asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air how many families will be housed in the married quarters which he proposes to build at Mawgan Airfield, north Cornwall; and what the total scheme is estimated to cost.

Our plans for married quarters at this airfield are being re-examined because of a possible change in the requirement. I will write to the hon. Member as soon as I can.

When the hon. Gentleman is re-examining the technical side of this matter, will he also reconsider the siting of these married quarters, because it would seem that they are likely to cost in the region of £500,000, and if he sites them where he wants to, it will be against the wishes of the county planning authority? Will the hon. Gentleman also bear in mind that military and naval quarters on big sites on the North Cornish coast have been abandoned within the last two years, and—?

I think that will be enough to be going on with.

I will bear in mind the hon. Gentleman's representations, but I cannot make any promise at this stage.

Bearing in mind that this aerodrome is on the edge of one of the most beautiful pieces of coast scenery in Cornwall, will the hon. Gentleman make sure that the Government do not erect absolute horrors on the skyline, as they attempted to do once before and were forced to pull them down again? May I have an assurance?

One of the matters which we have carefully considered in our suggested siting of these married quarters is that they do not occupy good agricultural land.

As this aerodrome is in my constituency, may I ask my hon. Friend to give an assurance that the views of local authorities will be taken fully into consideration in arriving at a decision?

Certainly. We are in close touch with the local authorities.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, arising out of claims by Mr. R. E. Harrison, of Rugeley, Staffordshire, he is now in a position to give the hon. Member for Lichfield and Tamworth specific answers to his proposal for a Departmental inquiry and to the request for information as to the adequacy of his Department's records covering the ranks to be assumed by civilian employees at Singapore in 1942 when embodied in the Royal Air Force on emergency evacuation to Australia.

I do not consider that a Departmental inquiry would serve any useful purpose. The records saved from Singapore and those maintained on the voyage home, together with the evidence of Mr. Harrison's superior officers, were adequate for a complete investigation of these claims.

Will the hon. Gentleman say why the Royal Air Force is treating this man so extremely unfairly? Will the hon. Gentleman deny that this man was authorised to take up the appointment of pilot officer, that he was instructed to buy a uniform, that he was paid at the appropriate rate and that when he reached Australia eventually he was demoted arbitrarily and consequently lost the value of the uniform, for which he was not compensated?

I can only assure the hon. Gentleman that we have consulted the two senior officers under whom Harrison was serving at that time in Singapore, and that both of them absolutely deny that he was ever given any indication that he was entitled to commissioned rank.

Cannot the Under-Secretary at any rate give us in some form and in public a complete explanation of this case, which prima facie looks like one of shabby treatment of an officer?

I have written in some detail to the hon. Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow). I think that he knows in detail exactly what the explanations are, and I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman asks his hon. Friend to show the correspondence to him.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air (1) if he will arrange for an investigation into the misuse of aircraftmen, details of which have been supplied by the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford;

(2) what progress has been made by the Criminal Investigation Branch of the Royal Air Force into the irregular use of materials and aircraftmen from the Royal Air Force Station, Lichfield.

A report on certain of the matters referred to by the hon. Member in his letter is now being considered by the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Maintenance Command. I am having inquiries made into the other allegations. I will write to the hon. Member as soon as the investigation is complete.

Can the Minister state how long he expects this investigation will take? Further, in view of the offer that I have made to supply more information and evidence, is the hon. Gentleman going to take advantage of that offer?

On the first point, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there will be no avoidable delay. On the second point, I shall bear in mind his offer when we are conducting our investigations.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider instituting an inquiry into the employment of part-time National Service men in the Royal Air Force, and may I please have an answer to the letter which I wrote several weeks ago disclosing the most appalling waste of time?

I apologise if the reply to my hon. and gallant Friend's letter has been unduly delayed. I will certainly look into the matter and see what the position is. I can assure him that we are constantly examining any cases that may be brought to our notice of misuse of manpower in the Royal Air Force.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what action he proposes to take in reply to the protest against the siting of a steel radio tower for his Department within the Dartmoor National Park.

Will the Minister bear in mind that the Dartmoor National Park is a most precious heritage of the nation, that Great Links Tor, where it has been proposed to site this mast, is one of the few wild tracts left in the West of England? Will the hon. Gentleman consult an eminent person outside the Service, such as Sir Robert Watson-Watt, before he makes an irrevocable decision?

I think that everyone interested in this matter has had, and will continue to have, every opportunity of putting forward points of view.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what offers of co-operation were made by the Royal Air Force to the United States authorities in connection with the exhibition of the film "The Dam Busters"; and with what results.

None, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air upon what conditions, in regard to the content of the film, the assistance of the Royal Air Force was given in the making of the film "The Dam Busters."

The agreement with the film company provided that certain scenes should be approved by the Air Ministry to ensure that there was no breach of security. In addition, slight amendments were made to the script to preserve the authentic Service atmosphere.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that this excellent British film was made with scrupulous attention to historical detail, in conjunction with his Service, that in the American export version it has been grossly distorted in Hollywood, particularly by the introduction of a Flying Fortress into the raid sequence? Is it not shameful that the American public has not been allowed to see the correct British version? In view of the importance of maintaining the good name of the Royal Air Force, should not some protest be made to the American authorities, because this certainly jeopardises good Anglo-American relations?

I am looking into all this extremely carefully now and, although am afraid I am not in a position to make a statement at the moment, I shall very carefully consider what action, if any, I ought to take.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation (1) what regulations are now in force governing the construction, safety and sea-

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the statutes and Regulations involved. As their enforcement is secured by inspection by my Department's surveyors, I am also circulating details of the inspections carried out and their results.

Is the Minister aware that I am much obliged to him for that comprehensive Answer? Does he agree that, on the analogy of the Regulations which govern the construction, safety and road-worthiness of motor cars, similar regulations should be punctiliously enforced in the case of ships, in the interest of crews and all concerned?

I think that when the hon. and learned Member has a chance to study the details with reference to the inspections which I am circulating in HANSARD, he will be satisfied that an effective effort of enforcement is made.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he has considered the reports, copies of which have been sent to him, concerning the comparative times taken to handle cargoes in London, Rotterdam and Hamburg; and what plans there are for making English methods more efficient.

I have seen the letter to The Times which my hon. and gallant Friend has been good enough to send me, and will reply to him on the particular case when inquiries which I am making have been completed.

On the general questions also raised in my hon. and gallant Friend's Question, the Ports Efficiency Committee is at present considering delays to road vehicles in ports and, as the House will know, my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service has recently set up an inquiry into the working of the Dock Labour Scheme.

While I appreciate some of the things which my right hon. Friend has, I know, done, may I ask whether he does not agree that it would be deplorable if London's speed and efficiency were inferior to that in some of the Continental ports?

I agree that the efficiency of the Port of London and of our other major ports is a matter of great importance to our whole national economy.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will introduce legislation to consolidate the law relating to merchant shipping, having regard to the fact that the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, has been subsequently amended on no less than 40 occasions.

In principle I am attracted by the idea of consolidation but the task would be heavy involving substantial expense and additional staff for which I can see no practical necessity at present.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that this is a classic example of the advantages of consolidating statutes, and that if over a period of 60 years there have been so many Amendments to the Merchant Shipping Act, it would be of the greatest assistance to ship owners, trade unions and others if they could find the law in a consolidated statute? Will my right hon. Friend reconsider his decision?

As my hon. Friend, who is familiar with this subject, knows, many of the Measures which are in form amendments of the original Act are really additions to it and do not amend the substance of it. While, as I have said, I sympathise with my hon. Friend's desire to see consolidation, there are many other aspects of the law where the need is even more urgent.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many miles of canals and inland waterways are still in active use in Great Britain; and what proportion of this mileage is controlled by the Transport Commission.

About 1,800 miles are still in commercial use, of which 1,420 miles are controlled by the British Transport Commission.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what tonnage was carried on canals and inland waterways in Great Britain in 1938, 1948, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, and to the latest convenient date in 1955, respectively.

As the Answer includes a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Would my right hon. Friend give the figure for 1938 and 1954?

Certainly. The figures, which will appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT, are, for 1938, 12,952,000 tons and, for 1954, 13,253,000 tons.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what recommendations he has now received from the British Transport Commission arising from the Board of Survey Report on canals and inland waterways; and what action he is taking thereon.

I have just received from the Commission, and am considering, its proposals for the develop- ment of those waterways which carry substantial traffic and which the Board of Survey recommended should be improved.

The Commission has also recommended that those waterways which in its view have insufficient commercial prospects to justify their retention for navigation should be transferred to other more suitable bodies. I have informed the Commission that this recommendation requires further study.

Will the Minister give this matter his most earnest consideration, in view of the difficulties which confront the Commission today because of the necessity to maintain many derelict waterways and because of the compensation which, in some cases, it is having to pay?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is an extremely difficult and very important problem.

Without anticipating the result of the inquiry, will the right hon. Gentleman also inquire how much it costs to deal with abandoned canals?

I think that that clearly is a relevant matter.

So far as the question of the closing of canals and waterways is concerned, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, painstaking as the Board no doubt was in going about its work, it was set up by the very body, namely, the British Transport Commission, which is responsible for their maintenance and which has not been keeping them all in a state of repair? Will my right hon. Friend consider, therefore, having a more independent inquiry before any action is taken?

I think that there is a good deal to be said for that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will give details of the new regulations relating to property found by members of the public on public transport.

In the light of the advice I have received from the Central Transport Users Consultative Committee, as well as from the operators and trade unions concerned, I do not intend to propose any amendment to the existing Regulations.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he has yet considered the report from the committee set up to inquire into flashing indicators on motor vehicles; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot yet add to my Answer last week to Questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central (Sir F. Medlicott) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Vauxhall (Mr. G. R. Strauss).

Does my right hon. Friend not realise the urgency of this matter? There are today, to my knowledge, five different types of these flashing lights, with five different colours. Since 1939 the need for standardisation has been impressed upon us. Why, therefore, should we have so much confusion with so many different signals?

As, I think, my hon. Friend knows, the use of these devices was authorised a year or two ago at the request of the motor industry to facilitate its export trade so as to permit standardisation of signs on the basis of those used in foreign countries. I really think that before deciding to make any reversal of what was, from the point of view of that important trade, a valuable concession, it is essential to complete a proper and expert examination, and to be quite clear which of these signs can be authorised and can continue to be authorised without danger. It is not quite so easy a matter as my hon. Friend might think.

Could we ever get any improvement if we were tied to one method? Cannot people have the intelligence to see that all these indicators mean that cars are going to turn?

I think that the hon. and learned Member somewhat oversimplifies the problem.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the primary consideration is the safety and convenience of users of our own roads and not the export trade?

Yes. That, of course, is my prime responsibility in the matter; but the same considerations do not apply to all these signs, and I think it is important to get the answer right.

Will the Minister remind the British Motor Trade Association that the car which sells the best in the world and is today competing effectively with British production is the Volkswagen, which still has the arm type of indicator? If that is selling in Europe and America, why should we resort to flashing indicators?

I think that the British motor industry, which has done a very good job in the export trade, is familiar with that problem.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many "A" special licences have been refused, in accordance with paragraph 4 of Part I of the First Schedule to the Transport Act, 1953, because the vehicles were unable to serve substantially the same areas as prior to disposal.

One hundred and six.

Would the Minister not agree that that is a rather surprisingly small figure in view of the large number of transfers of disposed-of vehicles from one part of the country to another? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many cases vehicles have recently been sold at a profit after having been disposed of by the Commission, and then transferred to different parts of the country? Will the right hon. Gentleman draw to the licensing authorities' attention the provisions of the Act, and see that they are fulfilled?

It shows how smoothly the disposal operation has gone.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is aware that applicants for driving tests in the Abergavenny district have been informed that they have to wait a period of four months before having a test; and what arrangements there are for tests to be undertaken when examiners are not available due to illness.

The normal waiting period for a test at the Abergavenny centre at the present time is seven to eight weeks. To alleviate the difficulties arising from the illness of the examiner I am arranging for an additional examiner to be available there from the end of this month.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will make a statement on the parking of cars without lights in London, as provided by Statutory Instrument No. 1363; and when he will provide similar facilities in the provinces.

The Regulations came into operation in London on the 21st September; it is too early as yet adequately to assess their effect, but I understand that, up to the present, they have been generally welcomed and that no substantial difficulties have come to the notice of the police. As regards the rest of the country, I am now examining the comments of certain organisations which I consulted about the signs and markings to be used.

Is it not a fact that this question was raised over a year ago and was received sympathetically; and is this not rather a long time to wait for the facilities to be provided, in view of the great advantage they would be to the travelling public?

I agree that they are an advantage to the public, which is why I am promoting them, but as the necessary signs have to be erected not by me bat by other bodies outside I think it is necessary to carry them with me in regard to the particular form of marking to be used.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in view of the fact that the one month's waiting time for driving tests is considerably lengthened because of lack of testing staff, he will consider extending the three months' limit for a provisional driving licence.

Clause 8 of the Road Traffic Bill now before Parliament proposes to extend the period of validity of provisional driving licences from three to six months.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the results of his investigation of the plan for monorail transport between Central London and London Airport; and whether he will make a statement.

The possibilities of a rail or monorail service between central London and London Airport are now being examined by a Committee composed of officers of the British Transport Commission, the air Corporations and my Department.

Having regard to the very long time that it takes to get from central London to London Airport, will my right hon. Friend hasten this inquiry?

I am anxious to get its results but, of course, the monorail is not the only runner.

Has the possibility of an underground railway been considered?

The possibility has been raised but the cost of underground construction is now so high that I do not think that it is a likely starter.

Would it not be possible for a body other than the British Transport Commission to be included on this Committee so that we can obtain a broader view of what can be done?

The point that will arise if a scheme is put forward is whether it is remunerative and, if it is not, who is to pay for it. I think it much better dealt with at the moment by the bodies which I have mentioned.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the Committee to examine the excellent communications between Paris and Orly Airport?

I am certain that the Air Corporations on this Committee are very familiar with them.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will recognise chambers of trade as responsible bodies for nominating persons to serve on area transport consultative councils.

These councils include representatives of commerce, and I would not wish to upset their balance of membership by increasing it. In appropriate cases I am prepared to consider inviting the views of chambers of trade in connection with appointments to these councils.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will, by regulation, require heavy vehicles to have traffic indicators of a kind clearly visible from directly behind the vehicle.

I am awaiting a further report by the Road Research Laboratory on direction indicators. When I am considering it, I will bear in mind my hon. Friend's suggestion.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that signals are frequently given from the cabs of these heavy vehicles and they cannot be seen by traffic behind owing to the size of the rear of the vehicle, and this frequently constitutes a grave danger on the roads?

That is a very serious part of the problem.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how much he expects will be expended on his roads programme and on the railway modernisation programme, respectively, in the current year.

Capital expenditure on the railways, of which only a small proportion relates to the modernisation plan, is estimated at approximately £70 million in the current calendar year.

Expenditure on all forms of road construction and maintenance during the current financial year will be of the order of £41 million from central Government funds, and of the order of £40 million by local authorities.

Can the Minister assure us that neither of the programmes is being slowed up, and that the railway programme, equally, is going forward, not only in amount but also in time?

Certainly, Sir.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if, in view of the needs of old-age pensioners, he will introduce legislation to authorise all public and private transport bodies to permit old-age pensioners to travel free or at reduced rates on public vehicles in a similar way to schoolchildren.

I have nothing to add to what was said on this subject by my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary on 18th February last.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the situation has changed considerably since last February, that the cost of living has increased very heavily, and that rents are now to increase also? Can he not do something for old-age pensioners in relation to transport?

I do not think that any of the wise words which my hon. Friend used on that occasion have lost their force.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will amend the lighting Regulations for heavy vehicles to ensure that they are more easily identified.

I think that the provision now made under the 1954 Regulations is adequate but I will gladly consider any suggestion which my hon. Friend has in mind.

Has my right hon. Friend considered the system used in the United States—contour lighting of heavy vehicles?

All these questions were gone into before the 1954 Regulations were made, but I will certainly note my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the amount authorised for new road construction and major improvements for the financial year ended 5th April, 1955; what amount of that sum was actually spent; what amount is authorised for the present financial year; and what amount he expects will actually be spent by 5th April, 1956.

The total amount provided for payments in 1954–55 was £5,048,000, of which £4,927,000 was actually spent. The amount provided this year is £8,314,000 and I expect this amount to be spent. If my hon. Friend is referring to schemes authorised, the total provision in 1954–55 was £19,360,000 but the value of the schemes actually authorised was £20,027,000. The provision for schemes to be authorised this year is £29,830,000, and I expect to authorise schemes to that amount.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in recent years the estimates have not been fully spent? As he has said, under £5 million was spent on Government account last year. Is he further aware that local authorities have recently been disturbed by the circular calling for economy generally? Can he assure local authorities that the road programme will go ahead, and that the Exchequer and local authorities will spend up to the Estimates this year?

As far as the road programme going ahead is concerned, I need only refer my hon. Friend to the specific assurance given on that point recently both by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say in which of the mass of figures he has just given is any provision being made to remedy the appalling state of affairs which exists at Hyde Park Corner?

I think that is a separate question.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will give an assurance that progress in the Government proposals for road improvement will continue in accordance with the original plans both as regards extent and timing.

Yes, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that when all these road improvements have been completed, the congestion will, because of the increase of vehicles on the roads, be just as bad then as it is now, with all the waste and inefficiency that that means? While I appreciate that there is financial difficulty at the moment, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he can assure the House that as soon as things get a little easier the Government will give top priority to further improvements?

I do not think I can go further than to invite my hon. and gallant Friend's attention to what my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said recently on precisely that question.

Can my right hon. Friend say when it is likely that a start will be made on the Staines by-pass?

Not without notice.

Is it not a fact that the hon. and gallant Member has understated the facts, and that when these schemes are completed the situation will not be similar to what it is now, but will have grown worse?

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are only too well aware of the problems caused by the very great increase of traffic, actual and potential, over the next few years with which we have to deal when handicapped by the heavy backlog of work with which we are now faced.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many schemes for road development and reconstruction affecting or requiring the demolition of domestic housing have been sanctioned by him; how many of these are likely to be in operation within the next five years; and how many houses are thus affected.

A very large number of the schemes I have authorised and intend to authorise and complete during the next five years will require the demolition of domestic housing. I cannot at this stage give the hon. Member the number of houses or the date when they will be affected.

Can the Minister not give at least some approximate idea of the number of houses to be demolished, thus adding to the housing difficulty? Furthermore, are all householders thus to be affected, or those who have been affected, left to their own devices to find alternative accommodation?

In reply to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, over a five-year period, in view of the very large number of schemes that are being undertaken, I really cannot give a figure relating to houses. Questions of rehousing are, I think, on the whole not matters for me.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation to what extent the compensation paid to householders affected by road development and reconstruction covers all the expenses involved in the surrender of their houses, including removal and loss of market value through public knowledge of impending road schemes affecting that property.

The level of compensation payable in respect of property acquired for highway development, as for other public purposes, is that laid down by Part III of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1954.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether that is adequate to the needs of those who have to leave their houses? If necessary, would he be prepared to see a deputation of hon. Members from both sides of the House on this matter as it affects their own constituents?

The question of a proper level of compensation when property is acquired for public purposes is not one for me to decide. If the hon. Member wishes a deputation to be seen, he should take it to one of my right hon. Friends.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether the new yellow through-route signs have now been erected by all the Metropolitan boroughs.

The necessary signs have been or are now being erected by all the Metropolitan boroughs concerned, with one exception.

Can my right hon. Friend say which is the exception?

Stepney.

In view of the fact that some of these signs direct traffic to a ring road which includes the bottleneck of Euston Road, will the right hon. Gentleman see that something is done at the earliest opportunity to remove that bottleneck?

The bottleneck was there before the signs, but I agree that its removal would be an improvement.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether the London County Council has now agreed to construct the flyover at Hammersmith on the Cromwell Road Extension, for which it took special Parliamentary powers in 1948.

No, Sir.

Is it not a pity that on this splendid new road there should not be the benefit of a flyover at Hammersmith? Will not a lot of congestion still arise from the two conflicting streams of traffic which will continue south of Hammersmith?

As I have said in this House three times, although I would prefer to see the flyover included, this is a scheme which I have to conduct in partnership with London County Council, which holds very strong views to the contrary. In order to get ahead with the scheme as a whole, I have thought it right to come to a compromise in order that the scheme shall proceed, but it is so designed that this flyover could be provided later.

Are the views to the contrary of London County Council based on lack of Government financial assistance? If they are, cannot my right hon. Friend consider the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke) that there is little point in building this double carriageway road to serve London Airport and other centres of great importance to the west of London if all the traffic is canalised in the bottleneck at Hammersmith?

The views of London County Council, as I understand them, are not affected by lack of Government assistance with finance. This scheme attracts a 75 per cent. grant as a whole. The view of London County Council is that it is not necessary, and that its share of the money—4¼ million—would be better spent elsewhere. My view is that this flyover will have to be constructed eventually but I am anxious that the argument over it should not hold up construction of this vitally needed road, on which work has now started.

If a flyover is not possible, will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether a flyunder is?

I think all the experts who have examined this site agree that if there is to be anything other than a surface roundabout a flyover is the right answer, on the physical layout.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if the consulting engineers appointed to prepare plans for garages under certain London squares have yet submitted their Reports; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what progress is being made with the preparation of plans for the construction of parking and garage accommodation under London squares.

Yes, Sir. The designs submitted are ingenious and much useful work has been done on the problems involved. I am placing copies of the Reports in the Library.

In view of the fact that the construction cost per car is higher than would be the case in garages built above ground, and of the damage to amenities in the squares and particularly to the fine trees in Grosvenor and Cavendish Squares, the Government do not feel able to recommend these schemes either to the local authorities, who are the bodies responsible for provision of parking facilities, or to private enterprise.

If my right hon. Friend cannot recommend these schemes, what alternative suggestions has he for relieving the streets of London of the appalling number of parked cars which are blocking side streets all over the centre of London? Can he hold out any hope of the provision of surface garages, particularly on the lines of the very easily constructed ones now in use on the Continent?

Yes, Sir, I am endeavouring to encourage this in every way. I think that when Parliament passes the Road Traffic Bill, certain of its Sections will very much help us in this—I agree with my hon. Friend—desperately needed development.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be better to, use the land under some of these squares for car parking purposes than to allow the cars to spread, as they are now doing,. into the carriageways of all the Royal Parks?

I am very glad that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Works has felt able to authorise a certain amount of parking in the Royal Parks, which has proved extremely useful to the motoring public. But before going into any detail on these particular schemes, which are most interesting, I suggest that my hon. Friend studies them and particularly the figures of the cost involved.

In the Reports which are to be placed in the Library, shall we have any indication about not only the cost but the reasons which have-induced the Minister to refrain from recommending their adoption? Experience in other parts of the world—tn. America, for example—is that underground car parks, going six floors below the earth level and having a park on top,. have been exceedingly successful. Why cannot the same thing happen over here?

Nothing I have said indicates that in general there is any fundamental criticism of underground car parks. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that they can be very useful in many places. These Reports, however, relate to, the three particular and rather difficult sites, and, when the right hon. Gentleman studies the Reports, I think he will appreciate the difficulties from the point of view of both amenity and cost which are inherent, in view of the limitations of the site, in these schemes.

Can the Minister give the House an assurance that the recent Government restrictions on capital expenditure by local authorities will not prevent the provision of alternative garage facilities?

I really do not think that that arises out of the Question on the Paper, which relates to these three particular schemes. The hon. Member knows that elsewhere I have discussed this matter with him at great length.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in the interests of the economy and better communications of the United Kingdom as a whole, he will introduce legislation to facilitate the construction of a submarine channel tunnel between the shortest and most convenient points connecting Scotland with Northern Ireland.

No, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when this project was first raised sixty years ago, the geologists and engineers who examined it gave it as their opinion that it was a perfectly feasible and practicable proposition, and that this opinion has been confirmed by more recent surveys? Is it not time that something was done to implement it?

My Answer was based not on the consideration whether this proposal would be feasible or not but on the consideration that it would be an extremely expensive operation, and I doubt if it would be right, even if the funds were available, necessarily to spend them in that way.

In view of that unsatisfactory reply, I wish to give notice that I shall raise this matter again at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will consider using the Colonial Office site, and any other temporarily abandoned sites, as car parks.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Works is at present considering whether arrangements can be made for the Colonial Office site or part of it to be available as a car park. I hope that local authorities will make full use of their opportunities to provide car parks on vacant sites wherever possible.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what steps he is taking to bring about an improvement in road conditions adjoining the railway bridge at the entrance to Saltburn, in order to ensure greater safety and a better public transport service.

I am aware of conditions at this point. The North Riding County Council, which is the responsible highway authority, has put forward no proposal to me for grant in respect of works nor is any such work included in the five-year plan other than the raising of the footpaths, which has now been completed.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the need for an improvement at this place has been the subject of urgent representations by the local authorities most concerned and by industry and by the trade unions—by both sides of industry?

As, I think, the hon. Gentleman knows, there are many schemes I should like to go ahead with, but in a matter of this sort I must give considerable weight to the priority accorded to the scheme by the responsible highway authority, which is the North Riding County Council.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what have been the results of the testing of the bridge linking Windsor and Eton by his officials.

The bridge was tested by officials of the Berkshire County Council assisted by officers of my Department on the night of 31st October-1st November, 1955, but the results are not yet available.

When the right hon. Gentleman receives those results will he bear in mind the need to preserve this picturesque and historic little bridge, and consider two proposals: first, that heavy lorry traffic should be diverted to another route in order also to avoid Eton High Street, and, second, speeding the work on the by-pass which would relieve the bridge?

Of course I will consider the hon. Gentleman's suggestions, but until I get the results of the test I cannot comment on them.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation why the second carriageway recently added to the Great Cambridge Road, between the North Circular Road and Bury Street, was constructed some 2 ft. narrower than the other carriageway, which is 24 ft. wide; and what width it is his intention to construct the second carriageway on this road between Bury Street and Carter Hatch Lane.

When the scheme for a second carriageway between the North Circular Road and Bury Street was planned, the standard for a two-lane carriageway was 22 ft. As a result of the increase in standards since then, the second carriageway between Bury Street and Carter Hatch Lane will be 24 ft. wide.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether authority has yet been given by his Department for the construction of the new Doncaster Mill Bridge on the Great North Road.

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the number of accidents which have taken place this year on the Otley—Wetherby road between Pool-in-Wharfedale and Harewood Bridge; how many fatalities have there been; and what steps have been taken to prevent further accidents.

Twenty-six accidents involving two fatalities. The highway authority has already dealt with the slippery road surface which developed last summer.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what mileage of new trunk roads he expects to be completed during the current financial year.

On the basis that what the hon. Member has in mind is completely new as opposed to improved trunk roads, the answer is 4.48 miles, in the shape of six by-passes or diversions, particulars of which I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in view of the parlous state of traffic, this is rather a disappointing figure? Will he guarantee not only that the financial part of the roads programme will not be cut but that the actual construction is not being slowed up?

So far as I know, there is no question of the slowing down of construction. With regard to the first part of the supplementary question, I do not think that at this stage in the first year of the programme for the completion of new roads the figure is at all disappointing.