Decision-makers in the upper echelons of the University of Cambridge are considering directing funds towards keeping lights on in the city after the County Council said it would go ahead with a night time switch-off of street lights unless it received outside support.

According to plans released by the County Council, from 1st April next year street lights on footpaths and residential roads will be switched off entirely. Those which are located on main traffic routes will only be dimmed.

There is significant concern regarding the proposed lighting switch-off between midnight and 6am, as it is believed that this could increase the potential for sexual assault and other crime across the city, due to the lack of light. These worries are exacerbated by the fact that Cambridge is a city where students often travel late, both studying and going out.

Councillor Markus Gehring, a lecturer in Law and fellow of Hughes Hall, suggested that the proposals could create a “gender imbalance” in certain subjects, with late lab hours, long travel distances, and a history of “very serious” incidents potentially putting off prospective female students from applying for courses which are being relocated to the West Cambridge site.

“I think it is completely unreasonable, especially in the area around the colleges,” Gehring said, “I think we’ve had some criminal incidents in dark spots that were very serious and we’ve now improved the street lighting, and now we’re switching it off.” He argued that the reduction in night-time lighting was “unbelievable”.

Meanwhile, in an open letter to Stephen Count, the Conservative Leader of Cambridgeshire County Council, Labour City Councillor Ann Sinnott criticised the County Council’s plans as “ill-advised” and described them as likely to have a “disastrous impact” on Cambridge residents.

She highlighted how lack of lighting “facilitates crimes such as burglary, theft from the person and also rape and sexual assault”. She asserted that reduced levels of lighting would “arguably breach the County’s obligations under the Crime and Disorder Act”.
Cllr Sinnott also emphasised how the combination of poor transport infrastructure – namely pot holes, which are the responsibility of the County Council – and reduced lighting for cyclists will lead to an “inexorable rise” in cycling accidents.

In 2009, in response to a series of incidents, Trinity College introduced a minibus service for students for their own safety.

In response to these concerns, the university is considering funding the illumination of street lights between 12 am and 6 am in order to ensure student safety.

If it chose to make a financial contribution to the funding of streetlights, the University of Cambridge would be following in the footsteps of other community groups which have done so, such as Cottenham Parish Council, who are considering contributing £800 to keep 62 lights on.

A spokesperson from the University of Cambridge confirmed that “the collegiate university is committed to the safety of its students and will work with local authorities as appropriate as their plans develop”.

The Conservative-led County Council intends to cut back on lighting to save money, with budget cuts requiring the Council to make savings of £41 million. A spokesman explained that the Council would be “happy if the university wished to fund the period when the lights are proposed to be switched off,” and also explained that “lighting will remain where they use CCTV, in the centre of the city and traffic routes.”

The County Council has also defended the plans on their website, where they emphasise that “street lighting is not a statutory service that the County Council is legally required to provide” and that they will “monitor any increase in [crime] levels on a regular basis”.

The County Council has also claimed that concerns over safety have been overblown, stating that “evidence supplied from other local authorities who have implemented part night lighting street light operation to date is that there has been no increase in crime or accident levels which could be attributed to the introduction of part night lighting”.

These claims are corroborated by Balfour Beatty, the private firm which operates Cambridge street lights on a PFI contract with the County Council. Representatives of the company, speaking at a South Area Committee of the council on 30th March claimed that “there was no correlation between crime levels and hours of darkness”.

However, the findings of this report, and the evidence used to support the claim that reduced lighting at night has no impact on crime levels, have been criticised by some.

Lib Dem City Councillor for Queen Ediths’ Tim Moore, who was in attendance at the South Area Committee, claimed results of the cited report were “unclear” and did not contain “enough evidence to say” that there would be no impact on safety.

On the other hand, research from May this year by the Department of Population Health at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that a significant change in the levels of crime or traffic accidents can be attributed to the switching-off of street lights.