asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air how many fully-trained pilot members of the Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve have received notification during the last 12 months, to the most recent convenient date, terminating their continuative training and terminating the conditions under which, on keeping their training, they qualify for allowances and bounty.

As the hon. Member knows, we are concentrating our resources on giving refresher training to those pilots who would be of use to us in the very early days of a war. Between 1st June, 1953, and 30th September, 1954, about 1,500 pilots were told that we would not be able to give them any more flying training. Apart from National Service reservists, all those who were in the Reserve on 31st May, 1953, will be entitled to draw bounty for the remainder of their engagement even if they do not carry out flying training.

Does that mean that the 1,500 people do not draw their training allowances which they were promised when they trained for this very difficult job, and that the policy of the Government now is that a pilot of 24 years of age is a completely wasted asset who is to be written off after the expenditure of several thousand pounds on his training?

No, Sir. It does not mean that at all. It means that we can now give refresher training only to those air crew reservists who are qualified operationally and who have not been away from operational flying for too long. We may not have sufficient time on the outbreak of a war to refresh those who have got too rusty. As regards the drawing of bounties, those who had an engagement in the R.A.F.V.R. before 1st June, 1953, apart from ex-National Service men, will go on receiving their bounties until the end of their current term of service even though they do not undergo flying training.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if he will make a statement on the cost of constructing the airfield at Greenham Common, Newbury, begun in the summer of 1951, to meet the requirements of the United States Air Force; in what proportion the cost is being shared; if he has had a further geological survey made; and if he is satisfied that this will ultimately prove to be a serviceable airfield for heavy bombers.

The total cost is expected to be about —7½ million. This is being shared in approximately equal proportions between the Air Ministry and the United States Air Force. Further soil surveys and load bearing tests were carried out this year when it was decided that the runway must be strengthened to take heavier aircraft. I have no doubt that the airfield will prove entirely satisfactory for the use the United States Air Force have in mind for it.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that a very large sum of public money is involved? As I think my hon. Friend must be aware, the advice on which his predecessor acted in 1951 has proved to be unsound, because the underground springs still persist in breaking up the runway. Can my hon. Friend give a definite assurance that he has taken further fresh and independent geological advice and that the work which is now being done is likely to result in getting a series of runways strong enough to carry these heavy bombers?

Yes, Sir. In 1951, before the airfield was rebuilt, a very comprehensive soil survey was undertaken. It is true that the runway has been damaged, but that is because it was used by aircraft heavier than those which it was designed to take. Since then we have carried out further tests, and the damage should not recur after the runway has been strengthened.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if he has studied the details sent to him by the hon. and learned Member for Aberdeen, North, concerning an enemy alien taken prisoner by British forces during the war, who later escaped and joined the Royal Air Force under an assumed name; and what precautions are now taken against a recurrence of this incident and the consequent possibility of espionage.

The implications of this case were very carefully examined in 1951. Since that date, security checks have been introduced which should help to prevent this sort of thing happening again. It would be wrong for me to say publicly what these precautions are.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many ex-enemy aliens joined the Royal Air Force under misrepresentations such as those set out in the book, "The Other Side"? Does this not involve a terrible risk to the safety of Britain and, indeed, to the lives of other members of the R.A.F.?

As far as I know, there have been no cases of enemy aliens obtaining entry into the R.A.F. by false declaration, although I should like to have notice of that question. In any case, the man who is the subject of this Question was in the Royal Air Force between 1948 and 1950. Our security arrangements have been tightened up since then, and descriptions of what is said to have happened five years ago are not necessarily true of the R.A.F. today.

As it is Government policy that what my hon. and learned Friend calls "ex-enemy aliens" should serve in bulk in N.A.T.O., what is the objection to their serving in the Royal Air Force?

Is the Minister aware that my objection and my Question are directed to ex-enemy aliens joining the Royal Air Force under misrepresentations such as those set out in the book, "The Other Side," which I have already mentioned?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air how far it has been the practice in recent months for men registering for National Service in Birmingham to be told that they can serve in the Royal Air Force only if they sign on for three years, and then only in a clerical job; how many National Service men in Birmingham have agreed to do so in order to train in the Royal Air Force; and whether he will give an assurance that this is not being used as a means to recruit men for the Regular Forces.

The practice in Birmingham is the same as in any other part of Great Britain. There is a limited number of vacancies for National Service men in the Royal Air Force and keen competition for them. No man is obliged to take a Regular engagement, but suitable men for whom National Service vacancies cannot be found are offered Regular engagements, not necessarily in clerical trades, and they often prefer to accept such engagements as an alternative to doing National Service in one of the other Services. In Birmingham in the last three months, 125 men were rejected for National Service vacancies, but were accepted for three-year Regular engagements.

Can the Minister say what, in fact, is the proportion of National Service men who get into the Royal Air Force? Would it not be a good idea, in order that the public should not think that registration is being used as a racket to get Regulars, that at the point of registration men should not be pressed in this way to take long service engagements? Does not this make it seem to the general public like a racket to get Regular airmen?

In answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, there are at present in the Royal Air Force about 160,000 Regulars and about 65,000 National Service men. That will give him some idea of the proportion. As regards the second part of his supplementary question, we have made it quite clear to all concerned that pressure is not to be put on these young men to take on Regular engagements. However, it is fair to point out to them that if they care to come in on a three-, four- or five-year engagement, they will enjoy certain definite advantages. A wider choice of trades will then be open to them, and they will be able to serve in the Royal Air Force instead of in the Army.

Can the Minister say why there is this strong preference for the Royal Air Force compared with the preference for the other two Services?

It is the best Service.

I can only imagine that it is for the same reason that I myself joined the Royal Air Force.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what reduction in, or exemption from, service is granted to National Service men in respect of previous service with a Commonwealth air force.

Service in a Commonwealth air force does not exempt a man from being called up under the National Service Acts. The length of time he serves is, however, normally reduced by the length of time he has been in the Commonwealth air force.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his answer will give some satisfaction to a constituent of mine who served in the Royal Australian Air Force and who is now back in Brixton?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air to give an estimate of the extra expense involved in using a north-south runway at Scampton Aerodrome, Lincolnshire, instead of obliterating a portion of Ermine Street to make a north-east—south-west runway.

About £50,000; but the north-south runway cannot be extended for reasons other than cost.

Can the hon. Gentleman Assure the House that it is not owing to tenderness for the married quarters at Scampton Aerodrome that he is consenting to this vandalism with regard to Ermine Street?

I can give that assurance absolutely. As regards extending the north-south runway, there are very many other reasons, apart from the married quarters, why we cannot extend it. It is 40 degrees out of the prevailing wind, and aircraft would have to land and take off over Lincoln, and, quite apart from the unpleasant effects of this on the people on the ground, the Cathedral Tower would form a hazard to aircraft.

Cannot my hon. Friend reconsider this matter, because these ancient roads will be of interest to future generations? Surely the Department could refrain from spoiling a portion of one of them?

We have looked into this matter extremely carefully. I, personally, have received representatives of the county and of the city and have been right through the matter with them. I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that if we could have avoided cutting through Ermine Street we would certainly have done so. I very much regret the necessity of having to do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air the average cost of training pilots and other aircrew, respectively, to operational standard.

In round figures, the cost, up to the time of joining a squadron, can be taken as: pilots and navigators, £25,000; air signallers, £15,000; and flight engineers and air gunners, £8,000.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what factors are used, in relation to the numbers of aircraft, for calculating future requirements of pilots and other aircrew.

Our calculations are based on an assessment, for each aircraft type and rôle, of the aircrew needed to meet our estimated requirements in the event of war. They take into account the immediate reinforcement of the front line in war by aircrew with recent operational experience who are for the time being employed on other duties, or who have recently been transferred to the Reserve. I am afraid that, as I told the hon. Member on 14th July, it would not be in the public interest to give details.

Is not the present factor too high, and does it not lead to a great waste of money in the production of pilots and other aircrew beyond what we can possibly expect to employ in another war?

The hon. Gentleman knows very well from his own experience the complication of this matter. It is not easy. However, I can assure him that the figures on which we are working are the result of an extremely thorough review which we carried out in the last few months, and represent the most accurate and objective assessment at which we can arrive.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation to state the results of his conversations with the Secretary of State for Scotland and the chairman of the Scottish Tourist Board, designed to bring into operation a scheme for the equalisation of railway freight charges in and to Scotland, and also designed to eliminate the hardships caused by the present anomalies in freight charges; and what steps he proposes to take in these matters.

The hon. and learned Member is misinformed. There have been no such conversations.

As the Minister is new to this job, has he not had some conversations with his predecessor about this matter? Is he not aware that the expense of transport in the North of Scotland is holding up vast industrial planning there, and will he look into the matter and do something about it?

This is, of course, an important matter, but there have been no conversations on this subject, nor could there usefully be any. The hon. and learned Member may be aware that, first of all, it is a matter for the Transport Commission to prepare a scheme and then to submit it to the tribunal, where Scottish interests can, and no doubt will, express their views.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the present time limit fixed by him under Section 76 of the Transport Act, 1947, for the submission of a railway charges scheme by the British Transport Commission to the Transport Tribunal.

The period at present allowed expires on 6th August, 1955. I understand, however, that the Commission has practically completed the draft of a Rail Merchandise Charges Scheme and is about to consult with interests concerned, including of course Scottish interests. It will be submitted to the Tribunal as soon as these consultations have taken place.

Will my right hon. Friend treat this matter with the utmost urgency? He will appreciate that people living in remote areas such as the Highlands and elsewhere hope that some system of relief from the penal burden of freight charges will be worked out. Surely it would be better to attract as much business on to the railways as possible in order to relieve the congestion on the roads?

Under the existing legislation the matter is not in my hands, but I understand the concern of my hon. Friends and other hon. Members about this matter. I have no doubt that the Transport Commission will press forward with its proposals.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform his hon. Friend that if his Government had not interfered with the Transport Commission a transport charges scheme would have been submitted several years ago?

I think that complicated and dubiously accurate statement had better be conveyed direct.

It is perfectly accurate.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this question of charges is particularly applicable to North Devon so far as coal is concerned?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what assurances he has received that steps will be taken to provide greater safety, for railway passengers in view of the recent report by Brigadier C. A. Langley. Inspecting Officer of Railways, on the accident to the night Aberdeen-to-London express on 7th March, 1954.

I am assured that any train, whether passenger or freight, which may exceed the normal load of a single engine will now be assisted by another engine on the incline from Inverkeithing to the Forth Bridge. I would also refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply which I gave to him on 27th October.

Are those the only steps that are being taken to ensure the safety of passengers in this place, where accidents have occurred on more than one occasion? Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter and see that passengers are properly protected?

I have looked into the matter very carefully. If the hon. and learned Member will study, not only this answer but the previous one, he will see that the main points made by the inspector of accidents have been met.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the rail passenger services are the safest forms of transport in this country or in any other?

They are pretty good.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation when he proposes to take action in connection with the dazzle problem; and whether he will, as an interim measure, adopt the yellow light.

Effective action to check dazzle largely depends on standardisation of lighting power and correctness of aim of the headlight. Much preliminary work has been done, but it is not possible to make new regulations until facilities for enforcement and testing can be provided, and time would in any event be required while opportunity was given for the fitting of cars with lights of the prescribed pattern. Work at the same time is proceeding in an attempt to secure international agreement. So far as the second part of the Question is concerned, the weight of scientific evidence is against my hon. Friend's view that yellow lights reduce dazzle.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that his answer will further depress those of us who are anxious to see some action on this question, and whatever may be the official view of the backroom boys of the Ministry of Transport, those who, like myself, have been driving for 25 years think that the yellow light is of some advantage?

I think that the reason the hon. Gentleman sees an advantage in the yellow light is that he has seen it in France, where the light is not only yellow, but of a lower power.

Will the right hon. Gentleman at the same time consider the distracting effect of these blinking, twinkling trafficators which so much embarrass motorists?

Yes, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Road Research Laboratory has advised against the yellow light?

I understand that is so.

Why not just prohibit undimmed headlights? Those who drive know that an undimmed headlight is very little better than a dimmed headlight. Why not prohibit it for the sake of safety?

The problem really turns not on whether the headlight is dimmed or undimmed, but on the angle of its setting. A very little alteration in angle—something less than three degrees—can make all the difference between a safe light and dazzle.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what results were secured from the international tests which were held in the United States of America earlier this year, which his technical advisers attended; and what action he proposes to take, arising from these tests, in making headlamp dipping universal.

The results of these tests are at present being analysed by an international working party of technical experts. Until I know the result of this analysis and receive a copy of the report, I cannot possibly say what action it will be right for me to take.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the attention of his predecessor was called to this matter in the early months of 1952 by a trade union which caters for a large number of public vehicle drivers, and that there is real apprehension among bus drivers about the danger of driving after dark because of different methods? Is he aware that his predecessor told me more than 12 months ago that something was being done, and does not he think it is time that he got a move on?

I am as anxious to get on as the hon. Gentleman, but he may be aware that there are certain difficulties about hustling an international working party.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will introduce legislation fixing the maximum fares to be charged on passenger transport services to children up to the age of 16 years, receiving full-time education, at half the rate for adults.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number of transport undertakings in my constituency and elsewhere have not brought their fares policy into line with the raising of the school-leaving age? Since one Government Department has determined that parents must send their children to school up to the age of 15 years, and in some cases 16 years, could not the other Department determine that they should have the benefit of reduced fares?

Under existing legislation, concessions are for the operators to make. At the next stage comes the approval of the licensing authority, and I only come in on appeal if there is disagreement. I do not think that this is a matter for new legislation.

Need the Minister be quite so modest? If he indicates to the licensing authorities that it is the opinion of the House that fares for children under 15 years should be half fares, would not the licensing authorities act accordingly? Cannot the Minister look into the matter? It is rather serious.

The Question relates to children up to the age of 16 years and rather different problems arise.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is a great hardship to people who have families and want their children to return for holidays to remote areas such as the North of Scotland?

It would clearly be of advantage to many people concerned to pay reduced fares in respect of older children, but I am not sure that it is the right thing to put this liability on transport operators, public or private.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will publish a list showing which major road transport undertakings grant, and which do not grant, reduced fare rates to children up to 15 years of age when travelling to and from school.

The information is not readily available and will take some time to collect, but I will write to the hon. Baronet when I have done so.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will consider introducing legislation to allow chairmen of urban district councils who are employed by the British Transport Commission the same facilities that are granted to lord mayors and mayors in order that they may carry out their civic duties without loss of income.

No, Sir. I do not think this an appropriate subject for legislation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Chairman of the Tonbridge Urban District Council is an engine driver and has important duties towards 20,000 citizens and other functions to perform, including entertaining Royalty from time to time? Is he aware that to fulfil these engagements the chairman has to be out of pocket, otherwise he must refuse to perform these duties? Is it right that Tonbridge should be unfairly treated because it has no mayor?

I have some sympathy with my hon. Friend's point of view, but it seems to me that it is essentially a matter for the Commission as employers to settle in discussions with their employees.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will take steps to amend the Transport Act, 1953, so as to preclude the sale of premises and lorries owned by British Road Services where it is impossible to offer alternative work in that undertaking to those displaced.

No, Sir. As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, suitable provision for compensation for loss of employment is made by Regulations made under the Transport Act, 1953.

Is the Minister aware that in my constituency there is a case, of which I have sent him particulars, in which an efficient enterprise has been broken up and the staff discharged without any assurance of alternative employment? What is the point of such an operation?

The right hon. Gentleman was good enough to draw attention to a particular case, in respect of which I am glad to inform him that most of the men have been offered suitable employment. The right hon. Gentleman will recall that the arrangements made for compensation to employees on denationalisation were conspicuously more generous than those made on nationalisation.

What is the advantage of having such an operation at all?

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to our debates on the Transport Act, 1953.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in view of the capital loss of £20 million sustained by the British Transport Commission from the sale of road vehicles, he will take steps to amend the Transport Act, 1953, so as to terminate the sale of road vehicles and other publicly-owned property.

No, Sir.

As the Minister has admitted the loss of £20 million of public money, the breaking up of an efficient industry and depriving a number of workpeople of their jobs, does he not think he has done enough?

The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well—if he does not know, he can inform himself from the Third Schedule of the 1953 Act —that this is not a question, in the crude sense in which he used it, of a loss of public money. It is in settlement of the charges which arose from the process of denationalisation reimbursed by the Commission.

Would the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether he has given his consent, as some people are boasting, to the private sale of the South-West of Scotland Road Transport to a private concern at a throw-away price?

That, of course, is a different question. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to put it down.

Will my right hon. Friend consider issuing a simple public statement which will counteract the inaccurate and unfair effect of the propaganda of the party opposite?

I think the crude suggestion made in certain quarters of a loss of this sort will probably discredit itself, but I will bear the suggestion in mind.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation when it is proposed to introduce legislation to terminate sales of road vehicles owned by the British Transport Commission.

The only such proposals of which I have heard are those of the hon. Gentleman and his friends. The time of their introduction is, therefore, so remote as to amount to the merest speculation.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that proposals which are made from this side of the House are eminently desirable? Does he not realise that no section of public opinion, whether trade, industry or agriculture, is in favour of continuing with the disposal of road haulage vehicles at the present time?

On the second part of the question, I have seen very little evidence to support the hon. Gentleman's point of view. On the first part of the question, I should be a little doubtful about a horse from that stable.

The right hon. Gentleman has limited experience of being a full Minister. Does he not think that it is best to answer the Question on the Paper rather than merely be gratuitously impudent?

If the right hon. Gentleman, whose courtesy I will seek to emulate, had studied the Question before that intervention, he would have seen that I was asked by his hon. Friend

"when it is proposed to introduce legislation"

Hear, hear.

What are the Minister's intentions? Is he continuing with the sale indefinitely or is he bringing them to an end? The House would like to know what is his policy.

I am carrying out the duties laid upon me by Parliament to dispose of these vehicles.

Will not the Minister look again at this matter? He must know that business and commercial interests all over the country are deploring the continuation of these sales. [HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish."] Oh, yes; chambers of trade, chambers of commerce, all of them are saying it. Will not the Minister look into the question to see what he can do to ensure that an efficient service is given?

I am as concerned as the hon. Member that there should be as efficient a service as possible, but he must accept it from me that a great volume of opinion in the country—[HON. MEMBERS: "Nonsense."]—regards a system of private enterprise as giving the greatest efficiency.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that his first duty to the House is to answer Questions on the Order Paper and not to subordinate the answering of Questions merely to winning the cheap cheers of his supporters? Is it now the settled policy of the Government, who are responsible to the House as a whole, that any proposal coming from the Opposition is bound to be wrong? Have we reached a stage of dictatorship when the Government are not prepared to listen to any proposal merely because it comes from the Opposition?

The answer under this Government is undoubtedly "No, Sir," but I ask the right hon. Gentleman to search his conscience as to whether that applied in 1945.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the total administrative costs incurred to date by the Road Haulage Disposal Board in disposing of the road haulage organisation of the British Transport Commission.

All the expenses of the Board are administrative costs. Twenty-seven thousand, nine hundred and fifty-four pounds is the total of its expenses to 5th November, 1954.

Is this not money which is being poured down the drain? Is it not ridiculous to spend this amount to make the loss of £20 million which is being made on the disposal of road haulage vehicles, and can we not call it a day?

The hon. Member knows perfectly well that that is not an accurate or fair way of expressing the position. This is a moderate sum economically expended to carry out the wishes of Parliament.

Does the Minister consider a £20 million loss a moderate sum?

The question which the hon. Member put down, and which, therefore, I assume he had in mind, is one to which the answer was £27,000.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Prescott versus Birmingham Corporation; and if he will introduce legislation enabling local authorities to permit old-age pensioners, and other needy sections of the community, to travel free or at reduced prices on corporation transport vehicles.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Erdington (Mr. J. Silverman) on 27th October.

Irrespective of what the decision may be in the Court of Appeal, will the Minister say whether he is in sympathy with the idea of allowing old-age pensioners to travel free, and also whether, if Leicester—as I believe is proposed—promotes a Bill containing a provision to that effect, he will give his whole-hearted support to it?

The last part of the supplementary question was, I think, on three points hypothetical. In reply to the first part, I think that until the matter is settled in the courts the less I say about it the better.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is aware of the difficulty of obtaining omnibus services in rural areas generally; and what is his policy for improving the situation in this respect.

While I agree that there are difficulties in some areas, this is not general. I have, of course, no power to compel anyone to run an un-remunerative bus service. But the licensing authorities are doing their best to see that as many as possible such services are run by operators of other routes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the rural areas of Hampshire the difficulties are considerable, and that people will not go to live and work in the countryside under present conditions unless they have a bus service? Will he make a study of what can be done to alter the conditions so as to make it remunerative to run local village bus services?

There are particular difficulties in Hampshire, to which my hon. Friend has drawn my attention, but as I pointed out in my answer, I have no powers to compel anyone to operate such a service. To secure a certain degree of co-operation from the licensing authority is the best way of tackling this matter.

Does the right hon. Gentleman now realise that if the area schemes had been left in the Transport Act of 1947, in many cases urbanised services could be used to subsidise rural services?

I understood that even right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite had now realised that the area schemes would not work.

Is my right hon. Friend aware—I am sure that he is—that it has nothing to do with area schemes? Is he aware that if the surrounding economic circumstances were examined it would be found that there are several steps which might be taken to help to improve this matter in rural areas? Is he aware that I shall take the opportunity of raising it more fully on a suitable occasion?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will introduce legislation to ensure that members of the public finding lost property on public transport are rewarded.

There is no need for legislation, but I am looking into that aspect of the regulations which relates to property found by members of the public.

Will the Minister bear in mind that it would greatly improve public relations if some reward were given to members of the public who find property on public vehicles and return it in accordance with their obligations?

I am looking into the case which, I think, the hon. Member has in mind, but I would rather not commit myself at present.

Is it not a general rule that Scotland Yard returns one-third of the value of property that is found?

That is another question and one which I do not think should be put to me.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what estimate he has made as to the charges which would be necessary on toll trunk routes to cover construction and maintenance costs, respectively.

No general estimate is possible, as such charge would depend on the particular road.

I appreciate that the figures vary a great deal according to particular roads, but as the Minister is rumoured to have an open mind on the subject, will he see whether details cannot be got out for different types of road so that we may judge whether suggestions for improving roads are reasonable?

I will look at the matter, but so many arbitrary assumptions would have to be made—for example, questions of cost, the number of points of entry, and so on—that I am doubtful whether the details would be of much use. I will, however, look into the question.

Will my right hon. Friend take note of the abhorrence of all road users of a system of tolls? Does he not consider that road users already pay sufficient in taxation and, as taxpayers, ought to have the right to use the roads for which they pay to be constructed?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation on what date in 1955 work will recommence on the construction of the Dartford-Purfleet Tunnel.

I regret that I cannot add to the answer given to the hon. Member on 19th May.

But does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that 15th May last is a long way away and 1955 is pretty close and that his answer is intensely disappointing to local authorities and industrialists who expected that with a new Minister something would be done?

The answer to which I draw the attention of the hon. Member referred, as he knows, to action next year, and next year has not yet arrived.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware of the danger to life to children and old people on the Scotland Road, Liverpool; and if he will now make provision for two subways between Caznean Street and Rotunda.

I am aware of traffic conditions on this road. The initiative for the provision of subways lies with the local highway authority, but my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary has already explained to the hon. Member other methods of dealing with this problem.

Is the Minister aware that 4,000 children, apart from the adult population, cross that road every week? Is he aware that it is a congested road, that we are very much afraid for child life and want to see something done?

I share the hon. Member's anxiety about this road, and I agree that there is very heavy pedestrian traffic upon it. The point at issue, however, is whether the best thing to do is to provide tunnels, which, as the hon. Member knows, are not fully used, or whether in the near future the alternative which has been explained to him would not be really more effective.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this anxiety is shared by those who live in neighbouring constituencies Who use this road in getting in and out of Liverpool? Will he consider, instead of tunnels, the installation of press-button traffic signals?

That has been considered, but I am rather doubtful whether that is the answer in this case.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what plans he has decided upon to ensure that pedestrians can safely cross the roads, following the reduction of road crossings for pedestrians in our cities and towns.

The whole purpose of the reduction in the number of pedestrian crossings in 1951 was, as explained by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Ham, South (Mr. Barnes) at the time, to make it safer for pedestrians to cross the roads by securing that crossings were both properly used by pedestrians and respected by drivers.

Has the Minister realised that the recent action of his Department in curtailing the number of zebra crossings in cities and towns has meant that there are few places where pedestrians can cross the roads? In most cities the crossings are hundreds of yards apart? Where traffic is heavy, what means have pedestrians of crossing the road?

I think the hon. Member has misunderstood. The reduction in the number of crossings took place three years ago. My Department has not been responsible for reductions recently. From correspondence, I gather the hon. Member has in mind that certain crossings which are police controlled have had their stripes removed—[Laughter.]—that has a familiar ring for certain hon. Members—so as to make it clear that they are controlled.

I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has got the idea. Is he aware that in Liverpool there are 131 such crossings? Where else can the people of Liverpool cross the roads in safety, as pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for the Scotland Division (Mr. Logan)?

As I have pointed out, the main reduction in the numbers was made—I think for very good reasons—by my predecessor some three years ago. If the hon. Member knows of some particular sites which he and the Liverpool City Council think should be considered for crossings, I will look into the matter.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that more light shines down on pedestrians at zebra crossings, as it is very difficult sometimes to see whether pedestrians are waiting to cross the road when the crossing is very dimly lit?

Lighting provision at these crossings is generally the responsibility of local authorities. I hope they will take note of the useful suggestion of my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in the interests of road safety, he will review his policy of refusing to commend and promote road safety inventions; and why no representative of his Department has inspected the signalling device of Mr. Chater, of Clevedon, details of which have on more than one occasion been forwarded by Mr. Irish, of 1329, Bristol Road South, Northfield, Birmingham.

I do not accept the imputation contained in the first part of this Question. No representative of my Department has inspected this particular device because the details already submitted make its nature and purpose sufficiently clear. Among other things, it would not, if used, comply with the law.

Is it not a case that in many letters to me and to other hon. Members the Department has said that it is not its policy to commend particular inventions? If Government Departments had to do so in time of war for war-time inventions, is not the campaign against death and destruction on the road sufficiently important for the policy to be reconsidered by the Department?

I made it clear, I hope, in the earlier part of the answer, that I do not accept the suggestion of lack of interest in suitable devices of this sort as our policy, but there is a distinction between that and getting involved in commercial interests.

Whom can an inventor get to take up these things? There is not one commercial organisation.

This particular device was submitted to my Department and we did not proceed further with it because, although its purpose was clear, it did not comply with the law.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation to give an estimate of the cost of printing the report of the technical panel concerning the Tamar Crossing.

£1,250.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware that people in mid and west Cornwall, interested in the report of the technical panel concerning the Tamar Crossing, have to go to Plymouth to see it; and whether he will send a copy to the clerk to the Cornwall Council Council for inspection at County Hall, Truro.

No, Sir. I sent a copy to the Cornwall County Council on 28th October.

While thanking the Minister for his belated concession—which happened to take place on the day when my Question appeared on the Order Paper—may I remind him that my important constituency of Falmouth and Camborne is 60 miles away from Plymouth and that Cornishmen do not regard Cornwall as an appendage of Plymouth and expect the right hon. Gentleman to remember that?

I need no reminding of that. In reply to the first part of the supplementary question, perhaps it was a case of great minds thinking alike.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will reconsider the scope of the proposed road improvement schemes for the next three years, in view of the anticipated increase in production of motor vehicles and the existing over-burdened and dangerous state of our roads.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether the Government will consider extending the road programme to ensure safer and more efficient communications.

I would refer my hon. Friends to the answer I gave on the 3rd November to my noble Friend the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke).

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the answer he gave last week did not face up to the problem? Is he further aware that every day brings irrefutable evidence that the problem of the roads is becoming more and more urgent? Is he also aware that feeling in the country is being kept in reserve, because of rumours that the Government are thinking of doing something about improving the roads, and that if those rumours are unfounded, there will be a great and warranted outcry against the Government for not facing up to this matter?

I take note of the most eloquent supplementary question from my hon. Friend, but none the less I have no statement to make at the moment.

Can the Minister inform us if there is any truth in these rumours, and, if so, how they managed to get into the Press without this House being informed?

If the hon. Gentleman can draft that question, perhaps he will put it on the Order Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm or deny that he has maintained a completely inflexible attitude to this matter of financing road development? Will he not use what, I suppose, must be a residual influence at the Treasury to try to get extra funds for roads in future years?

There is a certain element of speculation in that suplementary question with which it is difficult to deal precisely.

Will the Minister study the experience of foreign nations in reducing road accidents by road engineering?

Yes, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the scheme for which there should be overwhelming priority is the Farnham by-pass.

I note the view of my hon. Friend, which he has expressed not for the first time, but I do not think that it will receive the unanimous approval of this House.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will make a statement on the further development of the road programme in the North-East.

I have nothing to add at present to the reply given to my hon. Friend on 30th June last.

Can my right hon. Friend make any forecast about next year or even the year after?

Not this afternoon.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the abolition of the toll on Selby Bridge.

No, Sir. I cannot yet forecast when funds will be available for this purpose.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that until this toll is abolished and a new bridge built, nobody—not even my right hon. Friend—can regard the transport conditions in the East Riding of Yorkshire as being efficient?

I am not disposed to quarrel with that, but my hon. Friend will be aware that I have to set the claims of this proposition against that of a good many others, including others in the East Riding.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation, in view of the restrictions now being removed from building materials and labour, a date can be given for the commencement of the erection of road bridges over the River Forth and the River Tay estuaries.

No, Sir. The welcome removal of restrictions to which my hon. Friend refers, does not relieve us of the need to allocate the limited funds available to the most urgent projects which can be afforded.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the funds are available; that his predecessor refused permission to Scottish industrialists to build with their own funds, so that difficulty is now entirely removed? If I am right in supposing that there is no difficulty about building material, Scotland will build its own Forth bridge, if financial permission be extended. Will such permission be given?

The point is not so much financial permission as financial provision, but if my hon. Friend has a proposal for providing the finances for a bridge of this sort, that will certainly be looked at.

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the fact that there are bodies in Scotland proposing to raise the money to provide a bridge and charge the necessary tolls? Are we to take it from his reply that, if they do so, he will raise no objection?

I should have to see the proposals before answering that question, but I should be very happy to see them.

Will my right hon. Friend remember that the Tamar bridge would be far more useful and important than the bridge which has just been mentioned?

That may be so, but this Question refers to bridges over the rivers Forth and Tay.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what rate of grant he is prepared to make to the London County Council to construct the flyover viaduct on Cromwell Road extension south of Hammersmith Broadway.

Seventy-five per cent., Sir.

Why is there difficulty at present in regard to the construction of this highly desirable road?

That is another question. The hon. Member asked me what was the rate of grant.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation why there has been a delay in approving the application for an adequately wide footpath on that section of the Hednesford—Rugeley road lying between the newly-completed Pear Tree Estate, Rugeley, and the town centre; and if he is aware of the danger to pedestrians, in view of the planned increase in the population of the town.

No such application has been received.

As the right hon. Gentleman has a responsibility for road safety, will he make it his business to look into this case? A new estate has been completed, a vast increase in the local population has been reached, and the road is very dangerous indeed, with a large child population using it.

If an application is received from the responsible highway authority, of course I will look into it.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what investigations have taken place in recent months into the suitability of utilising the roofs of London's railway stations as possible helicopter stations.

I have recently completed an investigation into the practicability of rooftop sites for helicopters over Waterloo and Cannon Street Stations and at a site near St. Pancras. The last is unsuitable because of surrounding buildings; at the other two stations rooftop platforms could be constructed at very considerable cost, but it is doubtful if they would be large enough for helicopter traffic hoped for in the future.

Have we made any progress, or are we still marking time?

If the hon. Member will study my answer, he will see that we have made quite considerable progress.

Hovering.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what representations have been received by his Department to the effect that passenger airlines should be permitted to operate further over the sea without carrying dinghies.

None, Sir.

Does that mean that the Department is initiating a proposal to reduce the safety standards?

As the hon. Member is aware, when international standards are laid down which are different from those in operation in this country, we look into them as a matter of general practice in order to find out who is right.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what progress he has made towards securing international agreement on the mandatory installation of rearward-facing seats in passenger aircraft.

The installation of rearward-facing seats was advocated by the United Kingdom at the 4th Session of the Airworthiness Division of the International Civil Aviation Organisation in March, 1951. No agreement has been reached. I intend to instruct our representatives to raise this matter again at the earliest opportunity.

Is the Minister aware that not only is the Royal Air Force advocating rearward-facing seats, but that his Department's former inspector of accidents has now come out with a public statement in favour of them, which puts his Department in a rather awkward position? Will he say if he can take some additional initiative other than that already taken?

I do not think that we are in an awkward position. We have, in fact, taken the lead over this, and in that respect we have been forward-facing.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that anyone who has had experience of this matter knows that undoubtedly rearward-facing seats are infinitely safer, and that there is nothing to prevent him, or this country as a whole, from adopting them and putting the procedure into practice immediately?

From a safety angle, there is a good deal of evidence in support of the view expressed by my hon. Friend, but I think that he will be aware that there are a number of steps which have to be taken before there can be any question of compulsion, particularly in respect of existing aircraft.