Drivers ignoring road closures around schools during the school run could soon have a fine landing on their doorstep if council plans to enforce them using CCTV go ahead.
Fifteen primary schools now have school street schemes which restrict entry to roads around the school at drop off and pick up time.
Up until now, drivers who flout the restrictions have usually not had any comeback apart from disapproving glares from the volunteers who marshall them.
But Brighton and Hove City Council is now considering applying for Moving Traffic Enforcement powers under Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004.
If granted by the Department for Transport (DfT), these powers will allow the council to use CCTV cameras to enforce the existing road restrictions.
The council has now launched a six-week consultation.
At the moment, only police can enforce school streets schemes and the council says many drivers ignoring the restrictions, making some schemes unsafe and increasing congestion.
Councillor Trevor Muten, cabinet member for transport said: “We want to give our children, parents and carers a safe and enjoyable journey to and from the school gate.
“The School Streets scheme encourages more people to walk, scoot and cycle.
“Unfortunately, not everyone has been adhering to the road restrictions. These new powers would give us the ability to use CCTV to enforce them and keep people safe during pick up and drop off times. We are keen to take action – and these powers enable us to do that.
“It’s important that we listen to residents and the school communities. I’d encourage as many people as possible to give us their views and I look forward to receiving the feedback.”
Following a consultation with residents and if approved by DfT, the council would begin to use CCTV cameras to enforce the restrictions already in place. This would likely happen in early 2026.
There would be a six-month period where drivers would, in the first instance, receive a warning notice if they contravened the restrictions. If the restrictions were contravened a second time, they would be issued a Penalty Charge Notice.
The charge for receiving a PCN will be £70, reduced to £35 if paid within 21days.
What law would drivers be breaking in using a public road they have paid for through their taxes, and in a licensed vehicle?
These are not private roads belonging to schools, but PUBLIC highways. For ALL the public to use, not just a select few. Even teachers need to get to schools and access their own car parks. Or will the next move be for the council to ban teacher recruitment from more than a 1 mile radius and they all need to be fully able bodied to walk or cycle?
How about teaching children the Green Cross Code? Road sense will serve them all their lives no matter where they live and be far more likely to result in longer lives than falsely allowing children to believe that all traffic is benign and they play no part in taking responsibility for their road safety.
Why no discussion about the dangers of electric bikes and scooters, which are now causing deaths and injuries with no lesson or insurance requirements? And which are an uninsurable fire risk in a covered shelter or building? Or parents allowing their children to rattle about in wooden carts tagged onto the back of their bicycles with no protection or child seats? Watching the lack of child safety on bicycles, particularly parental bicycles, is horrifying.
Good lord..
You asked – What law would drivers be breaking in using a public road they have paid for through their taxes, and in a licensed vehicle?
The answer – in the article.
Thank you, Chris, for answering Chris’s question!
To go further, this is no different in principle to contravening a bus lane, a no-entry sign, or a one-way street. The fact that the road is a public highway is irrelevant – all highways are subject to lawful regulation for safety, access, and environmental reasons. A licence doesn’t confer an unconditional right to drive wherever you like.
Why would you like to drive in a designated school zone Mr Trugmaker?
You have a point about the Green Cross Code. It’s about time the little tykes took responsibility for their own safety. After all, you’ve paid your taxes so if you take out a couple of kiddies on your way to work, how is that your fault? You’ve taught them a valuable lesson on how to cross the road safely. That’s just good parenting. And if they’re on bicycles, well, they just had it coming, didn’t they.
Jesus wept. Could your post be more entitled?
Dumbass, they’ve literally put signs up that didn’t happen without authority.
What law ?
The contravention of a road traffic sign as shown in the photo.
Just close all the schools. Labour has already started.
What use are they anyway if they are neglecting to teach our children basic road safety?
why do you seem to think that the schools should be teaching road safety? That is a parent or guardians responsibility.
If it’s the parents’s responsibility to teach kids road safety, why are the council interfering with roads which happen to contain schools?
Even worse this council are creating another risk for parents in a hurry to drop their children off somewhere near the school entrance so they can make sure they get into their school gate safely before any predators spot them outside the school gates.
Roads are NOT playgrounds. That is the truly dangerous message to send out to children. They need to watch for both traffic and predators and know how to navigate them.
Parental responsibility and council intervention aren’t mutually exclusive; both are essential, your comment is a classic example of a false dichotomy.
The council has a duty to protect public spaces, especially near schools, where children are vulnerable. Evidence from other cities shows that school street schemes reduce traffic-related injuries and improve safety, not increase danger, another classic case of slippery slope reasoning and is a straw man argument.
Raising the spectre of predators without evidence is unhelpful fearmongering. Argumentum ad metum.
Creating safer roads doesn’t mean turning them into playgrounds; it means making sure children don’t have to dodge speeding cars just to get to school.
For those who are enraged by this, this shouldn’t need to be done if it wasn’t for the fact that people flaunt these restrictions and blatantly ignore them.
Shocking that several people have felt comfortable saying they’d like to endanger children to shave a minute or two off their car journey.
The problem with these schemes is they are often pushed through by affluent parents who after they drop their children off have time for a coffee, or go home to their wfh flexible job or to do their mumpreneur venture. Walk, ride, scoot isn’t possible for all parents, some have to drop their children off in the 10 minute window and be on the shopfloor for 9am for example. For people like these these schemes just make a difficult life even harder. I’m sure the rebuttal to someone in this situation would be to put their child in a breakfast club, but that would just show how little they consider others situations.
The media often publishes sensationalised reports about the sums the Council receives for fining drivers who breach restrictions. When that inevitably happens after school street CCTV does its job, remember that Council taxpayers will have had to pay for the technology in the first place, all because adults behave so dangerously they endanger children.