Crossing guards are once again in the news as a result of the release of a report from the "Safe Passage Task Force". This committee was sent off some time ago, by the Town Council to look at ways of replacing school crossing guards with other devices. Council, led by councillor Dean Pepper (in his role of councillor of transport), has decided that any locations that now have crossing guards must be justified by the application of provincial 'warrants'. Cut the crossing guards and then blame the Province for setting high standards. I say: Rubbish!, ask the council why the town put the crossing guards there in the first place, in defiance of the provincial standards. To take them away now when the amount of traffic is significantly higher than it was when they were established is lunacy and unsafe.

"Aha, that's what we say" is the cry from the Safe Passage Task Force" (SPTF). This report, probably the most professional piece of administrative prose seen at Victoria Hall for many a year, offers its suggestions on the way to make the streets safe whilst cutting the jobs of six crossing guards. However although the SPTF endorses the idea of cutting out six jobs and saving $66,000 that money will not be cut from the budget as it is going to be used for infrastructure improvements to make the roads safer. The principle that this report was founded on is that savings from the removal of guards will be ploughed back into a safer community. In order to be able to tell whining parents concerned about the safety of their kids; "No you cannot have a crossing guard because it is unwarranted" council has to fend off allegations of favouritism leveled by the those parents who look at the unwarranted locations and ask "Why?" Council will now rely on the "level playing field" of even standards.

But, there is a big problem, how do you take away the six crossing guards and convince the people in the neighbourhood it is not a bad move? Easy; implement the recommendations in the SPTF, say the SPTF! What this report recommends is a series of measures: four way stops, flashing lights, no right turns during school hours and more mechanical inanimate installations. And to make the community aware of the safe use of such devices how about a strong dose of 'social engineering and behaviour modification'. We are going to be assailed by a large scale community 'warm and fuzzy' touchy-feely exercise to make us all aware of road safety.

Well pardon me for being cynical but "Elmer the Safety Elephant" must be over twenty years old by now and have we noticed any difference in the safety attitudes of those people under twenty five years of age lately? In the report it is noted that although "87% of motorists speed in posted limits" and "Road signs have moderate effectiveness in changing driver speed behaviour", we are now going to spend $9,300.00 on such road signs and other street changes. Presumably during the period of adjustment to a safer society the local police will be regulating bad driving habits (during the SPTF monitoring process the police statistics for written offences and warnings rose 83% and 141% respectively) showing that regulation works. However at what cost? As a taxpayer it does not make much sense to me to use a $60,000 per year police officer to do the job that used to be done by a $10,000 per year crossing guard, i.e. make the school environment safer.

Although I praise the report writers for their comprehensive report I know that I oppose it with every bone in my body. Neighbourhoods are living breathing vital organisms that make up our societies, the smallest self contained living community of communities. People make up the neighbourhoods and nothing defines a neighbourhood better than the level of neighbourliness. How we look after our children in a neighbourhood is a reflection of ourselves and the community spirit. There is no greater symbol of the community care we give our children than a crossing guard! Take away the crossing guards and we move to 'faceless suburbia'.

My household pays $252.00 per year for police, the largest expenditure on the infosheet, recently mailed to me, the smallest was crossing guards at $4.00 per year. I do not think that we are going to break the bank in keeping crossing guards. In fact if we allow students, who are now mandated to perform 40 hours of community service a year, to be crossing guards we could put one on each corner of the town and still save money!

Comment on this page.....email Ben