asked the Minister of Transport if he will henceforth call for tenders for the design as well as the construction of civil engineering works.

No, Sir. I do not consider that tenders on a design and construction basis are suitable for road works in the conditions obtaining in this country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that probably large savings could be made in the cost of major constructions if we had competition in design as well as in construction? Would not he go as far as doing a few experimental projects of this sort, as this is what is done in America with great benefit?

There are many arguments for and against design and construction contracts, but most of the civil engineering work in my Department is confined to the construction of roads, where there is little scope for various designs. In some sorts of civil engineering work it might be desirable to allow contractors to put in alternative designs, but in respect of road work the scope is very limited.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) what area is covered by, and what price was paid under a compulsory purchase order for, the land now occupied by the Farthing Corner service area on the M.2 motorway; and what price was paid for it by the company owning the service area;

(2) what are the terms and conditions under which the land now occupied by the Farthing Corner service area on the M.2 motorway has been let or leased to the company operating the area; and what annual percentage return on the original purchase price paid by his Department this represents.

The Farthing Corner service area covers approximately 18½ acres made up from parts of a number of plots. The approximate cost of the land, which my Ministry will continue to own, was £4,000. It will be leased to the company providing the facilities for a period of 50 years at a fixed annual rent and a percentage on turnover. The lease is lengthy and complicated. I will send a pro forma copy to my hon. Friend, but the financial details are matters of commercial confidence. In any case, it would be fallacious to compare the return with the bare cost of the land purchase.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I find his reluctance to give these figures rather extraordinary? Would not he agree that when land is acquired from farmers at or near the agricultural rate and is let to a private company, obviously at a figure based on the commercial activities of that company, it would be proper, right and equitable to ensure that the people who own the land should have the opportunity to carry out negotiations and reap some benefit from the profit of the private company, which is not the job of the Government?

Regarding compensation, I am bound by the Act which this House passed. The effect of the Land Compensation Act, 1961, and particularly Section 6, is that compensation for land acquired under the Highways Act, 1959, has to be related to the value of the land, without taking into account any increase or decrease in its value brought about by the creation of a motorway at public expense. Therefore, I cannot give compensation on any other basis than that laid down by Parliament. My hon. Friend must remember that so far about £15 million has been spent on the motorway, without which there would be no traffic or trade coming to that service area. That has been brought about by the expenditure of a large amount of public funds. We are spending £170,000 on works in the service area, on levelling, drainage and the construction of vehicle parks and through roads, and so on. Without that expenditure there would be no value.

Will my right hon. Friend admit that this brings no comfort to people who so lose their land and have their incomes, as happened in the case of this small farmer, cut by 20 per cent.? Is it not time that the whole matter was looked at again? Surely my right hon. Friend will agree that if this argument is right the Government would have the power and the right to acquire land anywhere where they drive a road through land on which they think they can make a profit?

I hope my hon. Friend will acquit me of any of the guilt, as he calls it, in this respect. Parliament discussed at great length before it passed the Act of Parliament and laid down the terms and conditions which I must keep to. What Parliament had in mind when passing the Land Compensation Act, 1961, and the Highways Act, 1959, was that in those areas there would be no development at all but for the large expenditure of public funds.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will seek powers to paint keep left guide lines on busy pavements to facilitate pedestrian movement in rush-hours.

Highway authorities already have powers to do this. But previous experiments with a pedestrian keep-to-the-left rule proved unsuccessful.

This is a continuation of the point made on the previous Question. As my right hon. Friend is aware, pedestrian self-discipline is practised with complete success in cities as far apart as Melbourne and Moscow. Would it not be to the general convenience, particularly during the rush-hours, if my right hon. Friend made a concerted effort to make people, in the pedestrian and not in the political sense, keep to the left?

The question of keeping to the left is one for the county borough or local highway authority concerned. We have had experience of this sort. There was the Slough road safety experiment in 1957, when signs were used in an effort to persuade pedestrians to keep to the left, but that did not work. The majority either kept to the right or to the side nearest to the shop windows they wanted to look at. If any local authority wishes to try the experiment again, I shall assist, certainly in the constituency of my hon. Friend.

Could not my right hon. Friend take this matter a little more seriously? We are the most law-abiding country in the world and this unquestionably would be for the universal convenience. Will my right hon. Friend try a little harder?

My hon. Friend has misjudged me; I take this seriously. I have discussed it with RoSPA from the safety point of view and we have carried out experiments, but they have failed. If he can persuade local authorities in his constituency to carry out experiments, I will do my best to help them.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects to receive the report of the consulting engineers he appointed in 1962 to inquire into road communications between Hull and the Great North Road; and if he will make a statement.

I expect to receive the Report within two or three weeks. It is expected to be of wide scope. But the improvement of trunk road communications between Hull and the Great North Road is important and I will reach conclusions as quickly as possible. I have made provision for some of the work in the last extension of the trunk road programme in this Report.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that, in view of the urgency of this matter, there has been wide disappointment in Hull and East Riding over the length of time taken to produce the Report? Will he give an undertaking that, when it is received by him, he will arrange for publication of its salient points and urgent consideration of the principal recommendations?

I can promise my hon. Friend that I shall move as fast as I possibly can. The Report was commissioned in order that we could decide the best means of carrying out the recommendations to provide first-class communication between Hull and the Great North Road. The question of timing depends on decisions to be made when examining the Report and on necessary statutory procedures.

Has my right hon. Friend informed the consulting engineers of the importance attached to the fact that their recommendations should include the freeing of Selby Toll Bridge?

I have not drawn that to their attention, but I have no doubt that they will see this Question when it appears in HANSARD.

asked the Minister of Transport, if he is aware that parking problems in residential roads and streets of the Greater London area are increasing; and what proposals he has for easing the road safety hazard on minor roads in this area.

I am aware that the number of vehicles parked on the streets is increasing. Vehicles parked in minor roads are a much less serious hazard than those parked in main thoroughfares, and it would be wrong to prohibit parking there generally. But my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government and I intend to publish as soon as possible bulletins giving guidance to local authorities about parking firstly in town centres and subsequently in residential areas.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when cars are parked solidly on both sides of side-streets passing traffic has great difficulty in getting through? This presents a tremendous hazard to pedestrians, particularly children. Police largely ignore this because they are only too willing to keep cars off the main roads. Is not the only possible way of solving the problem massive expansion of off-street parking outside the London area, and will my right hon. Friend make prompt recommendations to the local authorities?

This bulletin will call attention of the local authorities to the necessity of action on their part to provide such off-street parking as is required in these local areas. Providing parking facilities in local areas requires local knowledge and decisions, and it is not appropriate for the central Government to decide the details of what should be provided in this way. I am calling the attention of the local authorities to the importance of off-street parking, and I am making a number of suggestions on how the job should be tackled.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this problem is greatly aggravated by the parking of commercial vehicles night after night in residential areas because there is no garage provision for them? Does he intend to allow this greater freedom for owners of commercial vehicles to continue for all time?

I have mentioned this matter in the House previously. Local authorities should provide parking facilities for these heavy vehicles which sometimes stay overnight and which should be parked off the streets. Several of these hive already been successfully started and more will be planned. Again, attention will be drawn to this in the circular.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will conduct an experiment into the segregation of similar types of road vehicles on a given stretch of road by excluding other types.

This idea is attractive, but putting it into practice poses formidable questions of safety and other traffic problems. I am exploring the possibility in London of segregation to give priority to buses in addition to the priority already given by exemption from some right turn bans.

Is it not a fact that one of the reasons for the congestion is the mixing of vehicles of different speeds on our roads? Since my right hon. Friend will not enforce a minimum speed limit, does not this seem to be a way of tackling this problem, as has been done successfully in countries like Sweden?

Separate carriageways for different classes of vehicles which would provide for overtaking would involve extremely wide and expensive roads. While, in theory, this proposition sounds attractive, when we get down to the details of the matter it becomes very formidable indeed.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in connection with the enforcement of maximum weights for vehicles used henceforward for the maintenance of footpaths, it is intended that vehicles which carry surfacing material such as tarmacadam will be weighed with or without their load of surfacing material.

The regulations relate to the gross weight of vehicles which includes the weight of any material carried.

Is the Minister aware that this will place considerable difficulty in the way of the proper repair of these footpaths? Has he not received complaints with regard to this matter from the various authorities, and what is he going to do about them?

The hon. Gentleman puts me in a slight difficulty, because I think he has anticipated his own Question which is next on the Order Paper.

I am sorry that the Minister should have been in difficulty, because I would have been very pleased for him to have answered them together.

asked the Minister of Transport when he proposes to discuss with the highway authorities the steps that can be taken to overcome the difficulties anticipated by them in connection with the operation of Statutory Instrument, 1963, No. 2126, dated 19th December, 1963.

The meeting was held between officials of the Ministries of Power and Transport and representatives of the associations of local authorities concerned on 20th March.

What is the hon. and gallant Gentleman proposing to do about it after having had that meeting? Has he any suggestions to make to deal with the situation?

The procedure for dealing with applications to the Minister of Power for relaxations under the present regulations was discussed and it was agreed that officials should prepare a draft amendment to the regulations which would allow local authorities, after consultation with the appropriate gas board, to use vehicles exceeding one ton in weight on footpaths.

asked the Minister of Transport what has been spent in the last three years on the resurfacing of the cycle track on the A.64 between York and Malton; and what was the number of cyclists found to be using the cycle track at the last traffic census.

Over the last three financial years, expenditure on resurfacing the cycle track was £122, £67 and £6,000, respectively. At a census taken over one week in August 1961, 214 cyclists used the westbound track and 240 cyclists used the eastbound track.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that this cycle track has now been down for 25 years and has really been very little used? Will he consider whether it is economical to spend fairly large sums on maintaining a track which is unused for most of the year, and would it not be better to convert it into a footpath?

This is always one of the considerations which we have in mind. I would point out that although cycle tracks are not widely provided these days, they still have considerable road safety value in certain circumstances. Where they have already been provided we want to be quite sure that their present value is negligible before removing them. In this instance it was decided that the tracks still have some value despite the rather low volume of cyclists using them.

asked the Minister of Transport what action he is taking to make the Summit Bridge, Roebuck Lane, Smethwick, less dangerous for pedestrians and road traffic.

The re-alignment of that length of Roebuck Lane which includes Summit Bridge has been included in the provisional list of schemes for the classified road programme 1965–68.

Provisional? Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that this is probably one of the most dangerous bridges in the land? It has a kink in the middle so that traffic one way cannot see the traffic coming the other way. It has one pavement 6½ ins. wide and another 12 ins. wide. There has recently been a fatal accident It is a miracle that there have not been others. Does not he agree that this is a case where measures should be taken, it necessary temporary measures, to remove an extremely dangerous hazard to traffic? I counted 10 or 12 cars passing there every minute. There were both vehicle traffic and pedestrians.

What the right hon. Gentleman says is correct. But the first thing for us to do is agree with the highway authority a definite programme for the works which are to be undertaken. It may well be that the gap between making any temporary arrangements and the completion of the new scheme will be very short indeed.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will introduce legislation to increase the powers of local authorities to restrict parking outside school entrances.

No, Sir. Their powers are already sufficient.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his Ministry circular last summer pointed out that two accidents out of five to children are caused because of masking of the road by parked cars? Would he study the roads around West-minster, the part not coveted by parking meters, and then he may discover how very difficult it is for children to see when crossing the road, and will he then take further action?

A school entrance carriageway marking is available and local authorities can put it down at suitable places. The idea exists and the carriageway can be marked so that parked cars will not mask the entrances and exits of schools. I agree that in certain cases they ought to be marked. If my hon. Friend has a particular case in mind where he thinks that action can be taken, I should be very grateful if he would let me know.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will reconsider his refusal to erect signs advising drivers of the proximity of homes for blind, disabled and aged people.

I do not consider that signs warning drivers about these homes are a reliable safety measure. Even so I am very concerned about the difficulties of pedestrians and especially of those who are old or handicapped and their needs are being given special consideration in the current review of crossing policy. But much their best protection is an escort

Is the Minister aware that a letter from his Ministry to the Manchester and Salford Blind Aid Society says that notices are best placed within the grounds of such homes? Is that not far too late to warn drivers? Is he aware that the letter also uses as an argument the fact that blind people do not cross the road at regular times? Surely this is all the more reason for such a notice. It seems daft to me.

All I can say is that the superintendent and secretary of the Manchester and Salford Blind Aid Society wrote to me suggesting that blind people from the homes themselves feel that for them to put their faith in signs which are for sighted motorists is ridiculous and that blind people would never dream of crossing Eccles Old Road without help. I am sure that all would wish to give assistance to the elderly and blind when crossing the roads. The only point of dispute is on the right way to do it—whether by proliferating signs for sighted motorists or whether by providing care and attention for blind persons when crossing the road.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he proposes to take to encourage the drivers of long-distance and other forms of through-traffic to use by-pass routes where provided.

We hope that the new directional sign posting recommended by the Worboys Committee will help to do this.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the internal areas of some towns which have been by-passed at tremendous public expense are still snarled up at rush periods by some forms of through traffic and long-distance traffic? Is not some research now required to find out why such drivers are reluctant to take advantage of some of the new by-pass routes?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. This matter is the subject of a great deal of study. In cases where there is a ring road, there is no difficulty at all; but in cases where the by-pass is on only one side of the city it may well be necessary, for the sake of connecting with a primary road entering the city on the side which is not by-passed, for through traffic to go into the centre.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that there is considerable concern in Kent on this matter? Since the opening of the Medway by-pass, a number of heavy lorries, particularly private lorries, are using the main town. The view in Kent is that Whitehall may plan but that tea houses are more attractive than Whitehall's planning. Would he consider more tea houses being built on by-passes?

I do not think we can undertake the building of tea houses, but I will certainly look into the other point raised by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will state the nature of the reply sent by his Department to the Mansfield Town Council in reply to the town clerk's letter of 11th February, 1964, respecting the widening and improvement of Westfield Lane, Mansfield.

The Council has been informed that the scheme for the widening and improvement of Westfield Lane at a cost of £40,500 has been included in the classified road programme for 1965–66. Subject to approval of the details and the agreement of Nottingham County Council, grant will be available in that year.

Is the Minister aware that I am disappointed with the date, although grateful at long last for the sanction of this improvement? As the Question says, this is a lane. It has now become a bus route. Developments are taking place in the area. There is great danger, particularly to small children. When I raised this matter in 1961 —[HON. MEMBERS: "Question."] This is Mansfield. When I raised this matter—

The point is getting it into Question form.

When I raised this question in 1961, the cost was £30,000. It is now £40,500. If it is left any longer, it will be still more. Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman advance the date?

No. I do not foresee any appreciable increase in the cost. When the hon. Gentleman studies the details of the scheme, I think that he will agree that the scheme now proposed is ambitious and will be satisfactory. I am sorry that funds cannot be made available in the current financial year, but they are required for even more urgent schemes.

asked the Minister of Transport how many prosecutions were instituted in 1961, 1962 and 1963, respectively, against A and B licence holders for using their vehicles in a manner other than that permitted under the licensing regulations.

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

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that, whatever the figures may show in terms of a relatively large number of prosecutions, there is still very wide public concern at the extent to which the regulations are being broken, whether by excessive hours being worked, excessive loads being carried, or proper maintenance and repairs not being done? This represents not only unfair competition with British Road Services and hauliers who work within the regulations, but a grave risk in terms of safety. Will the Minister make known to licensing authorities that so long as these regulations continue they should be properly enforced?

I am aware of the concern which is felt. I am sure that the licensing authorities are also aware of it, and I assure the hon. Member that every effort is made to enforce the regulations. There is a Question on this subject later on the Order Paper.

Is not the real trouble that the Ministry has not enough inspectors to do the job? No one denies that there is wide abuse and that it is very dangerous from the point of view of road safety. What is the Ministry doing to ensure that there shall be more inspectors to do this job adequately?

As I have indicated, there is a later Question on this point.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will take steps to improve rural bus services following the publication of the rural transport surveys he has had carried out.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave on 11th March to my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Mr. Speir).

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many rural bus proprietors are literally hanging on in extremely unfavourable financial circumstances waiting for him to do something? While we welcome his surveys and experiments in different parts of the country, is he aware that what is needed is action, and will he give a pledge that as soon as possible he will bring in a scheme, in case the whole system of rural transport collapses?

That is precisely what we are doing in six selected areas. Man remedies have been suggested. The surveys made last year gave us the facts of the problem but not the remedy, and no convincing case has been made out for any particular remedy which might be applied generally. For that reason we decided that we must have practical experience on the ground before assessing the situation, and we are doing that.

In view of the fact that the Jack Committee reported fully on this matter three years ago, is not the right hon. Gentleman being unusually slow in coming to a decision on the important matter of rural bus services?

The difficulty here is to find the right answer, and even the members of the Jack Committee were not unanimous

asked the Minister of Transport what was the revenue of the British Waterways Board from sales of water in 1963.

Six hundred and nine thousand and fifty-seven pounds. As the Board points out in its Interim Report on "The Future of the Waterways", there are also a number of cases in which water is taken free or at unduly low rates.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether several hundred millions of gallons of water are taken annually from the Chesterfield Canal by the Staveley Iron and Chemical Company? Is it not about time that some of these people paid something for the water they get?

I quite agree that this company takes a great amount of water, but it is primarily a matter for the Board within its management responsibility. I understand that for some time it has been trying to negotiate a reasonable and proper arrangement with this company, but it has not yet been successful. The Board is trying to get a reasonable sum, but the company is standing on its rights which date back to 1771.

Has the Board a statutory power to deal with this unfortunate situation disclosed by the replies which the Minister has given to this Question?

No, and that is one of the problems in this case. The Board at present has no statutory power to levy a charge on this water, but, as my noble Friend Lord Hastings said in another place, where there were out of date or burdensome obligations to provide water free or cheaply, it seemed fair that Parliament should consider whether in the context of future waterways legislation they ought to continue. In the interim Report the Board foresees the need for general legislation. This question of proper payment for water supply might well be a matter to be dealt with in that legislation.

asked the Minister of Transport how many enforcement officers there are for enforcing Section 73 of the Road Traffic Act 1960, limiting the number of hours during which lorry drivers may drive; and what plans he has for augmenting the number of officers to ensure better enforcement.

The number of officers engaged on this enforcement work varies from time to time since some are also employed on driving test duties. Generally about 140 are so engaged at any one time. There are no plans for augmenting the number at present.

Is it not a fact that there is a good deal of evasion? Surely this is not in the interest of anyone, and least of all other road users?

Our information is that, on the whole, the law is being very actively enforced. I would remind my hon. Friend that last year there were over 12,000 convictions.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there is this widespread evasion and that these people who work long hours become a menace not only to themselves but to other road users? When he is making inquiries into this misuse of the licences, will he take into consideration the fact that people take out B licences and use them for A licence work, so evading taxation and the responsibility which they ought to face up to, and that this is unfair competition with other users?

The enforcement authorities are well aware of this abuse, and I would remind the hon. Lady that the Geddes Committee is at present investigating this very point.

Is it not quite ridiculous that there are only 140 officers to do this work? The hon. and gallant Gentleman says that there have been 12,000 people caught and prosecuted. That is only those caught. I wonder what the figure was of those who got away. Will he have another look at this matter? How does he justify having only 140 men to do a national job of this kind?

I shall certainly take note of the hon. Gentleman's views, but I would point out that since 1958 the number of enforcement officers has been raised proportionately to the increase in the number of vehicles. This, no doubt, is another matter which will be looked into by the Geddes Committee.

Is the hon. and Gallant Gentleman aware that a great deal of evasion is facilitated by the use of dual log books, and is he considering issuing official log books with numbered pages for each vehicle? This would be of great value to a number of drivers who are forced into this dishonest practice of using two log books.

I have nothing to add on the subject of log books to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave quite recently on the same subject in the House. This is a matter which will no doubt be looked into by the Committee and they will no doubt make recommendations.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the number of motor vehicles which have been abandoned on open land and public parking places; and if he is satisfied that the powers contained in Section 43 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, are adequate to provide for the removal of vehicles and for the recovery of the costs incurred by the police or any other authority when vehicles are removed from any place other than a road.

We are very conscious of the problem of abandoned vehicles, which is being examined jointly by the Department with the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. Section 43 of the 1960 Act does not concern the removal of vehicles from land other than roads. Section 16 of the Road Traffic and Roads Improvement Act, 1960, empowers local authorities to arrange for the removal and disposal of vehicles abandoned in public parking places and to recoup their costs.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that a large number of car owners are at a loss to know how to dispose of their cars when they have finished with them? Will he make it an obligation on local authorities to provide a depot for such cars and also make it an obligation on the owners to take their cars to the depots when they are disposing of them?

Both measures would require legislation. Under existing legislation, local authorities have power, after making due efforts to trace the owner, to remove a vehicle and recover costs. The matter is being jointly borne in mind by my right hon. Friend and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government to sec how the procedure for disposing of surplus cars can be speeded up.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that much time and money is wasted by the instructions given to the police to trace the owners of abandoned vehicles, as a result of which the vehicles stay on the streets for months? Will he amend the Regulations so that the local authority can, without lengthy inquiries on the part of the police, take this rubbish off the roads?

We have to bear in mind the law as well as the regulations. The present practice is to leave to the discretion of local authorities and the police how long they take to trace the owners of vehicles. However, I understand that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government intends to issue a circular on the subject.

asked the Minister of Transport he is aware that small cars are often advertised to achieve, with safety, maximum road speeds at which they cannot in an emergency by suddenly braked without danger to other road users and if he will direct the attention of manufacturers to this fact so as to secure a safer vehicle design.

From my close consultations with the manufacturers I have no doubt that they attach great importance to safety in designing their products. I should regret any general tendency to advertise dangerous maximum speeds.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what progress is being made in the development of anti-skid control systems, because when a car is suddenly braked in an emergency there is a liability to skid with a consequent loss of stopping power and directional stability? If we appeal to drivers to be safe in their driving, ought they not to have the knowledge that the cars which they are using are safe to drive?

At present certain cars are fitted with devices to reduce the risk of skidding when the brakes are applied. We are considering improved devices which are being tested, but I do not consider that the compulsory fitment of such devices is appropriate at this stage of their development.

asked the Minister of Transport what research his Department is undertaking regarding the possibility of altering the construction and angle of the exhaust pipes of diesel lorries in view of the skid hazards caused by exhaust fumes settling on road surfaces; and what proposals he has to make.

Studies made by the Road Research Laboratory do not suggest that deposits from diesel exhaust fumes constitute a skid hazard of any importance on modern road surfaces.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply— [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"]—may I ask him if he is aware of the findings of the United States Transport Department, whose researches have resulted in a substantial alteration in the construction and positioning of diesel exhausts on vehicles? Will he not reconsider his Answer in the light of the American experience, which has been successful?

The Road Research Laboratory has considered this matter. We do not consider, in the light of its views, that special research to deal with this problem— which is not considered to be a significant one—would be justified at present.

Can my hon. Friend say whether the inquiries made by the Road Research Laboratory show that these fumes represent a health hazard? Would any advantage be achieved by having exhaust pipes, especially of public vehicles and heavy lorries, discharging from higher up?

No, Sir. This would not be advantageous at ail. Most of the constituents of the exhaust are heavier than air. Together with soot and gas and particles of carbon they would fall on passers-by and bicyclists and enter the rooms of houses by the roadside—which would be worse than the present arrangement, whereby at least exhaust pipes expel fumes at ground level.

asked the Minister of Transport how many London Underground escalators descend on the right hand side and the left hand side, respectively.

I am told by the London Transport Board that this depends on the flow of traffic and that all escalators are reversible. Normally, 41 descend on the right hand side and 31 on the left. In addition, there are 22 which are inside banks of three or more escalators and three which are on their own.

As traffic in this country keeps to the left, would it not be to the general convenience if all escalators came down and went up on the left, thereby preventing a rugger scrum at Underground stations?

At peak hours there seems to be a rugger scrum whatever we do. I shall draw the attention of the Board to what my hon. Friend has said, but primarily it is a matter for management.

Would there not be an improvement if the London Transport Board could arrange that the bits of wood on the steps of escalators were wider apart as at present they damage the heels of ladies' shoes?

I do not know as much about ladies' heels as does the hon. Member, but I shall draw the attention of the Board to that point; but ladies' heels do a lot of damage in other respects.

asked the Minister of Transport if he has received the report of the Transport Users' Consultative Council on the Stranraer to Dumfries and the Stranraer to Ayr railways; and whether he will make a statement.

I received the reports shortly before Easter. I am now studying them and all other relevant factors in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and my other colleagues. I shall also take into account the views of the Northern Ireland Government on the effect on through travel to Larne. I cannot yet say when I shall be in a position to make a statement.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware of the consternation caused in south-west Scotland and Northern Ireland by these proposals in the Beeching Report, and will he give very careful consideration to representations that he receives on grounds other than hardship from national organisations such as the Scottish Council and similar organisations in Northern Ireland? Also, will he give us a quick reply, because this is interfering with business?

Yes, Sir; I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. I can also give him the assurance that I shall not reach a decision until all the evidence has been considered, and considered carefully. I would rather reach the right decision than a rapid decision which was the wrong one, and I will reach the right decision as quickly as I possibly can.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also keep in mind the seaport town of Girvan, which is greatly interested in his decision in view of the importance to Girvan of having regular communications so that it may receive summer visitors?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware that the Transport Users' Consultative Committee for Scotland held a public hearing in the County Hall, Aberdeen, on 13th November, 1963, in connection with proposed railway closures in North-East Scotland, heard objections and reported to him; if he will now make public the report that Committee made to him; and what action he proposes to take on it.

I received at the end of December the Committee's reports on hardship for the four passenger closure proposals considered at its meetings on 13th and 14th November. Such reports are made to me in confidence. I have already announced my consent to the closure of the Fraserburgh-St. Combs service on condition that certain additional bus services are provided, and that closure doe, not take place until 1st May, 1965, in order to allow certain road works to be completed. I have also consented to closure of the Elgin-Lossiemouth service.

I am still considering the other two proposals in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

Does not the Minister realise that the proposed closures affect the City of Aberdeen, the County of Aberdeen and a large section of the country, to the extent of wrecking trade, industry, commerce and employment in an area which is struggling against the drift to the South? Does not he realise that to keep secret the Report and the evidence upon which it is based is a disgraceful outrage to the people in that area?

The Report from the T.U.C.C. would be on hardship only. If the hon. and learned Gentleman has any further points additional to hardship, those, too, will be considered, if he will write to me. At the moment, there is a considerable amount of evidence which we are looking into and sifting carefully. The thoroughness with which we go into it is shown by the time we take to consider it.

Will my right hon. Friend publish a summary of the T.U.C.C.'s Report?

Each T.U.C.C. decides its own procedure. Most Committees issue a summary to the Press when they send me the completed report.

Did it in this case?

I could not answer that question without notice.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that they get a speedy reply to the ones on which he has not reported, and will he ensure that when he replies they are given adequate time before review is made of closures if his answer is that they should be reprieved?

I think we must go into these cases thoroughly with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, and I can promise my hon. Friend that I will do that.

asked the Minister of Transport what arrangements he has made for taking advice on the economic and social effects of railway closure proposals in Scotland submitted to him.

As well as considering evidence submitted to me direct by local authorities and other organisations, I consult my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Industry, Trade and Regional Development. The former has at his disposal the assistance of the inter-departmental Scottish Development Group, as well as advice from the Highland Transport Board and the Highland Panel and views conveyed to him by the Scottish Council and other interested bodies.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some of the areas affected by the closures, many of which have been mentioned at Question Time today, special studies are being conducted into the relationship between future planning and transport needs? Can he assure us that he will await the findings of these special inquiries before reaching any decision? Will he also give a pledge that the evidence and advice he is given, particularly by Government Departments, which may per- suade him one way or the other on these closures will be published, or at least a summary of these matters?

The question of reports made by T.U.C.C.s, which are concerned solely with hardship, is entirely up to the T.U.C.C.s. They must decide what they issue to the Press at the time. In reply to the hon. Member's other point, the Secretary of State for Scotland will have the assistance of the Scottish Development Group, and if that Group's studies are not far enough advanced in certain cases I will certainly wait for them. However, in other cases I give consent for the closures but arrange for the track to be kept open for the present and without prejudice to the future. I arranged for that to be done in the cases of Kilmarnock to Ardrossan and Berwick to St. Boswells.

Surely in Kilmarnock and elsewhere we find areas in which we are to have new towns. Is this one in particular not a growth area, and is it not rather ridiculous, apart from the T.U.C.C.'s considerations of personal hardship, that the right hon. Gentleman should get advice from the Secretary of State that this particular closure should go ahead?

If the new town is developed in such a way that it needs railway services or facilities, then those facilities can be restarted. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Yes, and that is why we put the conditions in about keeping the track there.

asked the Minister of Transport what arrangements he has made to have railway closures in Scotland deferred until the economic and social consequences of such closures have been investigated; and which areas are covered by such arrangements.

asked the Minister of Transport what are the circumstances, in taking decisions on railway closures in Scotland, in which more time is needed for a decision, and closures accordingly are to be deferred.

No special arrangements are needed. Opposed passenger closures cannot take place without my consent. I will not decide any case until I have all the evidence I need. I cannot say in advance on which proposals I may need to make further enquiries, what points these enquiries will cover, or how long they will take.

Does the Minister recall that some weeks ago the Secretary of State for Scotland, in a speech to Conservative women in Scotland, said that it would be a year, sometimes two or more, before some of these railways would be closed because they were not going to be closed until the regional development plans were formed? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with that view?

I cannot remember the speech of my right hon. Friend in such detail as the hon. Gentleman puts forward, but I can assure him that in these cases one cannot say how long it will take because each case is different. Each case has different characteristics and must be considered on its own merits.

Is not a large part of the difficulty in dealing with this very complicated problem not just that of personal hardship but that of how the closures will affect a whole area? Is he aware that some inquiries appear to be conducted in private, perhaps almost in secrecy, and does he realise that the purpose of these inquiries would be served very much better if the maximum publicity were given to the consultations as they take place and subsequent to the findings being published?

There is no question of secrecy here. Some of the proposals that are made to my Ministry about the expansion of new towns, industry and so on are made by such bodies as the Scottish Development Group, the Highland Transport Board and so on. They work as a team, certainly not in secrecy, and send their reports to the Ministry.

Is it not unrealistic to announce closures of these lines while these inquiries are going on? My right hon. Friend must know how long some of these inquiries will take.

As I have said, each case is different. In certain cases it is clear that lines are not being used and are not likely to be used. In other cases it is possible that they are likely to be used and, for that reason, we state that the track should be kept. There are so many permutations and combinations involved in this. It is not merely a question of whether a line should be kept open or whether it should be closed. There are many shades of grey and this is not always a question of black and white.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that closures on a wider scale and at a more rapid pace would have taken place had this not been General Election year?

I do not think so.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is satisfied with the manner in which public inquiries dealing with the proposed closure of passenger train services are carried out; and if he will introduce legislation to ensure that, at transport users' consultative committee hearings on proposed rail closures, adequate time is allowed for the hearing of objections, and that no hearing is closed until every objector has had an opportunity of putting his case on hardship.

I do not think that any change in the law is required. The purpose of a public hearing is to assist the Transport Users Consultative Committees' assessment of hardship by enabling objectors to amplify the written objections with additional and relevant information I have no evidence that this object is not being achieved under the present procedure.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that the recent proceedings at Steyning fell very far short of what he is saying? Does he not agree that a public poster appeared all over the countryside saying that the hearing would be for two days, whereas it took only one day? Is he further aware that there is grave dissatisfaction in the whole area that the grievances have not been properly aired?

Notices appeared saying that the herring would be for two days, but they appeared locally without the Committee's authority. They were put out by unauthorised persons and, naturally, the Committee cannot be blamed for that. A great deal of evidence was put to the Committee in writing. It heard lengthy submissions on behalf of local authorities and 30 individuals also spoke at the meeting. I see no evidence that objectors who had new points to make were not heard.

Does the Minister not recognise that Dr. Beeching's proposals for rail closures and passenger train withdrawals were put forward many months before the plans for central development in Scotland were decided upon? Does this not mean that there should be a reassessment of these proposals, which were made when the Scottish economy was completely stagnant and when there were no indications of plans for central Scotland?

That is exactly what I have said is happening now. When any of these bodies tell me that there will be an expansion of trade or when my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry and Trade says that a certain area will be developed, all these things are taken into account.

May I bring my right hon. Friend back from Scotland to Sussex? Has he seen this copy of the poster which I have in my hand and which I will hand to him? Will he please look into the matter again and realise that the only way that there can be satisfaction and fair play is for him to call another meeting at Steyning to hear all the objectors, hundreds of whom, including myself, have not been heard?

I will certainly be interested to see a copy of the poster or advertisement in the local paper but, as I said, it was put there by some unauthorised persons for mischievous purposes.

In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of my right hon. Friend's reply I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will now make a statement about the laying down of a British nuclear-propelled surface ship.

The Working Group on Marine Reactor Research has just finished its report which the Government have started to consider.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a growing body of opinion that we can make no further progress until a prototype is launched, and that even if we take action now, several countries, including Germany and Japan, are likely to have nuclear propelled surface ships afloat before us? When will he announce a decision?

I cannot say when it will be, but it will be as soon as possible. It is a complicated and complex subject. Again, we want to make the right answer rather than a very quick one which may be wrong.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 11th February last year the previous Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Bromley (Mr. H. Macmillan), informed the House that we should soon have an economic nuclear reactor for a British merchant ship? Can he tell the House why it was that his right hon. Friend was so sadly misinformed and, indeed, on that occasion deceived the House and the country?

I have not seen the actual quotation from what my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley (Mr. H. Macmillan) said, but the technical assessment in this matter has proved to be a very difficult task. We were asked by the experts that they should have more time to do their task, and we agreed that they should. If they say they need more time, I think they ought to be given it.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the time has arrived for the Government to make it clear on what conditions they will co-operate with the shipping industry in the construction, maintenance and operation of a nuclear-propelled surface ship at a moment when it is suitable to proceed with it?

I agree. We shall have to have consultations with both the Shipbuilding Conference and the Chamber of Shipping as to how to co-ordinate their activities with ours. We have already seen the Shipbuilding Conference and the Chamber of Shipping; we saw them when this research was started.

No doubt while the Padmore Committee has been considering the technical problem of which type of design to adopt, the right hon. Gentleman has been having discussions about finance and so on. Therefore, now that the Padmore Committee has reported to him on the design, can we have an assurance, that decision having been taken, that it will not be long before we get a definite decision about relevant policy?

I agree that one must arrive at a definite conclusion in the matter as soon as possible. But we have only just received the report, and it is a little premature to ask me now at what precise date one could take a decision on it.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress he has made during the past 12 months to achieve agreement with other maritime nations on shipping restrictions, flags of convenience, flag discrimination and other practices inimical to world trade; which nations he has approached with this object; and what has been the result.

I have nothing to add to the reply my right hon. Friend gave my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, East (Mr. McMaster) on 12th February.

Does the Minister realise that, especially in view of the recent American restrictions, it is an outrage that he has nothing to add? Does he realise that Britain as a seafaring nation is greatly dependent on her imports and exports and that they are prejudiced by the limitations which are at present being placed upon them? Is there not a duty upon the British Government to protect British shipping and British imports and exports?

We are well aware of the importance to this country of her shipping, but I cannot accept the hon. and learned Gentleman's statement that we have accepted any of the limitations, as he describes them, which the Americans have tried to put upon us. However, I cannot pursue that, because it anticipates a number of later Questions. With regard to the hon. and learned Gentleman's first observation, I could not accept the fact that we have done nothing. A great deal has been done. The fact that the eleven principal maritime nations are now working closely together is having a considerable influence in checking the spread of these practices.

Will my hon. and gallant Friend make a specific statement as to the representations which have been made by all the interests concerned to the Prime Minister, to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, and presumably to my hon. and gallant Friend? We want to knew what answer has been sent by the interests concerned to those who have made the representations. The matter cannot just be carried on in this way.

I am not quite clear which representations my hon. Friend is referring to. If she is referring to the recent American action, the answer is that we have taken no notice of it.

Another serious division has now arisen among the maritime nations on the question of fixing freight charges. Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman anything to say about the action of the United States Federal Maritime Commission?

I do not think can answer that question. There are a number of later Questions on this very subject.

Are we to get an answer?

Will my hon. and gallant Friend seek the co-operation of the world Press in drawing the attention of the whole world to the disadvantages of the practice of flag discrimination, particularly that of the United States, building subsidies and operational subsidies, which completely distort the whole flow and economics of the world shipping trade? Surely it is time that tie United States Government in particular were told that their territorial waters do not extend to Southampton waters?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the American Government and other Governments that practise regulation or discrimination are well aware of our views. I will certainly bear in mind what he says about the Press, but on the whole I should have said that the action taken by the Government has enjoyed a very good Press, both in his country and in other countries.

On a point of order. I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply.

The hon. and learned Gentleman will try to.