asked the Minister of Transport what action he proposes to take to ensure that applications for the stopping up of rights of way under Section 153 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1962, are made prior to development being carried out on the land over which such rights of way run.

Planning permission of itself confers no right to obstruct a highway. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government is about to reaffirm this in a circular to local authorities and to suggest to them that they should warn applicants of this point when granting permission. I shall continue to issue similar warnings of the need to refrain from creating any premature obstruction as soon as any inquiry about stopping up or diversion reaches my Department.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will not he agree that this Question discloses that there has been something of an administrative gap, which I am gratified to feel has now been closed?

I have great sympathy with the hon. Gentleman. I do not think that footpaths should be closed unilaterally without due regard to the law.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will arrange to give as much publicity to his decisions under Section 153 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1962, where an order for the stopping up of a right of way is not made, as he now does in cases where it is.

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Transport what provision he is making to supplement the 1963–64 grants to local authorities to make good amounts underspent from the 1962–63 grants owing to restriction of work during the unfavourable weather in the first quarter of 1963, and to take account of the exceptional amount of road repairing required in the current year.

The first need is to determine what additional expenditure local authorities incurred last winter because of the exceptional weather. When their replies have been received my right hon. Friend will, as he has already said, consider what additional grants can be made this financial year.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will now impose the 40 m.p.h. speed limit on the Ashbourne Road from Kingsway to the Derby County Borough boundary, which was promised by his predecessor in 1958; and whether he is aware that since this promise was made there have been 37 accidents on this 1½-mile section of trunk road.

I made the necessary order on 9th May. It comes into operation on 13th June.

While expressing gratitude that the Minister has at long last made this order, may I ask whether, in view of the 37 accidents which have happened on this small stretch of road since the speed limit was first promised, he will now instruct his regional officer that the prevention of death and injury is of higher priority than allowing motorcar drivers to drive at a high speed in a place which is known to be dangerous?

I have, I think, given the right hon. Gentleman the answer he wanted. A speed limit is to be brought into force. I assure him that all the officers of my Department are conscious of the problem that is caused by accidents on the road.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will make it illegal for vehicles travelling on clearways to make use of lay-bys situated on the opposite side of the road to that on which the vehicle is travelling.

No, Sir. We hope that, as more lay-bys are provided, motorists will normally use those on the nearside, but I do not think we would be justified in making this compulsory at present.

Would not my hon. and gallant Friend agree that, in districts where it is feasible to have lay-bys on both sides of a clearway, it is courting disaster to erect signs, as is the case on many clearways, with arrows inviting motorists to cross over fast oncoming traffic to make use of a lay-by on the other side of the clearway?

Yes, I appreciate that. That is why we are trying to provide more lay-bys on the roads. The prohibition of crossing the road might result in vehicles doing a U-turn to get in and to get out again, which would be no safer and no less disturbing to other traffic than the present system.

asked the Minister of Transport how many road accidents occurred in the Yardley constituency of Birmingham during the last 12 months; and how these compare with those in the City of Birmingham as a whole.

The information is not readily available and could not be provided except after extensive research by the Birmingham Police. If the hon. Member has a particular point in mind, perhaps he will let me know.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a large number of fatal accidents in the division have been attributed to the bad lighting and the dangerous conditions on the Coventry road?

I have not received any information about that. If my hon. Friend will let me have more details I will gladly look into them.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will issue a comparative and comprehensive statement of figures showing the effect of speed on road accidents in general.

The evidence available does not lead to a simple and clear relationship between speed and accidents which could be illustrated by a statement of figures. The available data were, however, summarised and discussed in a paper by the Deputy Director of the Road Research Laboratory at an International Conference in 1960. I am sending the hon. Member a copy.

Will the Minister not agree that the time is long overdue when he should make a really scientific attempt to discover the ingredients and causes of the slaughter on the roads? What is he doing to find out whether speed plays an important part and is an important ingredient in that slaughter?

That is precisely what the paper to which I referred attempts to do. It is difficult to summarise it, but I would say this, that the risk of accidents occurring depends, of course, on many factors; the evidence does, however, suggest that in any given set of circumstances an increase of speed makes an accident more likely and also more severe.

Does the Ministry of Transport still have a Road Safety Committee, and, if so, when did it last make a full report on the problem of preventing road accidents?

The Committee does still exist and meets continuously.

When did it last make a full report? Is it not time, in view of the vast increase in the number of motor cars which the Minister has warned us we are to expect, that it should give us a comprehensive picture of the problem and of the remedies it proposes?

I thought I had satisfied the right hon. Gentleman that the Committee keeps my right hon. Friend continuously advised on these events rather than producing major reports from time to time. I would also add, as it is only fair to point out, that accidents have recently, I am glad to say, gone down.

asked the Minister of Transport why motorists are denied the use of residual time on parking meters.

The regulations governing this matter in London are based on the principle that each driver who parks his vehicle should pay a parking fee appropriate to the time he wants. The meters are, however, cumulative. Users buying less than the maximum period get the benefit of any residual time within the limit of the maximum, which is usually two hours.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that this particular aspect of the regulations does cause a good deal of trouble and can be taken advantage of by the more tiresome type of parking meter attendant, and would he not consider that to alter the regulations in this respect would help to smooth matters a good deal?

Yes. There are a good many arguments for and against. I can assure my hon. Friend that we are taking this seriously and reconsidering it.

Has any off-street parking been provided at Westminster with the cash which has come from the meters?

Yes, in the City of Westminster a good deal has been provided, but it is more expensive off the street than on the street, and, oddly enough, is not being used to the full.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has given further consideration to the possibility of using coloured signs to indicate left turn only and right turn only, respectively; and what decision he has reached.

This is a matter which has been considered by the Worboys Committee on Traffic Signs, and I think we should await the publication of their report.

Can my hon. and gallant Friend say how long it will be, because I think this is a very intelligent suggestion? [Laughter.] It is not mine, but I think it well worth a try.

The report has now been presented to my right hon. Friend. I cannot say exactly when it will be published, because this will depend on how long it will take to be printed.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will construct that part of the Denham-Stoken-church motorway which will constitute a by-pass of Beaconsfield so that it is open for traffic at approximately the same time as the Wycombe by-pass section.

That will not be possible. The High Wycombe by-pass is planned to start next Spring. Its extension to Denham, by-passing Beaconsfield, was always conceived as being of lower priority than a by-pass of High Wycombe. It is in course of preparation, but it is bound to be some time before work could start.

Does not my hon. and gallant Friend realise that once the Wycombe by-pass is completed the amount of traffic on the A.40 will be increased by all those drivers who have hitherto gone to great trouble to avoid the experience of driving through Wycombe? Is he further aware that the western approach to Beaconsfield on the A.40 carries a very heavy burden of traffic and has a terrible accident record, with deaths and injuries totalling about twenty people per mile per year? Furthermore, does not he realise that, if there is an interval between completion of the Wycombe by-pass and the completion of the Beaconsfield by-pass, the effect on Beaconsfield on the A.40 approach to it will be quite lamentable?

Of course, we appreciate the points made by my hon. Friend, and there have been representations from the local authorities on this subject. But I am sure he will realise that it is a feature of many road improvements that they give rise to traffic problems at each end. It is impossible to complete every by-pass at the same time. We must deal first with those which are most urgent.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity of raising this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Transport what consideration he has given to the proposal that a roads board should be created to be responsible for the planning and construction of the road network outside the main urban areas.

I am always ready to consider ways of improving the organisation that administers the road programme. But I am not aware of any evidence that such a change would be for the better.

Has the Minister read his own Hall Report in which serious criticisms are made of investment planning in transport? Would he not agree, in the light of that, that he should look again at the whole administration of the transport system with a view, in particular, to using a roads board to make sure that investment decisions are made the right way and that investment goes to the places where it is most needed?

That is another question. If we had a roads board, both the statutory processes for starting a new road and the investment control would still be the same as they now are.

But as we go into the 'seventies, when a great deal more capital will be required for building new roads to deal with the tremendous increase in traffic, surely there should be some unified control? The suggestion of a roads board is not something to be pushed away, but something whose practicability should be seriously considered.

I have not pushed it away. I have said that I am always ready to consider ways of improving the organisation which administers the road programme. If I were convinced that such a board would do so, I would consider it most seriously.

If the right hon. Gentleman is anxious to improve the road programme, is he not aware that there is one method? In view of the confusion which he has caused, has it never occurred to him that he might resign? That would help enormously.

That consideration had not occurred to me.

asked the Minister of Transport when Orders under Section 7 of the Highways Act, 1959, will be made regarding the North Orbital Road; and when it is proposed to construct it.

Between the Dartford/Purfleet Tunnel and A.13 the road is already being constructed and will shortly be completed. For the stretch between A.13 and A.11, my right hon. Friend hopes to publish a draft Section 7 Order in about a year's time. I am not yet able to say when the work will begin. For the remainder of the North Orbital Road, except between Hatfield and Watford, planning is at an early stage and I cannot say when draft Section 7 Orders are likely to be published. Between Hatfield and Watford, where the line of the North Orbital road follows existing roads, the route is being improved as opportunity offers.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that if the completion of this road could be prosecuted more vigorously and more rapidly, a good deal of expenditure on minor road improvements in the neighbourhood of Kelvedon Hatch and other parts of my constituency might be rendered unnecessary? Will he please give this work high priority in the national interest as well as that of my constituents?

We will certainly get on with it as fast as we can.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware that Form D.L.1, the form for application for a licence to drive a motor vehicle, gives to the applicant the impression that to be able to read at a distance of 25 yards in good daylight, with glasses if worn, a motor car number plate containing six letters and figures is an adequate visual standard for driving, and that this standard does not exclude sufferers from double vision and other visual disorders dangerous for drivers; and what action he proposes to take to clarify the requirements stated on the form.

Question 15 on form D.L.1 requires an applicant to declare any disability, other than those specifically mentioned in questions Nos. 12 to 14, which might be a source of danger when driving. It would be diffi- cult, in a form of this kind, to prescribe standards for double vision and other eyesight defects. Nevertheless, we will bear the hon. Member's point in mind.

Is not the hon. and gallant Gentleman taking this rather lightheartedly? Is not he aware that there are large numbers of people driving cars who have double vision, night blindness and many other kinds of impaired vision, and that large numbers of people drive without wearing their glasses although they are half blind without them? Would it not be desirable to have an inquiry into the whole matter?

We have at present little or no direct evidence that defective vision is a major cause of road accidents. Nevertheless, it is proposed to examine whether the eyesight requirements for drivers need to be tightened up, and discussions are taking place with the medical profession on the standards needed.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will make an official visit to the Isle of Wight on a Saturday in July or August in order to study its transport problems in relation to holiday traffic.

I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion, but I cannot say at the moment whether I shall be able to do so this summer. I can assure him that I shall study carefully any problems affecting the island's holiday traffic that come before me.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Ryde-Ventnor line, in particular, carries 2½ million people over the year, and that one can get a much better idea of the problems which will have to be faced if one actually goes to see them? When my right hon. Friend says that he cannot go this year, may I take that as an indication that the line will not be closed for several years in view of the enormity of the problem?

No, I cannot accept that as an explanation of what I said. I am, however, conscious of the problem. The sequence of events will be this. The railways will make formal proposals if they wish to close a particular line, and if objections are made the area transport users' consultative committee will hear them and make a report to me. Users and local authorities which represent users can make objections. I assure my hon. Friend that these points will be fully examined at the time of the proposals.

I am sure the Minister will agree that this Question raises the much wider issue of holiday traffic generally and not only in the Isle of Wight. Will he give an assurance that it will be borne in mind that in certain areas there is a tremendous demand for railway transport over six months of the year, whereas it is not so badly needed over the other six months?

I recognise that all the holiday resorts are a special problem and will have to be looked at individually in the light of the circumstances. I promise the House that I will consider the matter most carefully when the individual proposals come before me.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will invite the Scottish Transport Council to carry out a study on the lines of the recent Highland Transport Inquiry into the transport needs of Galloway and South-West Scotland.

Neither my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland nor I consider that this is necessary at this stage.

As my right hon. Friend made an alarming statement in a recent debate that he intended to close down all the lines in this part of the world in any event, will he take this opportunity of giving an assurance that he will take into account not only hardship and unemployment, but also future economic developments in that area and in Northern Ireland, as well as strategic and other needs? Secondly, will he say that he will not allow any rail closures to be made without the prior full agreement of the Northern Irish Government on matters which affect Northern Ireland?

I cannot go as far as that, but certainly the considerations mentioned in the earlier part of my hon. Friend's helpful supplementary question will be taken into account. Before any decision of any sort is reached affecting, say, the Stranraer-Larne service, I shall not only take those considerations into account but will consult my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Home Secretary. There are adequate safeguards which must be applied at the right time.

In considering the question of the Stranraer line, will the Minister bear in mind that the views of his hon. Friend the Member for Galloway (Mr. Brewis) represent those of the overwhelming majority of people in the area? Is he aware that there will be no passenger railway stations in Galloway or in South Ayrshire and that we shall feel marooned and isolated as a result of these proposals?

The hon. Member is often marooned and isolated, but I am glad that on this issue he is in coalition with my hon. Friend. I will take into account what has been said.

asked the Minister of Transport when he intends to introduce regulations to amend the present driving licence provisions for pedestrian-operated vehicles such as milk floats.

After consulting interested organisations, I have decided to modify my proposals. I now propose that all pedestrian controlled mechanically propelled vehicles of not more than 8 cwt. unladen weight shall cease to be treated as motor vehicles under the Road Traffic Acts. I have now made the regulations which have been laid before Parliament for approval. I must stress, however, that the regulations are experimental and that these vehicles will be brought back under control if they should prove dangerous.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for this very welcome though long delayed change in the regulations, may I ask for his assurance that the regulations he is proposing will cover the case of my constituent, Mr. David Crane, and his hand-operated milk float, on the basis of which case I first raised this matter?

I am grateful for the hon. Lady's thanks. I would say that this does cover the case of David Crane, and I wish him well. I would, however, stress the importance of safety and point out that if, when the change has been tried out, it proves to be the cause of more accidents, it will have to be reviewed. That is the only rider I make.

asked the Minister of Transport what correspondence he has received about the concern which exists in the north-western area about inadequate passenger services; what proposals he has received from municipal or other road services on this matter; what conclusions have been drawn from the Merseyside inquiry; and what action he will take on the North-Western Transport Users' Consultative Committee resolution, a copy of which has been sent to him.

My right hon. Friend has received no great volume of correspondence on this subject, and none from bus operators. He expects to receive a report on the Merseyside survey from the local authorities concerned later this year. He is considering how further studies as suggested by the North-Western Transport Users' Consultative Committee might best assist the study of long-term transport and planning questions in the Manchester conurbation. In any case, before taking decisions on railway passenger closure proposals in that area, the views expressed by the Committee will be taken fully into account.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary ask his right hon. Friend if he agrees to these points, that this is probably the greatest industrial area in the world and that the density of population there is greater than anywhere else? Is it not scandalous that the people are having to put up with this lack of co-ordination of transport? Has he seen the latest observations made by the chairman of the Transport Users' Consultative Committee, that it will take at least two years to consider the objections already made to the Beeching proposals?

While not accepting all the implications of the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I will put the questions he has asked me to my right hon. Friend, and I can at least assure him that my right hon. Friend is fully aware of the importance of Merseyside.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will take steps to make it compulsory for tractors when being driven on the road to be fitted with flashing indicators.

My right hon. Friend expects to lay new regulations revising the technical requirements for direction indicators in the near future. We wish to have some experience of how the new requirements work out in practice before making it compulsory for any vehicle to be fitted with such indicators, but the hon. Member's view will be taken into consideration at that stage.

While thanking the hon. and gallant Gentleman for that reply, may I ask him whether he is aware that in rural areas this is a particular problem? At the present time a tractor driver giving hand signals very often cannot be seen at all, especially when driving a tractor laden with straw or hay. Does he not agree that as youngsters of sixteen have been let loose to drive tractors on the roads for quite long distances now, it is important that a regulation of this sort should be introduced?

We quite agree with the points which the hon. Gentleman has made. None the less, we think it is better to make quite sure that we have the right kind of indicators before we start to make their fitting compulsory.

Will my hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind the other point of view, that if a tractor is towing a trailer full of hay and straw the indicators will not be seen at all, and that probably the tractor driver's arms are a more reliable form of indicator than the type which it is suggested should be fitted to a tractor which is being knocked about across the country?

I think that when the new regulations come out my hon. Friend will find that this point has been taken care of.

asked the Minister of Transport approximately how many buses are running in central London on weekdays at midday; and how this figure compares with 1950 and 1938.

I am informed that at present between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., 1,434 buses per hour run in the Central London area. Comparative figures for buses and trams for 1950 and 1938 were 2,176 and 2,458.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that this provides the sort of service Londoners need? Is he not aware that there are increasing delays at stopping places, that people often have to wait a very long time for a bus, and that a great many people who have not motorcars, private or official, depend on the buses? Will he do what he can about this?

The question of the number of buses in the central area of London is a matter of day-to-day management for the London Transport Board and not for me. However, I am bound to say that some of the short-term measures we have taken in London to speed up the traffic have assisted the London Transport Board, because in 1960–61 the London Transport lost mileage figure—that is, the difference between the scheduled bus miles and those run—was 18 per cont. down, which means that more than 500,000 miles were saved. So the measures that we have taken have assisted the buses considerably.

In fairness to those operating buses in the central area of London, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that, because of the congestion, it is virtually impossible to run scheduled services? Bus services are slower today than they were in 1914. What sort of conditions will there be in a few years' time?

The measures we have taken resulted in a considerable improvement in 1960–61.

Is it not the case that if buses and general public transport were much better this would encourage far more motorists to leave their cars at home?

That may be, but a private motorist is very greatly attached to his own car.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he proposes to take to curb the increase in drunken driving; and if he will make a statement.

The Road Traffic Act, 1962, which received the Royal Assent last August, made important changes in the law relating to drink and driving. The main provisions were brought into operation on 20th December last year, but it is too early yet to judge how they will work out in practice. Until we can do so, it would be premature to consider further legislation. I can assure the hon. Member, however, that the Government will keep this matter under continuous review.

Is the Minister aware that, in spite of the recent passing of the Act, within the last eight weeks chief constables have expressed very grave concern at the mounting toll of drunken driving convictions? Is he aware that one outstanding chief constable has called for drastic action to curb this menace on the road? Will he assure us that the penalties laid down in the Act will at least be enforced?

It is not only a matter of enforcing the penalties laid down in the Act. Parts of the Act have not yet been brought into operation. For example, Section 5(4) provides that for a second or subsequent conviction within ten years of a previous conviction for driving under the influence of drink or drugs the penalty shall be obligatory disqualification for not less than three years. This provision will be brought in on 29th May and it would be premature at this stage to prejudge it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to suspend the licence of every man who is convicted of driving a car while under the influence of drink? Is he not aware that a fine is easily paid, but that a man will have to take heed if he knows that his licence will be suspended if he is had up for drunken driving?

It is not a question of the Minister of Transport making these regulations. They were made by the House of Commons and Parliament itself. All I can do is to act within the framework of the authority which the House has given me.

Is it fair that the Minister should shelter behind the 1962 Act when he was responsible for it and resisted proposals from this side of the House which asked for much sterner measures against drunken drivers?

That is less than fair of the right hon. Gentleman. The 1962 Act was virtually a compromise Measure with all hon. Members acting individually. I am bound by the will of the House and I cannot alter it myself.

On a point of order. In relation to the Question before the last, may I ask you, Mr. Speaker, what has happened to the system whereby Ministers have the courtesy to inform hon. Members that they are to answer later Questions with an earlier Question?

I cannot answer about that. I heard the Minister announcing the numbers of the Questions which he was proposing to answer together.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will take steps to ensure that holders of driving licences should, for the purpose of convenient identification, have a personal photograph attached to the licence; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. We consider that the present requirement for every licence holder to sign his licence in ink is adequate.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that recently a person was concerned in the production of a licence bearing a name similar to his own and that within a matter of a few hours he was involved in a serious accident which caused serious injury and that subsequent police inquiries revealed that the person named had no such licence? Does he not appreciate that if there had been a photograph on the licence identifying the real holder, the accident could have been avoided and that similar subsequent occurrences could also be avoided? Is it not worth while having another look at this matter, especially when the practice is working well in other parts of the world?

Without studying the facts, I am not sure that I agree with the hon. Member that the photograph would have made very much difference. It is the view of my right hon. Friend and the Home Secretary that no greater safeguards need be provided than under the present requirements. Clearly, applicants would be put to much greater inconvenience.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that it is proposed to close the Motor Coach Station at King's Cross, London, on 30th September, 1963, that no alternative station is being provided, and that this will cause serious interference with the regular daily services by motor coach between London and East Anglia; and what steps he is taking to ensure that an alternative will be provided.

My Department, the Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner and the Metropolitan Police are co-operating to see whether arrangements can be made for operators to pick up and set down passengers in the streets in the vicinity of King's Cross when the present Motor Coach Station is closed. The provision of more elaborate facilities is a matter for the operators themselves in the first instance.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that people using these services from East Anglia are people who mostly live a long way from a railway station and that if the services are not convenient or are discontinued more motor cars will come into the Metropolis? Will he use his powers or his persuasion to see that in future development plans proper motor coach terminals are provided?

I shall bear that in mind, because it is important, but at the moment the Traffic Commissioner, in consultation with the Commissioner of Police, has to determine authorised picking-up points and the solution might involve waiting restrictions on other vehicles. This is a complicated problem, but we will bear in mind what my right hon. and learned Friend has said.

asked the Minister of Transport what reports have been made to him by the Docks Board regarding capital expenditure on the widening and improvements to the facilities of Hartlepools docks.

The Board has informed us that it is investigating a proposal to spend £750,000 on new coal shipping appliances.

In saying that I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend for that reply, may I stress that early action is necessary to improve the port facilities in Hartlepool, where we still have very high unemployment? I trust that, in conjunction with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, my hon. and gallant Friend will do what he can to help to alleviate the financial desiderata concerned in this vital issue.

We appreciate that, and the Docks Board hopes to be in a position to seek my right hon. Friend's approval for the expenditure later this year. If so, the work should start in 1965.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware of the unemployment position in the shipbuilding industry; and why he will not adopt the principle of scrap and build.

I cannot yet add to the answer I gave to a similar Question from my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. P. Williams) last Wednesday. But I hope that it will be possible to make an announcement on the Government's attitude before the House rises for the Whitsun Recess.

Is the Minister aware that a large number of vessels now afloat are near to being unseaworthy and are fit only for the scrap heap? Would it not be wiser to scrap these vessels now and to give work to our men in the shipyards by building other ships in their place?

I can only repeat what I said last week, and that is that the scrap and build scheme is not a simple, straightforward matter at all. There are serious disadvantages to it, and the position today is very different from what it was when we had a similar scheme between the wars.

While welcoming the intention of my hon. and gallant Friend and that of the Government to make public their decision before Whitsun—that is what I understand from the Answer—may I ask my hon. and gallant Friend if he can assure the House and the shipping and shipbuilding industries that it is not the intention of the Government to let the British shipping and shipbuilding industries wither away? Will he take account, while considering the interests of the shipbuilding industry, of the ship-owning industry as well?

We certainly appreciate the great importance to this country of the shipping and shipbuilding industries, and I think that perhaps we had better await the announcement when it comes.

asked the Minister of Transport what further steps he will take to ensure that all sea-going craft carry distress signal flares and rescue equipment.

All seagoing craft, except pleasure yachts of less than 15 tons burden, must by statutory regulation carry distress signals and lifesaving equipment. I do not consider that further steps to ensure compliance with these regulations are needed.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this will cause some concern around our coasts, because an increasing number of craft are putting to sea during the holidays and other periods every year and an unnecessary strain and burden is being imposed on the many splendid voluntary workers who are called out to rescues following accidents? Will he look into the matter much more closely and extend the range of vessels needing the type of equipment referred to in the Question?

We are, of course, aware of the seriousness of the problem, but we do not think we would be justified in taking responsibility for the inspection of all the various types of craft because of the large and costly organisation which would be required. We think that the matter is best left to local initiative and to instruction and training, which is going forward.

Will my hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind the fact that a large number of sailing and other dinghies race a mile or two out from the coast, and that it would be quite impracticable for this type of craft to carry these heavy distress appliances?

Yes, Sir; I am inclined to agree with my hon. Friend over that. Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that pyrotechnic signals need a great deal of care in handling, and that we must be careful that while guarding against one danger we do not introduce another.

asked the Minister of Transport what discussions he had with the delegation of business men from Scandinavian countries who recently visited this country to discuss shipping and shipbuilding matters of common interest to those countries and the United Kingdom with a view to correlating those interests and expanding British shipping and shipbuilding trade.

I know of no such delegation.

When will the Parliamentary Secretary emulate the constructive example of the Trades Union Congress in promoting international conversations at a high level with a view to increasing the trade, industry and commerce of this country and diminishing great unemployment, especially on the north-east coast of Scotland?

I can assure the hon. and learned Gentleman that we are always ready to consider anything which will help to bring orders to our shipyards.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will seek immediate consultations with the Shell Oil Company to discuss the need to ensure that British shipyards shall have the opportunity to build oil vessels that that company may require.

I understand that Shell intend to build up to six large tankers and are seeking tenders from 15 shipyards, nine of which are British.

Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman approached the Shell Oil Company to ensure that these ships are built in the shipyards of this country? Does he not appreciate that there are many shipyards where machinery is almost rusting because of lack of orders? Will he not do more than he is doing and have these consultations to make certain that the ships are built in this country?

We naturally hope that these ships will be built in this country, but we cannot force the company. It has already shown its interest, and it would not be appropriate to try to influence it any further. I remind the hon. Member that of the existing Shell fleet no less than 85 per cent. was built in this country.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that some of our competitors, foreign countries, subsidise shipbuilding? Will he make sure that British yards do not suffer any disadvantage as a result of those subsidies on the Continent and elsewhere?

We are aware that some countries make direct subsidies and we are also aware that indirect assistance is given. I ask my hon. Friend to await the announcement which I said would be made before the Whitsun Recess.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman said that nine British shipyard companies were interested in building these ships. Would he use his influence to see that the order is spread fairly among the shipbuilding companies of Britain?

No, Sir. I cannot give that undertaking.

Why not?

Private companies, as are the Government, are bound to place the orders at the yards which offer the best tenders.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will, in anticipation of formal proposals for the implementation of the Beeching Report in regard to the closing of Rugeley Town station, Alrewas stations and Lichfield Trent Valley High Level station, strengthen the West Midlands Transport Users' Consultative Committee by adding to the membership persons with expert knowledge of overspill future plans and requirements both as regards passenger and freight traffic.

The duty of the transport users consultative committee is to report to me on any hardship which it considers would be caused by a proposed closure of a passenger service or station. Before reaching my decision I shall take into account any other relevant factors. If in a particular case overspill plans were a significant factor, I would consult my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government. The consultative comittee has no power to consider proposals for freight service closures.

Since it appears fairly obvious that Dr. Beeching's secretariat has no knowledge of the Midlands overspill plan, which is a vast problem and is already in operation, would it not be profitable to see that the users' consultative committee at least is well informed before it makes its representations?

I assure the hon. Member that any overspill problem will be taken into account before a decision one way or the other is made.

Can the Minister say why these consultative committees are not allowed to cover the freight aspects of the proposals? Is he not aware that I have sent him particulars of protests against the closure of the Mill Hill station in Blackburn, including protests by a local business man? How are the interests of business persons to be reflected in the consideration of these proposals?

I am bound by the Transport Act, 1962, which was passed by this House and which lays down those provisions. All I can say is that the railways have been in touch with local business people regarding the freight services.

Is the Minister further aware that there are questions not only of overspill and freight, but those which concern areas with expanding coalfields and where new mines are being opened, as in the West Midlands and the North? Is he not aware that the problem of consultative committees and the question of freight is of paramount importance? Will he ensure that he is informed of any Coal Board developments in these areas before freight or passenger lines are closed?

It was about twelve months ago that I first said that the question of population overspill and of new industrial development would be taken into account. Government machinery was set up a considerable time ago so that these factors, as well as hardship to passengers and the provision of alternative services, would be considered.

In view of the nature of the Minister's reply, I give notice that I will try to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government on where the burden of subsidy should fall when uneconomic railway services are kept open on proof of hardship.

Where I do not consent to a proposal from the Railways Board for the closure of a passenger service, any consequent financial loss borne by the Board in respect of that service forms part of the revenue deficit which, under Section 22 of the Transport Act, 1962, may be met by the Exchequer.

In thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I draw his attention to a recent statement of his, reported in a special article in the Sunday Times, in which he said that local interests would have to bear part of the burden? I am wondering whether my right hon. Friend can explain that a little more. Has he in mind asking local authorities to bear part of the burden?

I do not know which particular reference my hon. Friend has in mind. All I have to say is that I cannot now commit myself to any undertaking that Exchequer assistance will be given. The great point is that each individual case should be looked at carefully and then we can see whether Exchequer assistance is needed.

Can my right hon. Friend at least give an assurance that, where cases of hardship are not proved, he will give local authorities or local interests an opportunity of taking over these lines themselves?

That is a matter in the first instance for discussion between the authorities concerned and the Railways Board. If any local authorities have proposals to make, I hope that they will immediately go to the Railways Board and start discussions.

Has not the Minister previously suggested that local authorities might be asked to bear the burden of keeping certain lines open? Have the local authorities any power to subsidise British Railways in this way?

It is a question not only of British Railways but of alternative services. The point is that one cannot decide upon Exchequer assistance until each individual closure has been investigated.

asked the Minister of Transport if, before consenting to proposals for the closure of railway stations, he will ensure that car parking facilities will be increased at those main line stations which can expect more passengers as a result of the closures.

As my right hon. Friend told the House on 29th April, we recognise the special problems of parking and travel which rail closures in urban areas may create. Similar problems may arise elsewhere. In considering proposed closures my right hon. Friend will take into account all relevant factors, including, where necessary, parking facilities. The Railways Board is well aware of the importance of providing parking space to meet its passengers' needs.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that the hon. Member for Rutland, having been threatened with the extinction of his county, is now faced with the loss of all his railway stations? Will he bear in mind that those supposedly more efficient counties outside of Rutland have not got adequate parking facilities, and that this will really have to be looked at if we are to have extra car parking facilities and places for buses near the stations, if and when the new services are put on?

Yes, we do appreciate that, but I must point out to my hon. Friend that although my right hon. Friend has no direct powers to compel the Railways Board to provide parking places, in giving his consent to the closure of a station one of the conditions might well be the provision of parking places at an adjacent station.

asked the Minister of Transport what expenditure was authorised by him for the modernisation and electrification of the Cheadle Hulme—Stoke-on-Trent main line, for the resignalling between Cheadle Hulme—Stoke-on-Trent line, and for the modernisation of the station at Stoke-on-Trent, respectively; what is the total cost of this works programme; and on what date it will be completed.

I understand that, within the estimated cost of £175 million for the London Midland Electrification Scheme approved by my right hon. Friend as a whole; the British Railways Board have authorised expenditure for the modernisation and electrification of the Cheadle Hulme—Stoke-on-Trent section of the line at a total cost of £6·1 million, including £1·2 million for resignalling and telecommunications improvements. The works are expected to be completed by the end of 1966. With regard to Stoke-on-Trent Station, I have nothing to add to the answer given to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ellis Smith) and others on 6th March last.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman inform his right hon. Friend that there is great appreciation among millions of people living in the vicinity of the line of the fact that it will be modernised and electrified? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to give instructions to his principal officers that some drive and enterprise shall be put into this so that the people can benefit from this service as soon as possible?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will be most gratified at the hon. Gentleman's approval, and I can also assure him that the maximum drive is being put into the project.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman also invite his right hon. Friend to meet the Members of Parliament representing north Stafford-shire in the darkness of Stoke-on-Trent station to see whether he agrees that something ought to be done about it?

And quickly.

I understand that the Railways Board has not yet finalised its plans for this station, but it is intended that it should be modernised to coincide with the introduction of the electric services on the line.

But does the hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that in the meantime—and apparently it will be a number of years before this is done—the people who work there and use the station are to be condemned to use it in the shocking conditions which prevail—unless, of course, the hon. and gallant Gentleman can arrange for us to have another Royal visit, when we might get some improvements made?

We have complete confidence in the judgment of the Railways Board in the phasing of the work. After all, 1966 is not all that far off.

asked the Minister of Transport at what precise stage and in what manner direct consultations will take place between his Department, local authorities and other interested parties when it is proposed by the Railways Board to close a railway service; and who will take the initiative in arranging such consultations.

I have already opened consultations with the local authority associations and other interested organisations upon the Railways Board's proposals as a whole.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer, but does he not realise that if local authorities have to wait until the railways claim to close a line and then have to go through the usual channels of the transport users' consultative committee, there will be considerable waste of time and expense and also anxiety for a local authority over a very long period? In certain instances where local authorities think that they have an unassailable case, would not my right hon. Friend consider it at an earlier stage so that it might, as it were, be put out of the way, and thus save a great deal of anxiety?

I am bound by the Transport Act, 1962, which says that a formal proposal should come from the railways, and it should be advertised twice, and then, six weeks later, the transport users' consultative committee can listen to objections and then make a report to me. But I would tell my hon. and gallant Friend that there will be ample time for the local authorities to prepare their case and to make it before a closure is contemplated and approved.

Is the Minister saying that matters relating to freight cannot go through the transport users' consultative committee, but that individual interests or industries must make their own representations? Would it not be better to have some form of co-ordination where an area is concerned?

The Act lays down that the transport users' consultative committee shall consider passenger service closures only and not matters relating to freight.

Can the Minister give any indication when the first of the Beeching Plan proposals for closures will start to operate?

I am afraid that I cannot. It depends on the Railways Board and not on me.

Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance that local authorities will be provided with information about the finance of a line which is proposed to be closed, because it will be very difficult for them to form a real judgment about it without this?

That is the subject of another Question on the Order Paper.

As the Railways Board and the Beeching Report have already indicated the closures which are in mind, and which will, presumably, be followed up, would it not be wise for all the local authorities concerned immediately to take steps to prepare their case, if they feel they have a case, against a closure?

I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I hope that the local authorities will prepare their cases carefully and at leisure and present them at the appropriate moment.

rose—

We cannot go all round the country on this Question. Mr. Vane, Question No. 27.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) what plans Her Majesty's Government have for improving communications in South-West Durham if the Darlington-Crook, Darlington-Barnard Castle and Middleton-in-Teesdale railway passenger services are closed; and

asked the Minister of Transport what plans he has made for improving road communications with Lyme Regis and Bridport, in view of the proposed closure of their respective railway branch lines and in view of the need to reduce to a minimum the extent to which the trade of these two seaside towns may suffer.

asked the Minister of Transport what consultations he has had with those concerned about the road traffic problems likely to arise when the Railways Board's proposals to close the Liverpool-Southport railway are put into effect.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress has been made on machinery to strengthen and modify roads where necessary following the acceptance of the Beeching Report.

My divisional road engineers have already made a first examination of the Beeching Report from the point of view of roads and road traffic. I shall, where necessary, obtain their views and those of the local highway authorities about the effects, if any, on the roads of the Railways Board's individual proposals to withdraw passenger services. But each of those proposals will be considered in the first place by the Transport Users Consultative Committee who will report to me on hardship and alternative services. My decision will take into account all relevant factors, including the cost of any road improvements that might be needed.

That means that the right hon. Gentleman has no plans and no ideas at all, and that his actions are as irrelevant as his actions at Burtree last week. How does he reconcile the actions of the President of the Board of Trade in trying to bring industry to this area with his own efforts in trying to stop it?

The divisional road engineers have made a survey of the general proposals of the plan. They now propose to make a detailed survey when each individual proposal is put forward.

At what stage will my right hon. Friend publish these proposals so that local people will have some idea as to what alternative, if any, is provided? That is what is important to them.

The proposals would be published in the first instance by the Railways Board itself. They will be advertised twice, and six weeks later the transport users' consultative committees will begin investigation.

Would it not be stupid to close down any services in the North-East before Lord Hailsham has produced his long-term plan for the area? What recent consultations has the Minister had with Lord Hailsham in order to compare the noble Lord's recommendations with those of Dr. Beeching's plan?

If it proves necessary, on examination of an individual proposal, that a line should not be closed—and my noble Friend makes his point of view known—it will not be closed. But the main point is that I am in continuous consultation with Lord Hailsham.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give details of the advice he has received from the Transport Holding Company, the Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association and the owners of municipal bus services as to their ability to replace passenger train services in England and Wales with adequate alternative bus services in the event of the Beeching proposals as to rail closures being carried out.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give details of the advice he received from the Scottish Omnibus Group, the Tilling Group, the British Electric Transport, the Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association and the owners of municipal omnibuses as to their ability to replace closed railway passenger services by adequate omnibus services in the event of the implementation of the Beeching Report.

When I met representatives of all the main groups in the bus industry in early April, they assured me of their fullest co-operation in working out arrangements to provide new or strengthened bus services to meet passenger needs when railway services are withdrawn. They told me that, while particular local cases might need a considerable effort, the information available did not suggest that the railway proposals would set them an impossible task nationally.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that most encouraging reply. Has he not been further encouraged by the announcement today by the chairman of the Public Transport Association, who believes that he can provide in practically every case a comparable service? Will my right hon. Friend give some indication of the frequency of the new bus services compared with train services, and also some idea of comparative costs?

The statement today was most encouraging. On the question of alternative services provided by buses, there are a number of points which we have discussed with the bus operators and which should be borne in mind. These include the timing of the buses so that they coincide with trains, the number of additional buses needed, road-side shelters—which have not been often mentioned in this context—and the whole problem of luggage. I would not exclude the possibility of trailers behind buses for luggage if we find that the luggage cannot be carried in the buses themselves.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Scottish Bus Group put out a memorandum indicating that it could deal with luggage in Scotland? Have other companies given such an indication?

They were all quite confident that, one way or another, they would be able to solve the problem.

When the Minister talks about adequate alternative services, does adequacy to him mean a schedule which will get passengers to their destinations in approximately the same time as by train? If the right hon. Gentleman is convinced that the substitution of buses for rail services will be adequate in that sense, he is the only person in this House who believes it.

A large number of considerations must be borne in mind, and the question of adequacy will be one in the first place for the transport users' consultative committees.

How long will it take for the bus companies to get into a position to be able to satisfy these requirements? What is the length of time it takes to get a new bus, or will the present buses be used although they are not equipped to take luggage?

The bus companies have made inquiries and there will be no difficulty about the supply of new buses if and when they are needed. But I believe that all these considerations have been taken into account by the bus companies, which have first-class managements.

Can the right hon. Gentleman estimate how many additional buses are to be put on our overcrowded roads?

Estimates based on the nationalised bus undertakings, which provide 80 to 90 per cent. of the stage carriage services in their areas, suggest that the number will be about 700.