COST-CUTTING plans that would see 44,000 Surrey street lights switched off between midnight and 5am, have been approved by the council’s Cabinet but attacked by opposition Lib Dem councillors.

Surrey initially promised to publish the list of affected streets in September, with the first phase of 33,000 lights scheduled to be switched off from October 1, followed by the second, of 12,000 lights, in December or January.

But, according to the Lib Dems, Surrey County Council has admitted the process has been delayed and it cannot yet tell residents if and when they will be left in the dark.

Lib Dem councillors criticised the council after it was revealed that residents who are set to lose their street lighting were not formally consulted on the proposal.

They objected that a consultation which was carried out in August that boasted a 75 per cent approval figure for the plan, was actually conducted through the council’s residents panels, drawn from people all over the county, rather than those who would be specifically affected.

They also voiced concern about a study published by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine into the correlation between crime, road safety and lack of street lights, which was used by the council to support its decision.

Although the report found no link between street lights being dimmed or switched off and any increase in road accidents or crime, it concluded: “It is important to note that it does not mean that this will be the case under all conditions, and so changes to lighting should be managed carefully.”

Lib Dem highways spokesman councillor Stephen Cooksey said: “It seems logical to me that the people the county council should have consulted with were the residents who were having their street lights turned off, rather than a panel of residents spread out around the county.

“Holding a consultation in August when so many people are on holiday and unable to respond does not sound like a sensible idea either. Instead the Tories are claiming to have carried out a consultation that endorses their policy, which is misleading to say the least.

“My experience is that most people are keen to see additional lighting in poorly lit areas, and this has been even more the case in the light of continued reductions in police resources.

“The Conservatives are making a political choice to reduce funding for services but at the same time increasing council tax.

Justifying the decision, Surrey said street lights consumed nearly 25 million kilowatt hours of electricity and generate around 12,500 tonnes of CO2 each year, which currently costs the council £3 million per annum.

The council said increasing energy costs and the significant environmental impact of street lighting meant it had a responsibility to ensure its infrastructure was being used efficiently and cost effectively.

That included ensuring the lights are on full power when needed but dimmed when not. Street lights are currently dimmed by up to 50 per cent from 10pm to 5.30am each night.

The council calculated turning off 44,000 street lights in residential areas would save it around £210,000 per annum along with reducing its CO2 ‘footprint’.