Spending a penny or two on essential conveniences

I’m referring to the provision and maintenance of public conveniences. As someone who has travelled widely in all levels of so-called civilised countries, I can happily report that Jersey can claim a respectable record, which is right and proper for an Island which aims to attract visitors to come, walk around and explore the countryside.

There is nothing more embarrassing than to be caught short in unfamiliar territory – then have to engage in displacement activity, such as dashing into a café to buy an unwanted beverage, simply to spend a penny or making an unexpected house call.

The spotlight has fallen on this sensitive issue following the contention by one of the UK’s largest unions that workers for whom the street is effectively their office – such as police, street cleaners, ‘posties’, feel – or are made to feel – embarrassed at having to ask establishments on their beat if they can use the facilities. It’s become a particular issue as councils target public conveniences for closure as an easy means of cutting municipal budgets.

It led to a good-natured discussion – skilfully avoiding the obvious linguistic traps – between a Unison rep and a spokesman for the British Toilet Association which campaigns for better facilities (I bet, like me, you were surprised to learn of its existence) on the BBC’s Today programme.

But it’s not just the practical considerations. It’s a general quality of life issue. The newspapers were quick to pick up on the story of the woman in Bath who was so incensed by the council’s decision to close the local amenities that she barricaded herself inside one of them in protest.

The rash of summer outdoor events and activities, often attracting large crowds, certainly concentrates the mind on the provision of rest and relief. Sadly, it often slips the mind of organisers of even the most prestigious events, leading to the ritual queues for the Ladies. Chaps used to get away with it more easily, but things have changed in the days of gender equality. You certainly have to marvel at the fortitude of folk corralled for hours awaiting royal processions etc.

Spending a penny, potentially creates a problem for any traveller and requires strategic planning. Some railway stations in London – Waterloo, for example (and that certainly wasn’t an intended pun) – now charge everyone for their use.

I suppose there’s ample justification, given you’ve got to pay someone to maintain them and, frankly, it’s not the most sought-after job in the house.

French railway stations, and even restaurants will expect a coin or six.

The problem is you have to pay up at the most inconvenient moment, often under desperate circumstances when the laws of sod contrive to ensure you have no small change or it’s buried deep in the bottom of your pocket.

Maybe it’s a national thing. In northern Europe and, in particular, North America, those aspiring to so-called polite society tend generally to feign discretion, even try not to allude either to the location or what is contained therein. Maybe they feel a blind eye means they are invisible or are not needed.

When pressed, there are plenty of convenient euphemisms – bathroom, washroom, little girls’/boys’ room, even ‘somewhere’.

Displacement terminology exists right across the board, from the nautical ‘heads’ to the ‘Loo’, which always raises a smile across the Channel. And that’s intriguing given the abundance of tired old jokes about ‘primitive’ facilities offered by our nearest Continental neighbours. Nowadays, the facilities are generally coming under greater scrutiny. Indeed, many a French establishment maintains a concierge to ensure fair play underground – they invariably are subterranean in swish Parisian restaurants.

In the ‘noughties’, many councils went for erecting aluminium contraptions in tourist spots. These environmentally-friendly ‘automatic’ toilets have a distinct tendency to be neither and demand far more than a penny to use them, though user cost is now being challenged – in France of all places – as unconstitutional.

As I mentioned earlier, generally we have a commendable record on providing well-maintained facilities. We’ve certainly got most of the tourist bays covered, even if inland it’s a question of spotting the church spires, on the grounds that the adjacent parish cemetery has got to have water for the flowers and so is likely to offer a discreet associated relief for the living.

The much-needed refurbishment at Snow Hill, and the widely-captioned JEP photo of TTS execs taking advantage of the revamped facilities at Sand Street Car park, were proof enough that the issue was firmly on the States’ agenda.

When all the cheap jokes about our ‘Hommes’ and ‘Dames’ have been chuckled away, there is a very serious point. Indeed, there’s a very persuasive argument that trade – in particular, shopping – flourishes where all public needs are readily accommodated. And that means providing an environment for those who may wish to linger, are of a mature disposition, maybe unfamiliar with the landscape or who have young children in tow, to feel confident to relax and open their purses.

So the lesson really has to be: ensure the cost of maintaining public facilities is always in the budget.

It really isn’t money down the drain and, however promising of quick profit, you can’t convert all your ‘loos’ into cafés.

In fact, there’s a commonly held belief that an establishment – and you can extend that as widely as you wish – is judged by the quality of its toilets.