noble Lords were indicating, to engage in high speed pursuit of someone whom they regard as having broken the law. They will have the right to place mandatory traffic signs which will need to be obeyed, otherwise motorists will be breaking the law. But there is no intention to create for them the exact similitude of a police officer.

Lord Cobbold: Surely they will need to force their way through a traffic jam to get to the place where the incident is happening so that there will be a red light in the mirror and people will have to move out of the way.

Lord Davies of Oldham: That is true, and I feared that aspects of this debate would relate to the whole question of our driving habits and how we respond to lights in our mirrors and so on. The noble Lord is correct—people would be expected to concede to a vehicle of authority, one which would be going about its lawful business of dealing with congestion. The matter on which I was seeking to disabuse the Committee was the notion that a red light would have the same effect as a blue light, which, as I understood the position, was an indication that a police officer might be in pursuit of individual motorists—pulling them over with regard to particular offences. That will not be the role of a traffic officer.

Viscount Simon: The Minister referred to signs given at high speeds. Does that mean that a traffic officer is allowed to exceed the speed limit?

Lord Davies of Oldham: No, when I referred to signs at high speed I meant signs that would be placed in any obstructed carriageway, or even above on a motorway sign, which would indicate that there was a problem ahead and that the problem had been identified by a traffic officer, not a policeman. But traffic officers would have the right to trigger or to set those signs that would need to be recognised at high speed.

I shall go a little further, because I have not gone far enough in reassuring the Committee about the point of the flashing red lights. There will be flashing red lights at the point of the incident. When they travel to the location of the incident the traffic officers will not be in emergency pursuit, as police officers sometimes are. We all know, for example with regard to ambulances, how quickly we move to one side to facilitate the progress of emergency vehicles. Traffic officers will not be in that category—that is why they will not be carrying those lights. The reason for a red light will be that the vehicle will largely be parked at, or be very close to the incident and the light will be there to indicate to everyone that a person in authority is there dealing with the incident and certain instructions will need to be obeyed.

Lord Rotherwick: I apologise for nit-picking. However, following the noble Lord's comments on red lights coming up in one's rear mirror, could the Minister tell us a little more? If a traffic officer is racing towards an incident of great importance, say, on a

22 Apr 2004 : Column GC7
motorway, and needs to minimise disruption, improve the movement of traffic and perhaps make the road safer, will the motorist see that traffic officer in the rear mirror approaching with flashing red lights and a siren? After all, ambulances and police have sirens. If that is the case, will the traffic officer's siren be of a different nature to those of ambulances and the police, so that one can differentiate between all three?

Lord Davies of Oldham: The traffic officer will not be in charge of an emergency service. When it comes to motorways, he or she almost certainly will proceed down the hard shoulder to pass obstructions—as do recovery vehicles that also sometimes have flashing lights, but which are never associated with the police. That will also be the case with a traffic officer. He will not be expected to be hurtling down our roads at high speeds with red flashing lights. On the contrary, they will proceed to the incident. It is there that the red light will come into play, when the vehicle is in position to give warning to traffic. But they will not be authorised in the same way that police inevitably are, due to their emergency role, to engage in high speed driving above speed limits on occasions with a blue light flashing. Traffic officers will not be able, or expected, to engage in such activity because that is not their role.

This is in the Hansard text for all to see if you havent already that is. Just though I would post it.

[Race Track]

The exemption from the RVLR on red lights was extended after the trial and is due up for renewal again in Jun/Jul
_________________

[Northern Lad]

[pongolad]

Nice to know politicians can talk utter bollards,,,so we can do our job, but we can't
_________________
Clarkson can kiss my Aspidestra

[mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm]

rear reds for live lane only mmmmmmmmmmm
my humble opinion is why is the hard shoulder is not recognised as a live lane as any vehicle can enter it at any time as we allways find for any reason legal or not i think the whole network should be classed as live lane well untill there is a better way of stopping those vehicles coming at me with the protection of a few inches of paint

[Race Track]

[mondeoman]

Last week i was travelling North on M40 approaching Warwick.Sunny afternnon,about 1730,in lane three in a row of cars,all travelling about 70-80 mph.Approaching a brow of a hill,i started to see the cars in front getting closer,so i started to ease back slightly.Then about 10 cars in front,was smoke and skid marks and all cars are slamming brakes on.Because i had dropped,i was now further from the car in front of me,so did not have to brake as sharp and with my hazards on,the cars behind were not stopping as sharp either.The cause: A HA shogun,sitting on the h/s with rear reds/ambers on.No car in front of them,no matrix signs set,so not sure what they were doing.I know the vehicles travelling to close and braking for apparently no reason caused the sudden braking but i am sure the rear reds didn't help.
_________________
Remember,the motorway can be a dangerous place.