A political row has broken out over school crossing patrols in Bedford borough, with Conservatives and Liberal Democrats trading accusations over cuts made to the service.
Bedford Borough Conservatives have criticised the Lib Dems for what they describe as a lack of transparency when they were in power, claiming that the number of school crossing patrols fell from 22 to 14 between 2015 and 2023.
But the Lib Dems hit back, claiming the Conservatives were using “misleading data” – and were responsible for cutting crossing locations from 20 last year to 12 now.
The Local Democracy Reporting Service has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the council for data surrounding school crossing cuts.
The Conservatives claim official council records “confirm” that under the former Lib Dem mayor, the number of school crossing patrols was “secretly slashed” from 22 to 14 between 2015 and 2023.
“No petitions, no announcements, no honesty with residents”, just a “quiet cut”.
Conservative group leader, Cllr Graeme Coombes (Wixams and Wilstead) said: “The hypocrisy of the Liberal Democrats on school crossing patrols is breath-taking, but unsurprising.
“Between 2015 and 2023, when they were in office, the number of school crossing patrols across Bedford borough fell from 22 to 14, a drop of more than 36 percent – hardly a record to be proud of.”
Portfolio holder for finance and corporate services, Cllr Marc Frost (Conservative, Wixams and Wilstead), also criticised the Lib Dems, calling their position a “cynical and shameless attempt to rewrite history”.
“This has nothing to do with child safety, it is cheap political theatre,” he said.
In response, the Lib Dems accused the Conservatives of presenting “misleading figures” by focusing on the number of staff rather than the number of patrol locations.
“The Conservatives have decided to cut the number of School Crossing Patrol locations from 20 that were identified up to last year down to 12 now,” a Lib Dem spokesperson said.
They added that staffing levels have varied over time due to recruitment challenges, but said this was different from removing crossing locations altogether.
“Despite proposing this as a budget saving and having it rejected, they have just gone ahead with it anyway,” the spokesperson said.
By John Guinn
Local Democracy Reporter
