asked the Secretary of State for Air how many successful and unsuccessful firings, respectively, of the United States Thor missile have been made by the Royal Air Force in the United States of America.

There have been two firings by the R.A.F. On the first occasion, the missile performed faultlessly; on the second, a technical fault developed during the early stages of flight and the missile was therefore destroyed.

Can the Secretary of State give any estimate as to how long he expects it to be before the Thor can be regarded as an operational missile rather than as a training missile, as I understand it is regarded today?

No, Sir. I am afraid I cannot give any estimate of that, but, of course, we shall as soon as possible make some statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware of the admiration felt in this country and abroad for the initiative, drive and organisation shown by members of the Royal Air Force in the recent London to Paris race; if he will list the units which have taken part in this exercise; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if he will make a statement on the participation of the Royal Air Force in the Daily Mail air race.

The Royal Air Force team, under the control of Fighter Command, included three officers from R.A.F. Station Duxford and one officer cadet from the R.A.F. College, Cranwell. They obtained first and third places in the race. Their average time on completed runs between London and Paris was less than 44 minutes. The Hunter and helicopter pilots, motor cyclists and servicing, radar and airfield teams were drawn from a number of units from Commands at home and R.A.F. Germany.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that, since the age of the amateur in these things appears to have passed completely, there are many people who have a very great deal of admiration for the way a professional Service like this was able to take part in this race, giving such pleasure to many millions and also a sense of stimulation to itself?

Is the Secretary of State aware that those of us who have served in the Royal Air Force are very proud of the fact that the Royal Air Force has pulled this off, but when in future the Royal Air Force participates in such events, can the facilities be made more widely available?

We made our facilities available to anybody who wanted to use them.

Will my right hon. Friend undertake to give the Royal Navy a few lessons on how to run these affairs?

asked the Secretary of State for Air why he arranges for Royal Air Force Alsatian guard-dogs to travel on passenger trains, which is greatly to the annoyance of the travelling public and railway staff; and whether he will now discontinue this practice.

I am afraid that we cannot provide motor transport every time dogs have to be sent to another station, nor could we very well send them as freight. The handlers accompanying the dogs observe the railway regulations and we do all we can to avoid annoyance to other passengers.

Is the Secretary of State aware that not enough is done to avoid inconvenience to the travelling public and that only last Friday I had complaints made to me by members of the railway staff at Waterloo who object very much to having Royal Air Force guard dogs in railway guards vans when they have to deal with large numbers of the travelling public going on holiday? Will the right hon. Gentleman have another look at the matter?

We have certainly received no complaints from the railway staff ourselves. I am very sorry if the hon. Member was inconvenienced in this way, but as far as I can ascertain, this is only the second complaint that we have ever received about dogs travelling by passenger train. The first complaint came from an elderly lady who thought that the muzzle on one of the dogs was too tight.

Surely these dogs are accompanied by an attendant when they travel? They are not sent alone, are they?

They have handlers.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will reconsider his decision to dispose of Errol aerodrome; and if he will now retain it in public ownership pending further efforts, in the light of the representations of the local authorities concerned and of the rapidly changing pattern of air transport, to establish air services from the aerodrome linking the Dundee, Angus and Perth area with London.

The representations of the Town Councils of Dundee and Perth, and of the Scottish Advisory Council for Civil Aviation, which I have carefully considered, do not provide any further information on the prospect of air services being operated from Errol Aerodrome. My right hon. Friend regrets, therefore, that he cannot see his way to retaining the aerodrome in State ownership and the town councils themselves have said that they are not interested in taking it over.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that will be generally considered in the Dundee area as a most disappointing reply in view of the fact that this airfield, far from being a charge on public funds, at present actually shows a small annual profit? Is he further aware that an air service to the Dundee area is urgently needed as an attraction to industry to an area of high unemployment? Will he not reconsider his decision in view of the fact that, I understand, changes are being considered in the kinds of aircraft being used for domestic services which genuinely leave it open whether it may not be practicable to have services at Errol airport in future?

We have, of course, gone very carefully into all this. We are advised by British European Airways and independent operators that they cannot in the foreseeable future see any prospect for services to this particular district. It is true that at the moment at that airfield expenses and revenues roughly break even, but the State has some £27,500 in capital locked up in this place for which, apparently, there is likely to be no use in the immediate future. We feel, as we are under pressure from Parliament to reduce losses from airfields, that we must do something to recover that money.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us how he will remove the capital invested in an airport like that? I am quite sure that the House is surprised to hear, with developing air traffic in Scotland, that there is not likely to be a use for that airport.

Yes. We shall, of course, dispose of the land and the buildings and any of the equipment that we have there, and we hope to recover some of the money which has been invested, which, as I have just said, amounts to £27,500 at present-day values. Unfortunately, there are no people who want to use or run services into Errol. That is a fact, and I am afraid that there is nothing my right hon. Friend can do to compel them to provide such services.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will now make a statement with regard to the future of Belfast Airport; and when work to improve the airport facilities will start.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has agreed in principle to the joint use of Aldergrove R.A.F. Station as the civil airport for Belfast. This is a most satisfactory outcome to our discussions, and I am most grateful to my right hon. Friend for agreeing to the principle of joint use. Aldergrove is operationally considerably superior to Nutts Corner and joint use offers the prospect of considerable savings to the taxpayer.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that Answer, may I ask whether he can give some estimate of the cost of this change? Can he say when the work is likely to start?

We would wish the work to start as soon as it possibly can. I could not give an estimate of costs, but I think my hon. and learned Friend would like to know that we do propose to provide full, proper civil facilities at Aldergrove.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what arrangements exist to ensure, in the interests of air safety, that the experience of all types of civil aircraft operators is fully utilised.

To ensure the closest co-operation between all operators, I have arranged for a Transport Flight Safety Committee. Its members will be the Air Corporations, the British Independent Air Transport Association, the Air Registration Board, the Directorate of Flight Safety of the Air Ministry, Transport Command and my Department. The Chairmanship will rotate between the airline members and my Department will provide the Secretary. Its task will be to consider problems of flight safety organisation, to agree uniform systems for the collection, analysis and exchange of information and to advise on safety publicity within the industry.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that what he has said will give considerable satisfaction? Will he ensure that this Committee, unlike some others, meets frequently and gets through a busy agenda?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The Committee has a useful job to do. I hope that it will get to work, and I agree with my hon. Friend that it should meet quite frequently at the beginning.

We agree that this is a useful job to do in pooling ideas on safety, but what further steps is the right hon. Gentleman taking to see that whatever suggestions or recommendations are made are enforced? The good companies will accept the recommendations. What steps is he taking to enforce them on the bad companies?

The hon. Member will have a chance to pursue his campaign against the bad companies later at Question Time. If he will read my Answer carefully, he will see that the Committee itself has to agree to a proper system for collecting information and getting its recommendations known and adopted.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what licences have been granted by the Air Transport Advisory Council on behalf of his Department for the operation of inclusive tours by Independent Air Travel Ltd., or its successor company, Blue Air Ltd.

If the Question relates to approvals currently in force, the answer is "None, Sir".

If that is the case, how does it come about that this company is operating regularly each week from this country to the Continent and is not laying before the Minister any of the operating schedules? What action is he taking in this matter?

I do not know whether the hon. Member is dealing with charter work, licensed work or inclusive tours, or what. As he knows as well as I do, there are certain charter operations which any operator can carry out that do not require prior approval from my Ministry. As to the general issue, that is raised in later Questions of his own.

The right hon. Gentleman cannot get away from it. This company, under another name, was granted certain licences to operate certain scheduled tours. As he said last week, the licences were taken away. The company is still carrying on with its programme. What action is the right hon. Gentleman taking?

As I have said, the hon. Member had better await the Answer to another Question of his. I am not sure that the hon. Member is wise to pursue this vendetta against independent airlines.

On a point of order. Is the Minister in order in suggesting that proper Questions, properly put to him, about matters which are of public concern can be characterised as a vendetta?

The expression "vendetta" really means a feud, does it not? It is something like that, and I think that within the realms of ordinary Parliamentary discussion I have heard very much worse things said.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what representations have been made to his Department about the operation of weekly air services by Independent Air Travel Ltd., or Blue Air Ltd., on behalf of its associated company, Sky Tours Ltd.; and what replies have been given to those representations.

The right hon. Gentleman originally raised with my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary the question of Independent Air Travel. I understand that the functions of this company have now been taken over by Blue Air Travel Ltd. Representations that operations by Blue Air were in contravention of Section 24 of the Air Corporations Act, 1949 were made to my Department on 6th June and 1st July. Replies to both representations were that the matter was already under consideration. Inquiries are still proceeding.

Is the Minister aware that this is the first time I have put a Question to him about this matter and that one Question does not mean either a vendetta or, with respect, Mr. Speaker, a feud? May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware what sort of figure he will cut, having said that he has taken away the licences from these companies, and they having consistently operated since May of this year, if they are involved in another accident? What conclusions are the public to draw?

I am very glad the hon. Member is making plain that he is pursuing this on a narrow front of particular companies, and I entirely accept that. I will try to explain as clearly as I can, although, as I think the hon. Member will accept, this is a somewhat complicated issue.

If a man has his licence endorsed for life and then, by deed poll, he changes his name, can he get another licence?

I do not think that is relevant, but I think that the hon. Member would like to know—perhaps he did not hear it in the recent debate in the House—that I have said that on the representations of independent air operators themselves I am proposing to introduce a system of licensing which will enable a licence to be taken away from a company if it is felt desirable so to do.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this company having come to public attention, when one asks Questions about it after allegations are made, which may or may not be true, that it is contravening an Act of Parliament, an hon. Member is not carrying on a vendetta but asking something in. the public interest? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to information in our possession, this company is taking about 600 people a week to Europe and has been doing so since May? Will he quickly come to a decision and find out whether in fact this company is legally in contravention of an Act of Parliament and, if so, take quick action to stop its being so?

I shall be only too pleased to do it and, if the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends have information which will help in that, I hope that they will let me have it. I would remind them that in previous debates when they have made representations on this matter they have been asked for information and they have been unable to provide it. If this time they can do so we shall receive it with the greatest interest.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what operational schedules have been filed by Independent Air Travel Ltd., or its successor company, Blue Air Ltd., or Falcon Airways Ltd., for flights undertaken since May of this year.

Air transport operators are not required to submit prior details of charter flights. None of these companies is currently approved for the operation of scheduled associate services.

The Minister is again deliberately evading my question. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have not stated in my Question anything about prior submission? Is he further aware that the recommendations of his own Department are that the operational schedules should be filed after the flight? This company, as he well knows, is operating but is not filing any schedules. What action has he taken?

The Question asked what operational schedules have been filed by Independent Air Travel Ltd. and some other companies. The answer I have given states that they are not required to submit prior details of charter flights. If the hon. Gentleman claims that they are not supplying these, that is certainly not within my information, but as he has made the request to me that I should look into it, I will do so at once.

rose—

On a point of order. If I provide any other information about this, may I have your protection, Sir, in not having that information described either as a vendetta or a feud?

That is not a point of order. I would protect the hon. Member in every proper case if he needed my protection, but he himself used pretty hard language about the Minister.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what steps he proposes to take to prevent the taking of alcohol by crews of British aircraft while on duty.

There is no evidence to suggest that the existing legislation which deals with the taking of alcohol by aircraft crews has been disregarded or that more stringent legislation is needed.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply, and I appreciate what he says. Does he not think, in view of the tremendous record of safety in British aircraft, which is apparently due to the strict enforcement of these Regulations, that it would contribute to greater road safety if more stringent regulations were applied to prevent the carrying of alcoholic liquor in cocktail sets in cars.

That is a little wide of the Question on the Order Paper.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that the purport of the Question casts a quite unfair aspersion on the sobriety of those British aircrews against whom there is no evidence whatever that they take alcohol during their tour of duty, and that we should offer our congratulations to these crews?

I was advised some time ago that it was always unwise for a Minister to speculate on the motives behind a Question which an hon. Member puts down, and I would not care to speculate on this occasion.

Will the Joint Parliamentary Secretary say what the regulation is with regard to the consumption of alcohol?

Yes. The position is that it is an offence under the Air Navigation Order, 1954, for a member of the operating crew of an aircraft, or any other person having a duty to perform in the aircraft, to fly on duty when his capacity to do so is impaired by reason of having taken any intoxicating liquor. The operators of public transport aircraft in their Operations Manuals usually provide that it is an offence against company regulations for the crew to drink on duty or within a stated period before flying.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is yet in a position to state the outcome of the discussions initiated by him in the spring of 1957 for the purpose of making obligatory the carriage by all fishing and cargo vessels of inflatable life rafts; and if he will now make a comprehensive statement on the subject.

The Merchant Shipping (Life-Saving Appliances) Rules, 1958, require the carriage of inflatable life rafts in all fishing vessels over 50 ft. in length and in all cargo ships on coasting and home trade voyages. The number and capacity vary with the size and class of ship.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for that long and comprehensive reply, may I ask him whether he is in a position to say in how many cases the recommendations he has mentioned have not been carried out and how many lives have been lost since I last put this Question to him as a result of these inflatable life rafts not being carried?

No. With regard to the ships on long voyages, to which the second part of my Answer related, I am advised that some 75 per cent. of the ships involved do comply with our recommendations. Therefore, the answer to the first part of the hon. and learned Gentleman's supplementary question is 25 per cent. at the moment do not. I have no figures whatever of the losses of life, but the fact is that it is not a question of simply saying, "You must have inflatable life rafts to save life", because there are already lifeboats provided. What we want to see is some more flexible system, which we shall be going into at the conference next year.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware that the various international conventions designed to stop oil pollution of the seas round British coasts have not achieved that object and that much loss and damage to human beings, to clothing and to bird life is still caused by that pollution; which of these international conventions are now in force; and what steps he is taking to make them more effective for the purpose intended.

I regret that there have been further instances this summer of pollution of the beaches by oil. Generally, however, I am sure the position has shown improvement over the last few years.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the fact remains that our beaches all round the country are in a shocking condition and that, beyond putting up notices warning that beaches are polluted, very little is done to prevent pollution, which is causing great damage, as the Question indicates, to clothing and to wild fowl?

I am sorry, but the hon. and learned Gentleman is guilty of exaggeration and distortion of the facts The plain situation is that we have made considerable progress in this matter in the last few years. There are a number of incidents reported from time to time, but the owners of the ships and those who are concerned with this problem are doing a very great deal indeed at great expense to themselves to see that this nuisance is eliminated. The solution lies in international agreement, and that is what we are pledged to continue to try to achieve.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will make a statement on the recent International Conference held in Copenhagen to prevent Pollution of the Sea by Oil.

I welcome the holding of this Conference, which was arranged on the initiative of the Co-ordinating Advisory Committee on Oil Pollution of the Sea of which the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) is the Chairman. The Conference was also held under his Chairmanship.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that one of the Committee's recommendations is that it is now essential that a new intergovernmental meeting should be summoned to deal with total avoidance of the pollution of the sea by oil. As this is essential, will the Government take steps to bring about this meeting?

I should like to say, first, that the work of the right hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) has been very notable. His Committee has done a first-class job in cutting down oil pollution. We are examining the question whether we ought to take the initiative in calling for an inter-governmental meeting, but it is important that the United States has now said that it will at least join the countries who have ratified the agreement.

May I ask the Minister, most unusually, if he is aware that the work done by his official at this conference was most notable and that it enabled the British Government to continue to give the lead that they have given for so long in this field?

If I might dare to say so, the end of term must be very near for the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) and I to pay one another compliments.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will state the number and nature of claims to compensation for personal injuries, loss of clothing and other loss sustained by members of Her Majesty's Coastguards during each of the last 10 years, and the manner in which each of those claims was met by Her Majesty's Government.

Since 1954 there have been no cases of personal injury which fell to be dealt with under the Superannuation Acts or the Injury Warrant, 1952. In 1957 a claim at common law was made by a coastguard who was injured n the course of duty. As negligence by the Department was not proved, liability was not admitted and no compensation was paid. I regret that information about claims to compensation for personal injuries prior to 1954 could not be obtained without an undue expenditure of time and labour. As information about claims for loss of clothing and other loss is rather lengthy I am writing to the hon. and learned Member.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that all protectors of life round our coasts are not included in this scheme and that all those protectors are engaged in an equally dangerous and courageous occupation, including those employed by the Royal National Lifeboat Institution? Will he do something to provide protection for the men of that Institution?

As I explained last week when the hon. and learned Gentleman put a similar Question to me, the lifeboat service is a voluntary service and we are not responsible for making payments to it out of public funds. If the hon. and learned Member has any proposal he would like to put to us, we will certainly consider it.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Lifeboat Institution has a very full system of compensation for lifeboatmen who are injured on duty and that that compensation is carefully considered by the Institution, recommendations are made, and pensions are paid to the widows and dependants of lifeboatmen who suffer while in the course of their duty?

Yes, I was aware of that.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will now announce the names of the chairman and members of the committee he is setting up to study and report on rural transport; and when he expects the committee to start its deliberations.

I am glad to say that Professor D. T. Jack, Professor of Economics at the University of Durham has agreed to be chairman of the Committee on rural bus services. I will publish the names of the other members as soon as I have heard from all of them that they are prepared to accept my invitation. I hope the Committee will start work as soon as possible after it is appointed.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that information and welcoming the appointment of Professor Jack as chairman of the Committee, may I ask whether he is fully aware of the urgency of the problem? Does he appreciate that many people in rural areas think that a committee should have studied this subject a long time ago? Will my right hon. Friend, therefore, give every facility and encouragement to the Committee to start its work and make a report at an early date?

I am glad that my hon. Friend has expressed his thanks. I would add mine to Professor Jack for taking on this very important job. I have said that the Committee will start work as soon as we have settled the rest of the membership, which I expect will happen quickly. I agree that the Committee has an important job to do. It will receive all help and encouragement from my Department.

Will there be a representative from Wales on the Committee?

Yes, Sir, certainly.

How many people from Scotland are on the Committee?

I believe that Scotland has two representatives.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will give a general direction to the British Transport Commission to prohibit the taking of alcohol by the drivers and firemen of locomotives of British Railways, and drivers of British Road Services, while on duty.

The British Railways Rule Book already provides that employees must not consume intoxicating liquor while on duty. Drivers of British Road Services vehicles are subject in the same way as other drivers to the law concerning driving vehicles while under the influence of drink. I do not think a general direction appropriate in a matter of this kind.

If it is good enough to say that pilots shall not have cocktail cabinet sets in their cockpits, and that locomotive drivers shall not have a bottle of beer in their cabs, why is it that motorists in this country can drive around with cocktail sets in their cars and have a drink while driving?

This Question does not refer to cocktail sets in motor cars, but I think the hon. Gentleman must keep a sense of proportion in this matter. I think it would be unreasonable to go further than the law does at present.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many additional examiners for driving tests have been appointed to the Middlesbrough Centre; and whether he will now establish a centre at Stockton-on-Tees to serve North Tees-side and relieve the congestion and delay at Middlesbrough.

Two new examiners have accepted appointments at Middlesbrough and will start their training shortly. I think the needs of the district can best be served by stationing more examiners at the existing centre, and a further increase in examiners at Middlesbrough is planned.

Can the Minister say why there is this difficulty in getting an adequate number of examiners at this centre? Is it due to the rates of pay being too low, or are the conditions of employment too stringent?

There is no difficulty now that we have completed the first stage of the competition. As I say, two new examiners have been appointed and will be taking up their posts very shortly.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what action he proposes to take on the recommendations of the Select Committee on Estimates on roads; and what consequential changes in the roads programme will be made.

The Report will be carefully studied and a detailed reply will be submitted to the Committee as soon as possible.

If the Report is now being studied and a detailed reply is to be submitted to the Committee, why did the Minister rush in and reject the Report before it had been given consideration? Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the remarks he made in his two speeches at Hendon and at Stamford rejected the Committee's findings and were insulting to the members of that Committee?

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman, because I would like to say this. There are two quite separate issues here. As to the relations between my Ministry and the Select Committee, we shall proceed strictly in accordance with the normal, conventional procedure, and the Committee has been so advised. Of course, the publication of the Report gave rise to widespread comment on the road programme as a whole. Whether that comment was in line with what the Committee intended I do not know, but it was certainly my job as Minister, in the light of the widespread comment arising from publication of the Report, to make the position of my Ministry quite clear, and I make no apology for that.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that if he had not made some statement on that occasion, bearing in mind the nature of the occasion and who was present, and as the subject concerned roads, the impression would have been highly misleading and he would have been taken as having no effective answer to the allegations, which indeed he has?

As my hon. Friend says, there are two issues here. As to the Select Committee, I have taken all the steps I can to ensure that the Select Committee is fully aware that I yield to no one in my respect for the House of Commons and its institutions but, as my hon. Friend has also said, the whole progress of the road programme could have been impeded if there had been a feeling that the widespread criticism of it in the Press as being improperly planned and executed might lead to broad changes in the scope of the programme. Tne speech I made was in front of contractors and local authorities actually engaged on the road programme. As I said before, I make no apology. It was my duty as Minister to make the position of my Ministry quite plain.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that criticisms of Ministers by the Estimates Committee or the Public Accounts Committee have occurred before and Ministers have to put up with it? It is part of what they are paid for. Could not the Minister have let the thing take its ordinary course and be a bit patient? Further, is he aware that before this Ministers have had to wait before replying to the Committee? May I put it to the right hon. Gentleman that, since we have these Committees in the House of Commons, it is important that they should be treated with respect?

There is not so much difference between the right hon. Gentleman and myself as he thinks. Last week, I took the earliest opportunity I had to say in the House of Commons that I was very sorry indeed if I had been in any way discourteous to the Committee. I have also taken further steps to make sure that the Committee is quite aware of my position.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that there is a great difficulty here and that some of us who have been Ministers and have suffered under this procedure know it? It is that a report can come out with statements that might affect work going on at that time and those who are carrying it on, such as local authorities, wish to know about it. There is bound to be a considerable gap before the Department's reply can be published, so does not my right hon. Friend think it would be a better plan in the future if a new system could be evolved under which the Report would not be published before the Department received it, giving sufficient time for a reply from the Department to come out nearer the time when the Report comes out?

On a point of order, Sir. In circumstances of this kind, where a Committee set up by the House reports to the House and the Minister feels that the matter is so urgent that he cannot wait for the normal procedure of a departmental reply, would there not be a case in which the Minister could come to you, the Speaker of the House, and ask your permission and that of the House to make a statement? Would not that be a proper way to handle a matter of this kind?

I do not wish to express an opinion one way or another on this controversy, but certainly if a Minister feels he wants to make a statement on a matter which concerns the public interest and the interest of his Department, in a proper case I would allow it.

Are we to take it. Sir, that you have received no such request?

I have received no such request from anyone.

On that point of order, Sir. Will you make it plain, if you agree, that once a Select Committee has reported the matter is public property and is a proper matter for public discussion? After all, it does not follow that the Department will send a reply; it may not wish to do so. Surely if the Report is public property, anybody—a Minister or a member of the general public—is entitled to comment on it?

There is a good deal of weight in that.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation for what reasons he departed from the normal procedure of replying to the First Report of the Select Committee on Estimates relating to trunk roads by making a statement to the House or by sending a memorandum containing his observations to the committee.

As in the case of the recent Report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries, widespread public comment was aroused by the publication of the Report. This comment whether in line with the Committee's report or not raised major policy issues.

Is it not clear from that reply and from the earliest exchanges which have taken place that the Minister still does not regret the fact that he made this speech outside the House and that these so-called apologies which he has made are really those of a petulant child whose vanity has been offended? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Is it not a fact that he stated that this Report was misleading and inaccurate and that the Committee had given only cursory attention to consideration of the road programme? In those circumstances, is it not a matter for the House and not for speeches outside?

I do not take that very seriously, because the hon. Gentleman—I certainly do not accept the very misleading letter of his in The Times this morning—has been responsible for bringing into my Ministry the nicest and biggest lot of letters we have ever had while I have been Minister, on the whole saying, "Get on with the road programme, and good luck to you". So I have no complaint at all.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the hon. Member for Enfield, East (Mr. Ernest Davies) will soon, after the General Election, have to make all his speeches outside the House?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many right hon. and hon. Members of the House of Commons have died, and how many have been seriously injured, as the result of road accidents since 1945.

According to my information, I regret to say that nine right hon. and hon. Members of the House of Commons have been killed in road accidents since 1945. I have no detailed information about the number of right hon. and hon. Members seriously injured in the same period.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that four of the deaths have occurred in the present Session and that there have been a great number of really serious injuries, both to Ministers and to other hon. Members on both sides of the House? Do not these facts show that road accidents are becoming a horrifying social evil, constantly increasing in gravity, and ought we not now to consider some new and imaginative measures to reduce the number of accidents?

I do not disagree with the right hon. Gentleman that road accidents are a horrifying feature in our national life. We are continually studying new methods to try to reduce the numbers and control them, but it would be a complete mistake to think that there is any dramatic method which could suddenly cure the problem. It is a matter of gradually changing people's mental attitudes to the way they behave in motor cars, and it will be a long process.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one hon. Member who was killed might not have been killed if the testing scheme which the Government have so much delayed putting into operation had been in existence?

That is not quite the same point. We are most anxious to get on with the vehicle testing scheme as soon as we can. If what the right hon. Gentleman says is correct, of course I regret it.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what report he has to make on the safety record of the Preston by-pass as compared with the old parallel road A.6.

Up to the end of June roughly a millon vehicles used the Preston Motorway and there were six accidents involving personal injury.

Do not the remarkable figures showing that there were only five accidents on the motorway in the last six months while there were fifty on the ordinary road give all of us encouragement to proceed with the programme for motorways and bring about greater safety?

Yes, Sir; the rate of accidents on the motorway was a good deal better than elsewhere.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is yet in a position to announce his decision with regard to the imposition of a speed limit on the Sutton by-pass.

We have already asked the Surrey County Council, as highway authority, to consider making certain improvements on this road. What is decided may affect the arguments for and against a speed limit; I will keep my hon. Friend in touch with developments.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that more than sixty people were either killed or injured on this stretch of road in the first six months of this year, and will he bear in mind the importance of reaching an early decision?

Yes, Sir; I will. I know that the accident record there is a bad one.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what is the reason for the continued delay in making the Order under Section 1 (2) of the Trunk Roads Act, 1946, which is required before progress can be made with the Queensferry Bridge.

The Order relating to the Queensferry By-pass and new bridge will be made within the next few weeks, but we are reconsidering the proposals for a diversion at Aston Hill as the result of objections to the original draft Order.

Can the Minister explain why we cannot have the Order for the bridge now? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the county council was informed in April that a separate order would be made for the bridge, that the bridge is most urgently necessary, that we have extreme traffic congestion there right through the summer months and that we have been waiting years for the bridge?

I know that the hon. Lady is anxious that the work should start, but there were a number of objections, and we had to consider this matter in relation to the Aston Hill section and to decide whether or not there should be a public inquiry.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is almost impossible effectively to arrange for the development of industries in North Wales unless something is done very quickly about the Queensferry Bridge, which is a real bottleneck—I only wish the hon. Gentleman could see it—not only on Bank Holidays but even on normal days?

I know that it is a very bad one, but I am afraid that, like many other important proposals, it has to take its turn. We are getting on with the preparatory work as fast as we can, and we will bring it into the programme at the earliest possible date.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what progress he has to report towards deciding the route of the London-Yorkshire motor road.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what road development he has planned for facilitating the movement of traffic through the West Riding of Yorkshire southwards and from South Yorkshire to the Great North Road, pending the completion of the London-Yorkshire motorway; and how soon such development will be completed.

As regards the line of the motorway through Leicestershire I cannot yet add to the reply that my hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Leicester, North-West (Mr. Janner) on 13th May when he explained that further consideration was being given to possible routes.

Is the Minister aware that this long delay in starting the work of constructing this road is very disappointing to the people in that vitally important industrial area, the West Riding of Yorkshire? To add insult to injury, is he aware that we have learned that there is to be a postponement of the electrification of the main railway line? Why is Yorkshire neglected in this way?

I only deal with the road. The difficulty of getting a road through Leicestershire is just as frustrating to me as it is to the hon. Gentleman.

Is the Minister aware of the serious traffic congestion in the West Riding of Yorkshire? Can he say how soon he will proceed with the motorway from Leeds to Sheffield which may be linked up with the London-Yorkshire motorway? Can he give an assurance that the Leeds-Sheffield motorway will not be delayed merely because of difficulties over the London-Yorkshire motorway?

The work of finding the line in Yorkshire and all the necessary preliminary work is going on. What I said today is that in the hope of helping Yorkshire over this very difficult interim period we are trying to link across into the new North Road which will give very rapid transit to the south.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware that many motorists are not carrying out the rules of lane discipline laid down in the new Highway Code, but drive continuously in the right-hand lane of three-lane single-carriageways; and if he will make it mandatory for motorists to read the Code.

Yes, Sir. I am aware that many drivers do not properly observe the rules of lane discipline. I am hoping for an improvement after the new Highway Code has become available, but I doubt if making the reading of the Code mandatory would automatically ensure observance of its rules.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that, although it would not automatically ensure observance, it would encourage people to observe the rule and make them aware of what is in the Highway Code? I am sure that some motorists are not aware of what is in it at the moment.

I agree about the difficulty of getting people to read the Code, but I do not think that the mandatory approach is the right one.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that, unfortunately, the Highway Code does not tell drivers in ordinary three-line carriageways not to go into the right-hand lane; it confines that injunction to special motor roads? Will my hon. Friend do something to dispel that false assumption?

It tells drivers to keep to the left.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation (1) when referring to the Transport Users' Consultative Committee cases where the closing of stations would deprive the travelling public of any form of public transport, whether he will in every instance request them to consider the feasibility of providing alternative omnibus transport;

The British Transport Commission itself always refers proposals to withdraw services or close stations to the Transport Users' Consultative Committee and the committees invariably take into account the existence of alternative services or the need for them.

I was not able to hear the earlier part of my right hon. Friend's Answer. Can he say whether it contained any reference to the sphere of interest which the consultative committee has in this matter? There appears to be some doubt. If there is doubt, will he take steps to ensure that when these cases are referred to the consultative committee it is regarded as perfectly proper for the committee to discuss with the British Transport Commission the provision of buses instead of rail services?

I beg my hon. Friend's pardon for being inaudible, but the first part of my Answer said that it is clearly part of the duty of a consultative committee to look into the question of what alternative services are available, to discuss that both with the British Transport Commission and with bus companies and any other interests involved, and to do its very best to see that these services are not withdrawn until it is satisfied that there is a reasonable alternative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there will be a large measure of support for the proposition put forward by the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Sir S. Summers)? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am at present in correspondence with him on precisely the same matter in so far as there is a bad time-lag between the original publication of an intention to close a station and any form of publicity as to what the Traffic Commissioners, for example, are doing in the matter of providing alternative motor transport, and that this causes extreme anxiety for people who have to commute to their work, and may indeed affect their livelihood and their ability to get to work on time?

The matter is, I imagine, relevant to our later discussions. I should like to say that I am just as worried about it as many other hon. Members. The problem of pruning the railway service, which is inevitable, and yet providing some alternative, particularly in rural areas, is a very worrying one indeed, but I hope that Professor Jack and his Rural Transport Committee may help us with advice in this matter.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will refer for consideration to the appropriate Transport Users Consultative Committee, under Section 6 (7) of the Transport Act, 1947, the proposal for closing the Newbury-Lambourn branch railway for passenger traffic, with special reference to the possibility of providing an alternative service by omnibus from Newbury station.

This proposal has already been submitted to the Transport Users Consultative Committee for the South Eastern Area by the Western Region of British Railways. The Committee will, I am sure, take into account any suggestions about alternative services without a reference from us.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that the procedure of the Transport Users Consultative Committee under the Transport Act, 1947, is working satisfactorily when it is a matter of safeguarding local interests? Some of us have doubts about it. Has my hon. Friend noticed the letter in The Times this morning stating that out of 118 cases, 116 were rubber-stamped by the Transport Users Consultative Committee, and does it not seem doubtful whether it is an effective body to safeguard local interests?

No, Sir; I would not accept for a minute that the Transport Users Consultative Committee is simply rubber-stamping proposals by the Commission. It has a most difficult job to do, and I think that it does it very conscientiously and fairly in the public interest.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what will be the effect of the rationalisation proposals contained in the re-appraisal of the plan for railway modernisation and re-equipment, Command Paper No. 813, on the passenger rail services between Leicester and London on the former Great Central line and otherwise.

The Re-appraisal Report describes the Commission's proposals for the Great Central line from Marylebone to Nottingham and for diesel traction on the main lines from St. Pancras. The Commission informs me that modernisation will greatly improve main line services between London and Leicester.

Is the Minister aware that it is proposed, or suggested, that there should be a reduction in the service between London and Leicester in the new traffic proposals? Is he aware that, although his colleague has refused to give adequate roads for transport, the Minister is now adding insult to injury by stopping some train services to Leicester?

This proposal is nothing to do with us. It is a proposal by the British Transport Commission. It has not yet been before the Transport Users' Consultative Committee, and I am not, therefore, able to discuss the merits of it. The hon. Gentleman must wait until the proposal goes through the normal procedure.