Colne RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


LT block logo JOIN THE DEBATE BY ADDING YOUR COMMENTS ON THESE STORIES

Registering to post comments on the Lancashire Telegraph website only takes a few seconds. Click here to go to the registration page.

Plans to switch off lights on M65 scrapped

7:00pm Tuesday 30th June 2009 in


CONTROVERSIAL plans to switch off the lights on part of the M65 motorway have been abolished.

Lancashire County Council’s new Conservative rulers say they have reversed the cost-cutting move while they investigate other ways of saving electricity.

Meanwhile the Highways Agency, which runs the rest of the motorway, has confirmed it has no plans to switch off any lights.

Possibilities that will be looked at include using sensors to switch on lights as cars approach.

There was an outcry when County Hall’s previous Labour administration unveiled plans to switch off lights between midnight and 5am on the section it manages between junction 10, Burnley, and 14, Colne in a bid to save £65,000 from this year’s budget.

But reversing the ban was part of the Conservatives’ alternative budget put forward earlier this year — and the new Tory cabinet member for highways, Coun Keith Young, told the Lancashire Telegraph: “We will stick to it and leave things as they are.

“We were given an explanation from the Labour group without any sort of detail and we have to consider the safety aspects.

“So we are putting the money back in the budget and the lights will stay on. There are all sorts of things that other councils are doing, and we need to try and apply the latest technology.

“But if there is a safety issue we need to look at that.”

Not all of the M65 is lit, and the rest of the motorway, from junction one at Bamber Bridge, is run and maintained by the Highways Agency, which is trialing switching off some lights on quiet parts of motorways elsewhere in the country.

But a spokesman for the agency said: “There are no plans to switch off lights on the M65.”

The Lancashire Telegraph first revealed the controversial plans in November. At the time police slammed the move, which they said would be a “retrograde step in relation to motorway safety”.

Comments(13)

RAyzer says...
7:41pm Tue 30 Jun 09

we all knew theyd be scrapped,most stupid idea since kitty ussher and co decided we didnt need an A+E,absolutely silly!!!!after what the corrupt M,PS have done how dare there compromise our safety to save cash after theyve stole

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

full moon says...
10:54pm Tue 30 Jun 09

This is a retrograde step. Real savings could have been made to the enviroment and in monetary terms! Any driver who cannot drive by headlamps alone should not be on the road at all!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

DavidBurnley says...
9:12am Wed 1 Jul 09

I use J10 of the M65 all the time. In the dark and unlit it is a very dangerous bit of road. The road markings and signage are designed for use in conjunction with street lighting.

Thanks to the new LCC for making this decision it is bound to save lives - that's more important than the reasons originally given for turning off the lights.

Full Moon - give the green tripe a rest and apply some common sense - it's getting boring!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Mikeee47 says...
10:41am Wed 1 Jul 09

Fullmoon. Have you ever drove on the M6 at night through Salsmbury & seen 2 deer run from one side of the carrrige way to the other? With lights on these animals were seen in plenty of time to prevent disaster, something headlights won't pick up until your upon them, stop talking complete divel..

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

happycyclist says...
11:08am Wed 1 Jul 09

Drivel?! What, you see deer crossing the motorway every day? Most people will be lucky to see a couple of deer in their entire lifetimes! Don't use such silly examples to prove a point -dangerous driver are the problem, not deer.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Izanears says...
11:12am Wed 1 Jul 09

Common sense at last.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RAyzer says...
11:14am Wed 1 Jul 09

fool---what happens when theres fog???people like you havent a clue,i work on the motorways and ive seen FIRST hand a lightless motorway crash,it takes ages to find anything---by the way,you know more than the A.A the R.A.C and the police..all 3 disagree with a STUPID IDEA

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

RAyzer says...
11:17am Wed 1 Jul 09

full moon wrote:
This is a retrograde step. Real savings could have been made to the enviroment and in monetary terms! Any driver who cannot drive by headlamps alone should not be on the road at all!
you obviously either dont drive,or drive at night..clown,typical save the world idiot,rather save pounds than lives...ask the M.PS to give aback some money they took BY MISTAKE..thatl cover the cost of the WHOLE OF BRITAINS LIGHTING,no way are they compromising our safety

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

DaveBurnley says...
5:43pm Wed 1 Jul 09

full moon wrote:
This is a retrograde step. Real savings could have been made to the enviroment and in monetary terms! Any driver who cannot drive by headlamps alone should not be on the road at all!
Have you spent much time driving at night? I don't mean a 10 minute trip to the shops, I mean driving for hours on unlit roads.
You see shadows and imagine all kinds of things in the darkness, that's when accidents are most likely.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Mikeee47 says...
10:31am Thu 2 Jul 09

happycyclist wrote:
Drivel?! What, you see deer crossing the motorway every day? Most people will be lucky to see a couple of deer in their entire lifetimes! Don't use such silly examples to prove a point -dangerous driver are the problem, not deer.
Are you one of these cyclist who don't have insurance, run red lights & totally disregard the highway code, I used the deer as an example for reading the road, you must be one of these who cant see past your nose,

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Heavy Metal Islam says...
2:04pm Fri 3 Jul 09

Now the new LCC needs to take the next step and make the M65 a full 3 lane motorway from start to finish and put a JUNCTION 11 EAST BOUND in Burnley.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

full moon says...
12:19am Sun 5 Jul 09

The point is, illumination costs! I do not have unnecessary lights when I am asleep nor does any sensible person. Yet councils permit lighting of stretches of roads such as the A56, which I can see from my window and I know how little traffic occurs during nightime. Issues such as costs, ecology, enviroment can no longer be fudged, fear of litigation cannot determine future policy decisions.Extravagan
ces need to be curtailed, not cowardly overlooked!!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

masher49 says...
11:17pm Sun 5 Jul 09

I work as a professional driver of large vehicles. I use the M65 on a very regular basis, in all sorts of weather conditions. Lack of lighting would just be a pre-cursor to an increase in accidents. There are several areas of the M65 where three lanes merge into two, and these are accident blackspots even in good weather conditions. Remove lighting, add in some mist and rain, and these areas would become a nightmare to drive. The example of deer crossing is not the best one, but on a regular basis ( at least once a fortnight) I see animals or even people either crossing the carrigeway or on the hard shoulder. I recognise the "green" argument, but at what price a life? Not just the animal in the road, or the fool on the hard shoulder, but the innocent driver who swerves to avoid because visibility has been reduced? Surely the real answer is to use alternative forms of energy such as solar panels or wind turbines to power lighting. These can hardly be classed as an eyesore in the middle of a motorway!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

More Colne stories


Most popular



Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses