asked the Minister of Transport if he will impose statutory waiting restrictions outside school entrances in the Metropolitan area as school entrance signs are invariably disregarded.

I do not accept that school entrance markings are invariably disregarded. Where they are, the usual form of statutory waiting restriction is often not the right answer. I am, therefore, arranging an experiment with a modified form of restriction. This will be facilitated by the new system of marking waiting and loading restrictions.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that in a recent survey of 250 London schools it was found that the school entrance sign painted on the road was completely ineffective? He has only to walk a few hundred yards from this building to see many cars parked outside school entrances. Will he do his best to expedite the experiment that he talked about?

I am expediting the experiment to the best of my ability. What we have to avoid is preventing spaces outside schools from being used for parking when the children are not attending schools—during school holidays, weekends and those sorts of times. I propose to have this experiment to enable us to judge the restrictions that we can impose on parking outside schools at times when children are likely to be going in and coming out.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that experiments in this matter have been going on for many years and have never led to any satisfactory conclusion? Can he assure us that on this occasion the experiment will really be worth while and that action will follow?

I hope that this experiment will be the exception to the rule.

Could the right hon. Gentleman make clear what is the object of the experiment? If it is to enable children to cross the road outside their schools, will he bear in mind that this is not always the safest place for them to do so? Very often it is better for them to go to a proper pedestrian crossing nearby.

It is not just a question of children crossing the road outside schools. It is a matter of children running out of school, off the kerb and on to the highway, when vehicles are parked there, and the driver of a moving vehicle having his view obscured with the result that a fatal accident occurs. A good many accidents have occurred as a result of ice-cream vans being parked near school premises and children stepping out from behind them into the road. These matters are worthy of full consideration and I am doing this as quickly as I can.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will introduce a scheme of limited exemption from parking regulations for registered disabled drivers.

Local authorities operating parking schemes already have powers to grant exemption to severely disabled drivers from charges and time limits. The police everywhere normally exercise discretion in favour of disabled drivers displaying badges issued by local authorities under the scheme sponsored by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

Would the hon. Gentleman make certain that disabled drivers are well aware of this position? Would he not agree that a disabled driver who is unable to get somewhere near the place to which he is going has first the difficulty of walking there and then has the difficulty of going back and moving his car at the end of that time? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that cases have been brought to my attention where the information given by the hon. Gentleman has not been brought to the notice of disabled drivers? Will he see that this is done?

We are completely sympathetic to what the hon. Member says. I hope that this Question and Answer will have done something to give publicity to the subject. It is a matter for the exercise of discretion on the part of local authorities and the police. We hope that that discretion will be exercised in favour of disabled drivers.

Will the hon. Gentleman ask his right hon. Friend to consider approaching local authorities once again, and particularly those that have not made any concessions under the scheme, to consider whether they will do so? Will he not agree that this scheme, introduced three years ago, has on the whole been of great benefit.

We are certainly prepared to consider the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion. It is a matter for the local authorities and we do not want to keep directing them about exercising discretion of this kind, but if there is evidence that action is not taken to exercise discretion in favour of disabled drivers we will certainly take the matter up.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that most of these civilian disabled have no pensions from public funds arid that they take pride in earning their living and that by the very nature of their complaint that living is largely earned in offices? Is he aware that we are making it quite impossible for these disabled who are working hard in earning a living to reach the offices where they work?

If there is difficulty we shall be glad to have the evidence and see what can be done. We are doing everything possible to take into account the needs of disabled drivers. It is a matter for the local authorities but if evidence of that kind exists we shall be glad to receive it and to take the matter up with them.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) when he intends to define the boundaries of the regions for his regional transport plans;

asked the Minister of Transport what regional transport surveys he proposes to institute; and how long he expects the surveys to take.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects to produce a regional transport plan for Eastern Scotland; whom he proposes to consult during the preparation of this plan; and if he will make a statement.

The planning of transport in the regions will be part of the regional economic planning, the arrangements for which were announced by my right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State on 10th December. My Department will be taking a full part in the work of the regional planning boards. The boundaries for transport planning will be the same as for economic planning generally in so far as transport can be planned regionally. Whether more intensive studies may be needed in particular areas will be decided in the light of progress made by the Boards and my Department on transport problems generally.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what body or organisation will carry out these transport surveys and when he thinks this task will be completed? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the Chippenham area the traffic situation will become a great deal worse when the Severn Bridge has been completed? Will he give us some assurance that he will accelerate the construction of the M4, which runs through my constituency?

I have answered a number of Questions together and they raise very general issues. It is a bit much to ask me to extend the matter now in hand and speak about work on the M4. To go back to the general question raised earlier in the hon. Member's supplementary question, in the working out of economic plans in the regions it is of the utmost importance that transport considerations be taken fully into account. The making of a transport plan is essential to the making of an economic plan in a region, but it would be very foolish to endeavour to make a transport plan in isolation. We must, therefore, have these economic plans, with experts on transport taking a full part in their making.

Will there be any form of integration with a transport overlord having some say in this matter? How much integration will there be between each section in a regional plan and how far will this have central direction, perhaps from the Ministry of Transport?

There is another Question later on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the First Secretary indicated that regional plans for eastern Scotland are unlikely to be ready before the middle of next year? Is the right hon. Gentleman now indicating that the whole question of possible railway closures in this area will not be decided until regional plans are published, in other words, that there will be a further six months of uncertainty?

Not at all. It is my duty to consider each railway closure proposal as it comes forward after I have had a report from the T.U.C.C. and have consulted those of my right hon. Friends who inevitably have an interest in these matters. It is only where we decide, for example, that if effect is given to a closure it would prejudice the further consideration of the needs of that area that we would refuse to consent on those grounds. It might be that we would refuse to consent to closures on other grounds, and it might be that we would consent, but these things have to be looked at on their merits and I hope to do this without undue delay.

Does not what the right hon. Gentleman has said about railway closures mean that there is no change at all in policy for the closure of railways under this Government from what it was under the previous Government?

I am hoping within a few days to issue a statement about the results of the examination which I have made of closure proposals since I took office. I am quite convinced that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate at once when he sees this statement that there is a very different result with a different Government in office.

Do my right hon. Friend's answers to these questions imply that although the previous Government produced economic plans, for example for central Scotland, they did not formulate or begin to formulate regional transport plans to go along with those economic plans? Is that what my right hon. Friend means?

I do not think that the previous Administration took this matter far enough. I do not think that they examined the transport requirements of regions when they considered economic plans. In any case, the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galbraith) will shortly see the outcome of our considerations.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) what advice he has received from the Nationalised Transport Advisory Council set up by Section 55 of the Transport Act, 1962, for the purpose of advising him on questions relating to the co-ordination of nationalised transport undertakings; and if he will make a statement;

asked the Minister of Transport if he has now decided who is to be chairman of the Nationalised Transport Advisory Council.

I have not as yet sought the advice of the Nationalised Transport Advisory Council. As I told the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke) on 16th December, I will make a statement about its future as soon as I am ready to do so.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recollect that, when his party was in opposition, it frequently complained that the Conservative Government were not co-ordinating nationalised transport policies? Is it not, therefore, astonishing, if that view was correct, that the new Government have done nothing about making use of the provision of the Act which has been in existence since 1962 and which could have been operated at any time?

When we were in opposition we frequently criticised the Conservative Government for their lack of interest in bringing about transport co-ordination generally. It is true that the right hon. Member for Wallasey (Mr. Marples) had his Advisory Council under the Act, but it met only four times under his chairmanship. I am now getting down to the job of making a plan for transport co-ordination generally, which will obviously take me outside the scope of the present Advisory Council. However, I will, as I find it necessary so to do, call meetings of the Council.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recall that I have been good enough to put down four Questions to him in four weeks about who the new chairman of this very important body is to be? Is he further aware that, on each occasion, he has given a dusty answer? We are rather bewildered by all these rumours that Dr. Beeching is to be the new chairman and we do not know whether or not they are true. Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that, since our dynamic new Government came to power, this very important body in nationalised transport has not been called together to advise the Minister?

Order. This seems a little eloquent by way of a supplementary question. Perhaps the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke) will bring it to an end.

I am sorry that the hon. Member should be so confused about the future of the Advisory Council and about who will be its chairman. I have no immediate intention of changing the identity of the Chairman of the Council, who is myself. I have, incidentally, on a number of occasions in the past two months met the chairmen of all the nationalised transport undertakings.

On all these matters, is the right hon. Gentleman still waiting for Beeching? When are we to have an end to the pantomime of disclosures and semi-disclosures dropped through the Press week after week without a statement to this House?

There has been much speculation in the Press in the last few weeks and a lot of it has been embarrassing to me. I do not know whether that speculation is based on disclosures or semi-disclosures. I shall do my best, subject to your permission, Mr. Speaker, to put an end to speculation by making a statement at the end of Question Time.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will introduce legislation to ensure that, when a motorist is overcome by the approach of sleep from whatever cause and pulls into the side of the road to rest, he will not thereby render himself liable to prosecution.

No, Sir. I am not aware of any reasons for introducing legislation on this subject.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I asked this Question because recently a motorist was prosecuted for pulling into the side of the road and going to sleep in the back of his car when he felt too tired to drive on? This does happen from time to time. Even if the fatigue in such cases is the lamentable result of a surfeit of alcohol, surely the safest and most sensible thing to do is to pull up? If the law takes such drivers to task for doing so, is not the law an ass?

This is something for the exercise of common sense rather than legislation. We cannot legislate to relieve people of the liabilities of creating obstruction on the roads. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] That is what is implied. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Obviously, motorists must exercise their judgment if they are being overcome by fatigue and move off the main highway on to some place in which they are not creating an obstruction but where they can nevertheless have a rest. This matter is best left to the judgment of motorists.

There was no question of obstruction in the case I quoted.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is a genuine legal difficulty in this respect? Under the Motorway Regulations and the Clearway Orders it is illegal for a motorist who is overtired and wants to park on the verge for a little rest to do so, even if he is not causing an obstruction? I appreciate that this is a difficult subject, but would not my hon. Friend give it further consideration?

I am willing to do that but there are a number of difficulties. It is suggested that we take legislative action but there are places on these highways where a motorist is permitted to draw off and go to sleep in the back of the car if he can. There are ways and means whereby he can rest without causing an obstruction. In view of the opinions expressed, however, we will certainly give this further consideration.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the law allows a motorist to pull into a lay-by on a main road and sleep? If the law does not allow it, will the hon. Gentleman introduce legislation to clarify the position?

I would have thought myself that this was something that we should leave to the motorist, to exercise good judgment in the interests of himself and of other motorists by finding the best place to rest without causing obstruction. However, as I have said, we will consider these representations again. The difficulties must not be under-estimated.

asked the Minister of Transport what criteria, other than those already announced by his predecessor, he intends to use when making decisions on Transport Users' Consultative Committee reports on proposed rail closures.

As my right hon. Friend explained to the House on 4th November, he proposes to take more account of the wider social and economic consequences of rail closures than did his predecessor.

Will the Joint Parliamentary Secretary give some details? This really means that in the case of those branch lines in respect of which notice of closure has been given by the Railways Board and in respect of which a T.U.C.C. inquiry is to be held, there is to be no change whatsoever. Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the letter which was sent to a constituent of mine in Sidmouth, where the T.U.C.C. is due to sit at the end of January, I believe, which stated that the closure of that line would be postponed until there was a regional survey, was in fact another breach of promise by the Government?

No, Sir. There has been no breach of promise. I cannot prejudge my right hon. Friend's consideration of any particular T.U.C.C. report. We shall consider any T.U.C.C. report which has a bearing on the hardship involved, but we shall also consider the wider question of the social costs and benefits of transport in these areas.

Could the hon. Gentleman be a little more specific? What does he mean by "take more account of the wider social consequences"? What more could be done? [Laughter.] It is all very well for hon. Members opposite to laugh, but what more could be done than taking account of industrial development, housing, population growth, the pattern of road transport and the condition of the roads? What further social considerations can the Minister take into account? Will he tell the House in detail?

It is not a question of what could be done. The Government are establishing a network of regional planning boards and councils in order to survey comprehensively all these questions in relation to the future population and economic needs of the areas. These are the matters that we are taking into account.

How long does it take the Ministry to come to a decision when, as in the case of East Brixton station, the Transport Users' Consultative Committee recommended that the station should not be closed?

How long it takes depends upon the complexity of the issues that may be involved. Again, I do not want to prejudge any particular case. We shall give to each case the amount of consideration that it warrants.

Are we to understand that the closures are not to take place until the planning boards and councils have done their work? Otherwise they are absolutely irrelevant.

I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman heard my right hon. Friend's statement on 4th November setting out clearly the criteria which we are applying and the fact that we will judge whether a proposed closure is major by taking into account the regional needs.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary be precise and tell us of one single criterion which is additional to what there was before?

The criterion which is additional is the assessment of social costs and benefits and the regional transport needs.

But these are general terms. Will the hon. Gentleman tell us precisely what the difference is, instead of talking in general terms which mean absolutely nothing?

rose—

That has been asked before. Mr. Strauss.

Is it not a fact that while the criteria which the Government will consider are exactly the same as previously, the Minister will give far greater weight to these social considerations than the previous Government did?

I am sorry to be repetitious, but I must say again that we are introducing as a criterion the needs of regional planning on a comprehensive basis; we are looking not merely at one form of transport and one system of accountancy for one form of transport, but at all the forms of transport in relation to one another, taking into account the social costs and benefits involved.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will issue a general direction to the Railways Board to notify him as soon as possible of major closure proposals, in order that regional surveys can be instituted without delay.

No, Sir. The institution of work in connection with regional planning is not dependent on the publication of closure proposals by the Board though, as I explained in my statement on 4th November, regional planning considerations will be taken into account in deciding whether passenger closure proposals should proceed through the full statutory procedure.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his maiden statement as Minister caused a great deal of doubt whether there was any change of policy regarding rail closures by his Government compared with the previous Government? Would he not agree that it is essential that we should have this clarified, preferably not by a statement made on Christmas morning? It is very much to be hoped that the matter will be speeded up. That is the reason for my Question.

I shall speed it up all I can. I shall not make a statement on Christmas morning. The hon. Gentleman has asked me to give a direction to the Board which would require it to decide which were major closures and which were not. Clearly, it is impossible for the Board to decide that.

As my hon. Friend's question refers to regional surveys, would the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the question which was put to him, on Question No. 15, by my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Mr. Awdry)—namely, what bodies are to do this work in the respective regions? Until we know this and until they are set up, there is bound to be continuing uncertainty.

If I were to respond to the request made just now, I should have thought that I would be increasing the uncertainty. Until the regional boards are set up and until the persons who are to serve on them are identified, clearly it is impossible for me to say who will be on the boards and who will represent transport interests on them. My Ministry will, of course, be represented on them. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are treating the matter with the utmost seriousness. If the House will be patient a little longer, we shall get the boards established, and then it will be seen that the transport requirements of the region are adequately safeguarded as the boards get down to work.

Is the right hon. Gentleman going to make his statement to the House, and if not, why not?

The statement that I said I would issue within a few days will be about closures. These statements have not been made to the House in the past. Normally they have been made by the Railways Board and not by the Minister. All I have indicated is that I have been making a few decisions and think it proper that I should let the public know what the decisions are by means of putting out a statement. On the other hand, I could just leave it to the Railways Board, as my predecessor did.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give an assurance that, when authorising railway closures in respect of which a Transport Users' Consultative Committee has found that hardship will result by depriving school children of transport to school, he will make it a condition of his assent to the closure that adequate and comparable alternative transport will be provided by the Railways Board.

Responsibility for providing transport to the nearest school for children living beyond walking distance rests on the local education authority. When considering a proposed closure, my right hon. Friend will consult the Secretaries of State for Education and Science and for Scotland as necessary, and will take into account any hardship it might cause to school children and any additional cost to public funds of providing alternative arrangements.

Is the hon. Member aware that when the Railways Board instituted recent inquiries in the south-west of England it stated that it considered it to be the responsibility of the local authority and not the Board's responsibility to provide alternative accommodation for school children? In view of the fact that Section 56 of the Transport Act contemplates the provision of alternative services and most certainly does not differentiate between the various types of user of the railways, is not this indefensible?

No Sir. But, of course, I am completely sympathetic with what the hon. Member said, which is that the Railways Board has responsibility only for the railways services and that we have the responsibility for providing adequate transport arrangements. I can assure the hon. Member that in considering any report on this matter, including hardship to school children, we shall ensure that adequate transport arrangements are made, whether by rail or by some other form of transport.

asked the Minister of Transport what study he has made of the report of the Transport Users' Consultative Committee and the memorandum submitted by the Isle of Wight County Council on the Isle of Wight railways; and if he has now made a decision on their future.

We cannot complete our study of the Railways Board's closure proposals until we have received certain essential information from the Board. Whatever my right hon. Friend's final decision may be, however, I can assure the hon. Member that the services will still be in operation throughout next summer.

That last remark is at least a comfort for next year, but does not the hon. Gentleman think it disgraceful that a decision has not yet been made, particularly bearing in mind that the Labour candidate in the Isle of Wight at the General Election gave an assurance that if we had a Labour Government the Isle of Wight railways would not be closed? Is not this another example of a breach of promise by hon. Gentlemen opposite?

The hon. Gentleman is getting a little ahead of himself and of us. I am not prejudging anything about our consideration of the report. That fact is that it had already gone through the statutory procedure and so we had an obligation to consider it and discuss it with the Railways Board, and the hon. Gentleman will know that that is a complicated matter. I hope he will be reassured by the fact that we have relieved anxiety in the Isle of Wight by stating that we have taken a decision to keep the services in operation throughout next summer.

asked the Minister of Transport what sums he estimates will be advanced by him to the Railways Board in this and in the coming financial year in respect of the project for liner trains.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects the Beeching Report proposals for liner freight trains to be implemented; and if he will make a statement.

The Railways Board hopes to introduce the first experimental liner trains next summer, if early agreement is reached with the unions on the principle of "open" depots. My predecessor approved investment of £6 million for liner trains; of this about £700,000 will be spent in 1964. Investment for 1965 will depend on the date of introduction of the services.

Is there anything which the right hon. Gentleman can do, or is doing, to help the Railways Board in obtaining the conditions necessary to initiate this very important scheme?

I have discussed this very important scheme with the Chairman of the Railways Board. He is continuing his discussions with the unions. I believe that it is his wish that I should not intervene in those discussions at the present time. I hope that they will be brought to a satisfactory conclusion so that the liner trains can start next summer as planned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people recognise the difficulties involved in this case between the Railways Board and the unions and will be grateful to know that there is a possibility of these liner trains starting next summer? While I appreciate the difficulty in which the right hon. Gentleman is placed, may I ask him to do all in his power to promote an agreement between the unions and the Board on this subject?

If it seems necessary for me to "barge in" I will do so, but at the moment I would prefer to allow the Railways Board and the unions to carry on their discussions.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will issue a general direction, in the public interest, to the Railways Board to undertake a review of the land they hold, with a view to securing the release of the maximum amount of land for municipal housing purposes.

It would not be appropriate for me to issue such a direction. In general the disposal of surplus railway land is a matter within the management responsibility of the British Railways Board.

While thanking the Minister for that Answer, may I ask him whether he is aware that in the Metropolitan area virtually the only available building land which does not need a house to be pulled down in order to build municipal housing on it is railway land? Can he do anything at all to speed up the release of this land for municipal housing purposes, particularly in the Metropolis?

I very much hope that the announcement made the other day about the restriction on office building in London will make it clear to the Railways Board, among others, that the very expensive and valuable land which it has available for development will not be developed for the purposes of building offices, and that it may therefore become available for the building of houses.

But is that wise from the transport point of view? Surely if the railways have land available near a railway station, that is precisely the land which ought to be used for building offices, from a transport point of view? Will the right hon. Gentleman have a few words with the First Secretary of State to see whether it is possible to make some relaxation of the restrictions so that the railways may build offices, if they choose to do so, on land near railway stations?

It would ease the commuter problem very considerably if employment were provided very close to the terminal point at which the workers disembark. I know that from this point of view the Railways Board is actively considering to what extent it can have development above railway stations as well as on railway lines nearby. But a great deal of the land which includes railway lines, which my hon. Friend suggested could be made available for housing, is not alongside railway stations at all.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that before any land is released by the Railways Board, full consideration has been given to using the land near stations for car parking facilities for people using the railways? Does he realise that this is a considerable problem in areas outside London? The railways are attempting to encourage people to use commuter services, but these people have to block up many streets by car parking before they can get to the stations.

The hon. Member makes a very good point. It is very desirable that some of these open spaces which are created by the demolition of properties alongside railway stations, should provide accommodation for car parking—I should have thought in many cases multi-storey car parks. That is a very desirable development, but I do not want to say more than I have said because the disposal of the land is a matter for the Railways Board.

asked the Minister of Transport when he will make a statement about the future of the Darlington to Richmond railway line.

Within the next few days.

Does not the Minister consider that from last January until now is rather a long time, since that is when the transport users' consultative committee last met to consider the matter? Will he give the same assurance as my hon. Friend gave that, as the British Transport Commission admitted £97,000 of receipts to the transport consultative committee, he will at least see me before a decision is taken?

I am very willing to have a brief word with the hon. Member and I should like to have a word with him today if he could find that convenient, because I am on the point of reaching a decision. I have been discussing this closure with the Board only this week, and I want now to reach a decision. The hon. Member mentioned last January. I would point out that the transport users' consultative committee's report was received in March of this year.

Are we to gather that this is not a major closure and is not a decision in arriving at which he is dependent upon any transport survey or plan for the region?

No. The right hon. Gentleman should not draw any such conclusion from what I have just said.

:Why is it not coming under the survey?

The hon. Member must not confuse the issue. I have said that I have to take decisions on these matters on their merits, and that I am seeking to do. I thought that I had gone pretty far in giving the hon. Member an invitation to see me today. I can tell him that I will make a decision within a few days.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will now sanction the commencement of the preparation of detailed plans for the Ombersley by-pass on the A.449 road.

No, Sir. To do so would mean diverting resources from other more urgent road schemes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that after the completion of the northern link in February there will be a considerable increase in traffic on the A.449 and there will be several miles of dual carriageway on either side of this village which has a very narrow street through it? Is he aware that this will make it one of the most dangerous villages in the Midlands? Will he examine it again?

The hon. Member will recognise my difficulty. The trunk road programme was published in June this year by my predecessor and this scheme was not included. Our economic and financial resources are very heavily committed and if I were now to bring forward this scheme it would have to be at the expense of some other scheme. I do not want to hold out any hope that I will be able to do that.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will make a statement on the conclusions he has reached from the experiments made in the use of compulsory pedestrian crossings.

The results of the pedestrian control experiment in London require very careful study before conclusions can be reached. This is proceeding. I will make a statement as soon as possible

Could the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea of how long is "as soon as possible"?

"As soon as possible" must be rather soon, because the experimental regulations run out at the end of March, which is not very far away. "As soon as possible" must be before then.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether in connection with this matter he intends to abandon the Panda crossing system which has proved a complete failure?

I do not want to prejudge what I may do when I make a statement a little later.

asked the Minister of Transport when the screens will be re-erected on the M.1 motorway to prevent accidents caused by sudden blinding from headlights.

These temporary hessian screens were designed to simulate hedges and shrubs in order to provide information about the optimum height and spacing for central reserve planting to reduce the effect of dazzle. We now have this information and we do not intend to re-erect the screens. The next part of the experiment, about to start on M.2, is to plant various shrubs to see how they stand up to motorway conditions. On M.1 we still have the experiment with metal mesh screen as an anti-dazzle device.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that this is the first time that there has been a retrograde step in the construction of things on the motorway, and that now a crash barrier is all the more necessary since there are likely to be more crashes on the M.1 as a result of the removal of the screens, which ought to be made permanent?

No, Sir; we do not regard this as a retrograde step. All these measures have been regarded in the past, and are still regarded, as experimental. As I have said, a number of experiments have been proceeding from which conclusions have been drawn, but without more information we cannot arrive at final conclusions about what we should do in the future.

Is there not a great deal of public anxiety that these things in connection with the M.1 move so slowly? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the matter of headlights has been discussed for years? Also, what thought has been given to the prevention of accidents by reason of sudden fog on the M.1?

That is another question. I regret that these things are moving slowly. These experiments are very difficult. There is a conflict of view and evidence about the best measures to take to persuade motorists themselves to reduce dazzle as well as about the best possible form of central reservation. However, we shall continue with a number of experiments, and I hope that we shall be able to speed up the process of arriving at conclusions.

Would my hon. Friend agree that the first retrograde step on motorways was when one of his predecessors refused the extra 1 per cent. capital cost to illuminate them, and that if that had been done there would have been no question of any anti-dazzle device being necessary?

My hon. Friend's supplementary question goes a good deal wider than the original Question and requires some research. I will do the necessary research, and if he will table a further question, I will answer it.

asked the Minister of Transport what proposals he has for installing a controlled pedestrian crossing with lights in the Wokingham Road at Reading.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the need for a controlled pedestrian crossing in the Wokingham Road at Reading; and what action he proposes to take to provide it.

We are aware of the representations that have been made for a signal-controlled pedestrian crossing here but on present information a crossing is not justified. However, a comprehensive review of pedestrian crossing policy will take place during the coming year. My right hon. Friend hopes to be able to make an announcement about this shortly.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that that reply will inevitably cause disappointment in the part of Reading to which the Question refers? Will he take into account the very restrained and responsible representations which have been made, particularly by the body of parents represented in the school which is very much affected? Does he not feel that this is a very special case in the Borough of Reading which ought to be dealt with ahead of the major review that he has indicated will take place?

The Answer that I have given is based on the information that we have had to date. We appreciate the local feeling on this subject. Our representatives are awaiting certain new information from the Reading Borough Council about traffic flows and the problem at this place, and it may be that in the light of that information we shall take a different view. On the basis of our study of the traffic flows at the moment we consider that a pedestrian crossing is not justified, but when we receive the new information I will let the hon. Gentleman know the results of our further study.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that the information that he requires from the Reading Borough Council has been sent to his Ministry? Does he realise that, although the original application was turned down in February of this year, because of the growth of public feeling the council resubmitted the application? Would he, therefore, be willing to receive a deputation of people from Reading who feel so terribly strongly about this situation in an area where accidents happen very regularly?

I appreciate the anxiety. I think the best thing would be for us first of all to consider the new information which has not yet been studied and discuss the matter further with Reading Borough Council. We shall be very pleased to receive a deputation if the matter continues to be felt unsatisfactory.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress is being made in his department's efforts to persuade local authorities in the London and Greater London area to provide off-street parking facilities for heavy lorries.

My Department has continued to encourage local authorities. I understand that the City of London now has certain plans but that otherwise only one other authority is considering what might be done. Clearly much more is needed. Public off-street parking for about 1,200 lorries has so far been provided commercially. I have no powers to provide lorry parks but the Greater London Council will have. I hope that it will be prepared to use them where appropriate and to encourage the boroughs to meet more local needs.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the problem is increasing weekly and that more and more lorries are parking in residential roads in Greater London, causing grave embarrassment to local people who are suffering considerable loss of amenity value? Is it not time that greater urgency was initiated by the Ministry?

These lorries parking in residential streets are a very great nuisance. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that I have no legislative power to do anything about it. I cannot provide the car parks for off-street parking for lorries. I think that we could do very much more than has been done so far, however. I am willing to have discussions with the local authorities, as I have said before, and I am making an appeal to the Greater London Council to do a great deal more than has been done hitherto. I will do all I can to bring pressure to bear on the local authorities to provide these facilities.

asked the Minister of Transport how many times at peak periods in the morning and evening during the past six months the Barton swing bridge has been closed to road traffic.

In the six months April to September this year, the bridge was closed on 98 occasions in the morning peak and 97 in the evening peak.

In view of his Answer, will the Minister give an assurance that he will review the arrangements for the swinging of this bridge, because thousands of people are held up going to and from work and traffic congestion extends to many towns in the area? Is he aware that this area supplies workers for the Trafford Park Estate in Manchester?

If my hon. Friend will let me have information to show that very serious delays are being caused, I shall most certainly be willing to have another look at the matter. My information is that the average delay to traffic caused by the opening and closing of this bridge is about five minutes and that considerable restriction is put upon the operators of the canal as to the occasions on which the bridge may be opened. But the Manchester Ship Canal is a rather important waterway in this country. and it is important that vessels should be able to use it. I should be glad if my hon. Friend would give me evidence on which I might have a further review of this matter made.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will now reconsider the building of a Humber bridge, so as to open up many of the Eastern Counties and provide an alternative north-south route.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kingston-upon-Hull, East (Commander Pursey) on 9th December.

Does that reply mean that the Minister is considering the Humber bridge as a national project? Is he aware that the total volume of goods passing through Hull Docks is over £500 million a year and that £17 million has been spent on their modernisation? In view of the fact that it is thought that the bridge will cost far less than the original estimate, does he not agree that it ranks for consideration as a national rather than a regional project?

It is a considerable project, and that is why it will inevitably take some time to consider all the traffic and costs figures which the Humber Bridge Board has supplied. But we take the matter very seriously. It is a project which may have tremendous potentiality. We will speed up the study as quickly as possible and let the Board and hon. Members know the results of our study as soon as possible.

Would the hon. Member discuss with the Minister of Power my suggestion that the cost of this highway might be shared between the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Power by building across the Humber a barrage by which electricity could be generated? Traffic could be carried on top of the barrage. Would he discuss that with the Minister of Power?

We are always glad to share the cost of these enormously expensive projects with someone else. I will certainly have a word with the Minister of Power about it.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware of the contribution made to export earnings by the tourist industry in Dorset and south-west England; and whether in view of this he will devote additional resources towards the provision of trunk roads in the area.

This is already being done, to the extent compatible with the many other important demands upon the road programme.

Is the Minister aware that in summer time the population in these areas is trebled or quadrupled and that traffic along the main trunk roads for many hours in August is reduced to a speed below that of a horse and cart? Does he agree that that image is not desirable? While I understand his difficulties, will he bear in mind the thought that Dorset is not getting its fair share of what it is proposed to spend nationally on roads?

We are aware of the considerable seasonal problem. As the hon. Member may have seen, there was a debate on the Adjournment on 14th December, in which I laid out the not-inconsiderable programme which we are carrying out and which is projected for the next few years on the A.38 and the A.30. We are very much aware, from representations which we have received, of the needs of the area. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that that part of the country will get its fair share of the allocation.