asked the Minister of Transport whether he will inquire into the need for safety barriers outsides those schools in Clevedon which are on the main through road, as this matter has now been under consideration for some months by the Somerset County Council, without result.

The local education authority are considering the need for the provision of safety barriers outside schools on the Class II road B.3130 in Clevedon, and as far as I am aware, the negotiations are proceeding satisfactorily.

Is the Minister also aware that if matters are proceeding satisfactorily they are proceeding in such a leisurely way that neither the inhabitants nor the headmaster nor the headmistress of the school can possibly be satisfied? Could he not do something to speed up matters? This has been going on for a year.

This is primarily the responsibility of the Somerset County Council. Inquiries have been made quite recently by the Ministry of Education, and maybe this Question, which the hon. Member has asked, may hasten the matter in some respects.

asked the Minister of Transport why the Traffic Commissioner for the North-west Area refused an appli- cation from the Batty-Holt Touring Service, Limited, Blackpool, to operate a five days' tour to Scarborough.

According to my information, this application was withdrawn on 30th April before it could be heard at a public sitting.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it rather hard that these people who live in Blackpool should not have the same chance of getting to Scarborough as people from other areas?

I do not think that question arises. I am dealing with a specific allegation which, as far as I can see, has no substance.

If I send the right hon. Gentleman full particulars will he have an inquiry made?

I will certainly look into any information which the hon. Gentleman cares to submit to me.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his Department or the county councils of the West Riding and East Riding of Yorkshire are primarily responsible for negotiating with the owners of Selby Toll Bridge; and whether, and on what date, negotiations for the purchase of the toll rights were initiated.

On 20th January, 1947, my Department, which, in agreement with the county councils, is taking the initiative in this matter, requested the chief valuer to undertake negotiations for a provisional settlement.

How is it that the Minister has been able to tell me by successive answers in the last few months that negotiations are proceeding while I have information from the owners of the bridge that the first approach made to them by the Ministry was about a fortnight ago?

What course the valuer is taking in the matter is one for him, but in view of the inquiries which I have made into this I should like to inform the hon. and gallant Gentleman that I am calling for a special report, as my Department is very anxious to facilitate the removal of these toll bridges.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has yet received any recommendations from the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee on the relief of traffic congestion in London; and whether he will make a statement on this matter.

Yes, Sir. On the advice of the Committee, I have made an Order, to come into force on 27th of this month, prohibiting the waiting of vehicles between 11.30 a.m. and 6.30 p.m. on Mondays to Fridays inclusive, on about 10 miles of the principal thoroughfares in Central London. Passenger vehicles will be permitted to stop only long enough to set down and pick up passengers, and goods vehicles to wait only while loading and unloading, and, even then, for not longer than 20 minutes. In addition, the Order will prohibit street trading in these streets on ail weekdays, except under licence. The restrictions on slow moving traffic which were in force in the West End before the war will be re-imposed on the same date, and I also propose shortly to make Regulations imposing similar restrictions in certain of the main streets in the City.

asked the Minister of Transport why the table relating to the reduction in road grants does not include the Isle of Ely, the county council for which has been informed of cuts of 27 per cent. on class one road, 24 per cent. on class two roads and 78 per cent. on class three roads in the councils estimates; and what steps he proposes to take in view of the fact that flood damage to roads in the Isle of Ely is estimated at £11,000 and frost damage at £9,000.

The figures relating to road maintenance in the Isle of Ely were not received from my regional office in time, for inclusion in the table which was printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT. In deciding the proportion of the County Council's estimates towards which grants will be available, account has been taken of local conditions, including frost and flood damage. According to my information, the figures of frost and flood damage quoted by the hon. and gallant Member include some £8,500 for damage to trunk roads, which will be borne entirely by the Road Fund.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this problem is by no means confined to the Isle of Ely and that all his policy amounts to is the erection of "Road up" signs instead of "Road works ahead"?

asked the Minister of Transport if he will specify the areas in which road maintenance is covered by the block grant.

The Local Government Acts of 1929 which instituted the block grant, provided for the discontinuance of classification grants in respect of Class I and Class II roads and bridges in London, in county boroughs in England and Wales and in large burghs in Scotland, and of grants for the maintenance of unclassified roads in counties.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he took to ascertain conditions in Warwickshire, including damage done to classified roads by frosts, snow and floods, before deciding what amount of the county council's estimated expenditure on road maintenance should rank for grant in 1947–48; and why he failed to consult the Warwickshire County Council before reaching a decision.

My divisional road engineers are in constant touch with the officials of the county councils in their areas and are fully conversant with local conditions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the Warwickshire County Council are unable to carry out the repairs for which they have estimated and for which they are entitled to grants they will have to discharge labourers; and that if further repairs are not made it will lead to a general aggravation of the position?

The hon. Gentleman must recollect that this is a universal problem. and I cannot treat one county differently from another.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman discriminating between different counties? Has he not already said so?

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the decision he has made in regard to road grants is going to throw the country into complete confusion, and that unless some steps are taken to rectify these enormous cuts a great many roads will have to be closed down throughout the country?

I greatly appreciate the difficulties involved, but, after all, in spreading the available funds we have to take into consideration the complete range and responsibility of all the highways in this country.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the county councils were encouraged to put in pretty high estimates as the result of the announcement of the right hon. Gentleman in January, 1946, and that this latest announcement has come as a complete surprise to them and has thrown their plans and budgets for the year completely out of gear?

What steps are being taken to meet the shortage of labour and materials?

I do not think it is primarily a question of shortage of material and labour, but a question of the allocation.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the answer to this Question and Question No. 78, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that considerable damage to property in Urchfont, Market Lavington and Easterton was caused by the use of 4,000 lb. bombs in the vicinity of R.A.F. exercises on Friday afternoon; that widespread anxiety in the neighbourhood has been caused by an announcement that there will be an even heavier exercise tomorrow, Tuesday, and whether he can give an assurance that that exercise will take place under conditions that can cause no damage to civilian property.

I am much indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for this opportunity to express my great regret that damage and alarm should have been caused in Market Lavington, Easterton and Urchfont by the dropping of 4,000 lb. bombs on the artillery range of Larkhill on Friday last. In the past 4,000 lb. bombs have, in fact, been safely used on this range, and on Friday the bombs fell nearly 2¾ miles from the nearest village. But, in view of what happened on Friday, the Air Council have now given orders that no bomb heavier than 500 lb. shall be used in the demonstration which is to take place to-morrow. I am satisfied that no danger can result from the use of these much smaller bombs.

May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that statement, which will give very great satisfaction to the people of Wiltshire?