Local government in Britain has figured out a novel way to get children walking and cycling to school: fine their parents.
The Evening Standard recently reported that cars will be banned from streets near two schools in London between 8:30 and 9:15 a.m., and 3:15 and 4 p.m. Parents who ignore this ban will face fines up to £130 ($216). It's a trial run for the "School Streets" program that is being implemented to help alleviate noxious air pollution and congestion on London streets. Students are being told to walk or bike.
To illustrate the need for the ban, the newspaper posted a video online that showed parents treating a school sidewalk as if it was the passing lane of the M1. They barrel along blissfully, unconcerned about the danger they pose.
Like a lot of traffic-problem solutions, fining parents addresses the "what" (cars causing pollution, kids not getting exercise) but does little to address the "why." Most parents would prefer their children walk. Most kids would, too. So why don't they? Critics say that it's a result of our car-centric culture, but it goes deeper than that.
For some kids, walking to school would be the proverbial 25-kilometre hike, uphill, both ways. They no longer go to their local public school. Their folks grew up wearing designer jeans and covet designer education. They choose private schools or trendy public school offerings: immersion, extension, enrichment, extended enriched immersion. They're convinced an elite kindergarten will lead to a happy, successful adulthood. To anyone whose kids are finished high school, this is laughable. It's a bit like someone in England in 1900 thinking, "If we can just win the Boer War, it's all easy street from here on in."
Parents worry about strangers. It's hard to blame them. Statistics regarding "stranger danger" may be infinitesimal (an RCMP report found five such incidents in 2000-2001), but we are bombarded with stories of child violence and abduction.
Some parents drive to school because they have to race to work. If a parent needs to be at the office by 9:15 a.m., they need to drop off the kid at 8:45 in order to beat traffic and get to work on time. They could drop off earlier, but some schoolyards are not monitored at that time. They could take public transit, but public transit in Canada can be painfully slow.
But mostly, parents are afraid of other motorists. Many drivers are so irresponsible and badly trained they shouldn't be allowed to operate a manual bottle opener, let alone a vehicle. When you see some moron blow through a crosswalk near an elementary school because he's texting, it's hard not to start looking for the nearest projectile-quality brick. It's also hard to feel comfortable about your eight-year-old navigating such madness on their own. Ironically, kids are more at risk at being injured by during the school drop-off by parents in cars dropping their kids off at school because they're too afraid to let them walk.
So, is fining parents who drive their kids to school a solution?
I guess so, if you're the kind of person who likes to "get tough" on things and then fall asleep on the couch. Fining a few parents won't solve air pollution. It won't even stop them from driving to school. They'll just drive like bigger maniacs.
And if we're fining drivers, why not fine everyone who is on the road near schools during drop-off and pick-up? Aren't they causing pollution, aren't they a danger? It may be better to implement programs that encourage parents to have their kids walk to school. Some schools offer incentives, such as stickers that kids collect for each day they walk. We need to find the sweet spot. Imagine if, for every 15 stickers earned, dad and mom get a free six-pack of craft beer, a soy mocha latte decaf or beard-trimming? It just might work.
Andrew Clark