I beg to present a humble Petition signed by 11,704 persons, including the joint trade union committee of A.E.I. representing staff and manual workers of A.E.I., traders, shopkeepers, residents and employees of industry of many London boroughs, Harlow New Town, towns and boroughs in the Home Counties and also Hartlepools, Coventry, Manchester and Rugby.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps she is taking to prevent possible dislocation of industrial development in expanding towns, due to the effect of the 100-mile limit proposed for quantity licensing of heavy goods vehicles.

There is no ban on heavy lorries going over 100 miles. Unless rail is at least as cheap, speedy and reliable as road, quantity licences will be granted. The system will thus ensure that goods move by the most economic means; this should bring benefits to the places my hon. Friend mentions.

Is my hon. Friend aware that transport to and from London to the outlying areas of East Anglia is of the greatest importance to developing industry, and that there have been some fears that firms might be tempted to move inside areas which appear to be less than 100 miles from London? Will he give an assurance that the radius from London which covers King's Lynn rather than road mileage will be counted?

I assure my hon. Friend that there is no ground for anxiety. According to the terms of the Bill, mileage is counted in a straight line, and I understand that King's Lynn is 90 miles from central London. Almost the whole of the area around London would be excluded, and I therefore give my hon. Friend that assurance.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider, however, that the businessmen of King's Lynn are better at deciding the most economical form of transport?

We firmly believe that, where it is able to offer a competitive service, rail should carry this kind of traffic.

asked the Minister of Transport what is her estimate of the National Freight Corporation's profit or losses for 1968 to 1969 and 1969 to 1970.

We expect the National Freight Corporation to be capable of operating on a financially viable basis from the outset, but it must be for the Corporation itself to make detailed revenue forecasts.

What will be the yearly cost of this new bureaucracy?

I am not sure what the hon. Gentleman is talking about. We are discussing some of these matters in detail on the Transport Bill, but these are assets already in existence which are being transferred to the National Freight Corporation. For example, where they hold assets of the Transport Holding Company, it will be for the managers of the new concern to make the most successful financial results from their opportunities

asked the Minister of Transport why, in fixing the charge for the removal of abandoned vehicles and those illegally or obstructively parked, she made no distinction between the deliberate intent to abandon permanently and the temporary and inadvertent nuisance caused in the other cases.

The law distinguishes between these offences and provides widely different penalties for them. The removal charge is intended only to cover the cost of removing the vehicle, and this is unaffected by the intention of the person leaving it.

Yes, but would the hon. Gentleman not agree that it appears that the owners of badly parked cars are now subsidising the owners of vehicles deliberately left on the public highway?

No, Sir. The Public Accounts Committee had looked into this and it was suggested that the cost of removals should be increased to the present rate of, I think, £4 10s. in London and Birmingham and £4 elsewhere except motorways. The charge is intended to cover the actual cost of removal of the vehicle and while occasionally a "non-runner" is more expensive to remove than a "runner," there is sometimes great difficulty with a "runner" because it has an anti-theft device.

But will my hon. Friend try to even out the varying charges in the same town for police removal, which is separate from local authority removal? May we at least have some uniformity here?

I will look into this. I think that there is a distinction between the police and the local authority, in that the latter may know that certain vehicles are completely abandoned, whereas the police are merely removing a vehicle which is an obstruction. There is a difference.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she is now in a position to make a statement on the progress of the discussions she is having on the question of an inquiry into the Thames lighterage industry.

As I have explained to my hon. Friend, we have examined his suggestion for an independent inquiry into the lighterage trade, but have concluded that it would not only cut across investigations now in progress into particular aspects but might also inhibit action on the most urgent problems facing the trade.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's reply and the consideration which he has given to my Motion on the subject, but would he not agree that it would be rather dangerous to leave the future of the Thames lighterage industry to the new Ports Authority, because, if it is anything like the present P.L.A., it will be anti-lighterage? Would he use his good offices in the near future to discuss with both sides the short-term as well as the long-term problems of the industry?

Yes, Sir. I am prepared to do that. In fact, one of our reasons for not accepting my hon. Friend's suggestion for an independent inquiry is that we think that more progress could be made by direct discussions with the port authorities and those responsible for the lighterage trade. I should be glad to consider any proposals where we can help.

asked the Minister of Transport what investigations her department is carrying out into the reduction in tyre failure and increased safety produced by filling tyres with nitrogen; and what steps she is taking to develop the use of nitrogen-filled tyres.

We are seeking more information on the basis of reports, originating in America, that nitrogen filling of tyres might reduce tyre failures. At present we have no evidence to suggest that this is likely to be an effective and practical means of making tyres safer.

But would my hon. Friend not accept that the American experiments suggested that, once internal oxidation is reduced, the rate of tyre failure falls appreciably and that there is no suggestion that the cost of nitrogen filling of tyres would be prohibited?

There has been a suggestion from America that nitrogen filling of tyres would reduce the oxidation of the rubber, but at present we are making only preliminary inquiries to see how effective this may be. If those inquiries prove hopeful, we will institute some research. As to tyres and tyre safety, the new Regulations introduced by my right hon. Friend which come into effect on 1st April are a practical step in this direction.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps her Department is taking to encourage drivers to carry children in the rear seats of cars and to develop and extend the use of rear-seat harnesses for children.

I am including special publicity on television about this in my road safety campaign for this summer. I am also considering how best it can be emphasised more widely as part of our efforts to reduce accidents, particularly to children.

Would my right hon. Friend accept that, while the House welcomes this, 70 per cent. of serious accidents could have been avoided by the use of children's harness in rear seats, which is now available, and that this is a matter of urgency? Is she aware that some countries, like Italy, are introducing legislation to prevent children from being carried in the front seats of cars?

I am well aware of the risks which parents take with their children's lives in the practice of having the children in the front seats—sometimes even a baby on a mother's lap. I am very anxious to discourage this. This is why we are making a special feature of this matter in the publicity campaign which we will launch on a wide scale this summer.

asked the Minister of Transport when Bournemouth will be affected by her proposals to set up Passenger Transport Authorities throughout the country.

As my right hon. Friend said in the White Paper on Public Transport and Traffic, we will consider the establishment of Passenger Transport Authorities outside the conurbations when the future shape of local government is clearer.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that people who use public transport on the South Coast would prefer the Minister to concentrate on improving British Rail commuter services rather than introducing these authorities, with an inevitable increase in fares and a burden on the rates?

There is no inevitable increase in fares. The main purpose of establishing these authorities is to get the co-ordination and greater efficiency which I imagine the hon. Member wishes to see. But, meantime, matters are being investigated by the regional passenger transport co-ordinating committees of the Planning Councils. If the hon. Gentleman has any problems, I suggest that he puts them to those committees.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Conservative-controlled Southampton council has welcomed the new Passenger Transport Authority for the area?

asked the Minister of Transport how many representations and letters she has received to date against the Transport Bill.

asked the Minister of Transport how many communications have been received by her Department since 1st January, 1968, on the Transport Bill; and what percentage of this total gave support to the provisions of the Bill.

In view of the expensive campaign against the Bill conducted by the Conservative Party and other groups, it is not surprising that I have received a large number of letters, many in a standard form, protesting against the Bill. They include some hundreds of copies of a largely incomprehensible coupon from a newspaper. I have, however, without any prompting, also received many letters supporting the Bill generally, although some of these have criticised specific provisions.

How many of them have protested against the disastrous rise in costs? For example, does the right hon. Lady think it right for a small shipbuilder in East Anglia to pay a levy of £400 in going from East Anglia to Manchester when the boat is being exported? What is she doing about this matter?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman keeps a little more abreast of the news. Obviously he is referring to parts of the Bill which are no longer in it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the most critical road hauliers are the inefficient ones and that among the industrialists in Scotland there is now general acceptance of the Bill as recently modified?

I think that there is now a growing appreciation by the road haulage industry that many of the wild attacks which have been made on the Bill are totally insubstantiable. I am confident that as the Bill comes into operation these absurd, exaggerated fears will die away and that the benefits of the Bill will be appreciated, even by road hauliers.

Following on the right hon. Lady's swallowing of her own words, could she tell us the cost of printing the standard reply to the many standard and non-standard letters?

Far from there being a standard reply, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that very great care has been taken by my Department to circulate in reply, even to the coupons from the newspapers, the full details of the Bill, because the industry is doing itself harm by continuing to repeat complete misstatements of the position under the Bill.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) how many professional associations in Scotland have submitted written observations to her on the provisions of the Transport Bill; and if she will list them;

I have received a number of letters on the Bill from professional associations and local authorities in Scotland, but they are not separately filed and I could not justify the cost of separating them out and listing them.

Can my right hon. Friend inform the House whether trade unions in Scotland have been favourable to the Bill, since their members represent a very big part of the vote and of the interest in the Bill? Could she further tell the House whether this will give the local authorities the opportunity to provide a first-class service in the interests of the people of the respective areas?

Yes. Certainly the trade unions in Scotland have welcomed the Bill, and the Scottish T.U.C. has gone out of its way to say how big an improvement this will make both in the level of public transport and in the conditions of their members. As for the local authorities, on the whole their comments have been favourable to the Bill, and the establishment of the Scottish Transport Group is one of the biggest steps we could take to see that public transport in Scotland is under the control of local communities.

In view of the fact that the right hon. Lady considered, when she was proposing the abnormal loads and wear and tear taxes, that there was a real need to relieve Scotland of some of the £33 million involved, what relief does she consider Scotland will need from the extra £60 million of motor vehicle licences and fuel tax?

The hon. Member is aware that special representations were made from Scotland about the abnormal load charges. It was this which was the fear of industry in Scotland which has to carry these abnormal loads rather long distances. It was for that reason that I agreed to consider the exemption of the development areas, having Scotland very much in mind. In view of the fact that the Chancellor was imposing certain financial burdens on the road haulage industry in his Budget, I represented to him that the abnormal loads charge should be dropped, and I am very glad to say he agreed.

asked the Minister of Transport what representations she has received from interests in the Highlands and Islands relating to proposals in the Transport Bill; and what reply she has sent.

I have had a number of representations from hon. and right hon. Members, local authorities, firms and individuals, mainly about the proposals in Parts V and VI of the Bill. In replying and my Department have explained how these proposals will operate in the Highlands and Islands; but of course as the hon. Member knows I am not now proceeding with Part IV of the Bill.

Is the Minister aware that the Highland Development Board has recommended that the Islands be exempted from quantity licensing, and that local authorities in the Highlands are worried about the effects of the Government's proposals? Is she further aware that none of these public bodies is a member of the Road Haulage Association?

I am aware that the local authorities of the Highlands and Islands have accepted and, indeed, welcome the majority of the Bill—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—as well they might, in view of the financial assistance that the Government are giving for the first time to rural transport and in view of the other grants included in the Bill to help public transport in areas of this kind. As regards quantity licensing, it has been explained time and again, particularly to areas like the Highlands and Islands, that, where there are no rail services available, the quantity licensing proposals will not affect the road transport provisions.

While recognising that there are many aspects of the Bill which will be particularly beneficial to the Highlands, including those which my right hon. Friend has just mentioned, may I ask whether she is aware that there is concern in the remoter parts of the Highlands which are not served by rail services that the profitability of companies which are based on these parts is dependent to some extent on back loads from the south, and that if their requests for quantity licences are opposed by British Railways, it might have an extremely serious effect on them?

But I would assure my hon. Friend that where there are no rail services, quite clearly British Railways will not object, let alone be successful in objecting, to applications for road licences. It is a total misrepresentation of the purposes of the Bill to suggest, as some have, that quantity licensing will hit areas which have not got a good rail service. Obviously those areas will not be affected.

Will the Minister take note of her hon. Friend's point that these firms depend on return loads for which, under her system, they will be unable to obtain quantity licences?

It does not follow that there will be no licences for back loads. There are controls about back loads under the existing provisions. In fact, my provisions are a considerable liberalisation of the present quantity control. The problems of back loads will be considered on their merits by the independent licensing authorities.

asked the Minister of Transport what representations she has received from industry in Scotland on proposals in the Transport Bill; and what reply she has sent.

I have received representations from organisations and firms in Scotland about various aspects of the Transport Bill. In each case I have sent an appropriate reply.

Does the Minister realise that, however generous the licensing authority may be—and she has just indicated that they will be generous in certain areas—industry in Scotland, quite apart from road hauliers, views with profound anxiety the delays of several weeks involved in the application procedures, because 100 miles is a normal distance in Scotland and not a long one?

The delays of several weeks again are purely pieces of mythology. It depends entirely on whether the Railways Board issues an objection to an application at all. As Mr. Johnson, the Chairman of the Railways Board, has made clear, British Railways intend to be extremely co-operative and flexible in this matter and in many cases there will not be any objection.

The Minister seems to view all representations on this matter through rose-coloured spectacles and takes to herself only those parts of them which support her case. Is she aware that industry in Scotland feels threatened by the impact of this legislation on the most important part of its industrial position in the country, namely, transport costs?

I know that there have been anxieties, particularly about the abnormal load charge. Far from refusing to listen to representations, I have listened, and have said that they would have to be considered. I said that in areas like Scotland there was a case for the reconsideration of the abnormal loads charge. I agreed to reconsider it. It has now been dropped. I can only say that the fears about the effects of quantity licensing have been deliberately whipped up by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite.

asked the Minister of Transport what representations she has had from Perth and Angus Fruit Growers Limited regarding the road transport White Paper; and what reply she has sent.

The Perth and Angus Fruit Growers Limited wrote about the possible effect of the road transport proposals on the carriage of perishable goods. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of our reply.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in order to get flexibility and quality of service in the fruit trade, growers depend very much on road transport? In view of his right hon. Friend's assurances about and defences of the Transport Bill, can he assure these growers that they will not suffer extra costs and restrictions in providing the services that they are able to offer?

We are only concerned with the quantity licensing of lorries over 16 tons gross weight. If British Railways wish to object to an application, their criteria for doing so are that they can offer as good a service on the grounds of speed, reliability and cost. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that Clause 71 allows licensing authorities to grant short-term quantity licences immediately if required.

In the case of an emergency involving perishable goods, how does the hon. Gentleman fit in a fortnight's delay when applying for a quantity licence?

There is no 14-day delay. If the hon. Gentleman knows anything about licensing, he will know that over the years licensing authorities have been able to take speedy action in emergencies if necessary over the telephone.

asked the Minister of Transport when she expects to receive the report from the East Midlands Economic Planning Council on future passenger transport needs in the Nottingham area.

I understand that the Council is not preparing a separate report on passenger transport needs in the region but will deal with it as part of a general report which should be ready later in the year.

But is my right hon. Friend aware of the growing and continuing concern about the inadequacy of passenger transport in the Nottingham area following the closure of certain railway stations and the failure to provide adequate bus services? Would he not advise his right hon. Friend to designate the area for a P.T.A.?

The latter part of my hon. Friend's question will be considered by my right hon. Friend at a later date. I am aware of the urgency of this problem. We shall shortly be receiving the Planning Council's Report, which will deal with Nottingham's passenger transport needs. But my hon. Friend will be aware that the counties and county boroughs of Nottingham and Derby have now put in hand a separate study of their own to go into the whole question. Out of that, I hope that we shall get effective proposals for co-ordination.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she will give an assurance that the owners of houses in Bowring Park Road, Liverpool, that will not be purchased to make room for the South Lancashire Motorway, will be adequately compensated for the loss in the value of their property caused by the recommendation of her Department's North-West Road Construction Unit.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she will seek powers to enable her to make good the loss to owners of houses deleteriously affected by new road developments.

My right hon. Friend has received representations about the compensation law in relation to highways and these are being studied.

Will the Minister bear in mind that once an urban motorway is planned a blight descends on the whole area? Many people have invested all their savings in these houses. Will the hon. Gentleman consider getting the district valuer to determine a pre-development price so that the houses can be bought by the local authority?

We are aware of the problems to which the hon. Gentleman has drawn attention. We have now received an extremely complex document from the Chartered Land Societies and representations from others. These are now being studied by the appropriate Government Departments. As soon as we have the results of the study my right hon. Friend will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she has by now received the views of local authorities on the Report of the Working Party on the Training of Learner Motor-Cyclists; and if she will make a sattement on the development of the training scheme now operated by the Royal Automobile Club/ Auto Cycle Union.

The last of the replies from the local authority associations was received earlier this month, and we are now considering their views.

Does my hon. Friend agree that few acts could do more to improve road safety than improvements in the training of learner motor-cyclists? Is it not, therefore, urgent to repay the painstaking zeal of those who drew up the report with great speed in coming to a conclusion about these replies?

Yes. My right hon. Friend is extremely anxious to make progress on the proposals which she has put forward. We shall be talking to the local authorities about them, and I hope that we shall rapidly reach a consensus and get action.

In view of the Minister's justifiable onslaught on noise from four-wheeled vehicles, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman can say to what extent local authorities have expressed any opinions on the noise made by motor cycles and whether some encouragement can be given to abate the nuisance?

Order. This is a question about the training of learner motorcyclists.

The subject that the hon. Gentleman has raised is covered by regulations introduced by my right hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the success of the use of reflective number plates on cars, she will consider taking steps to make their use obligatory; and whether she will make a statement.

No, Sir. More evidence of their road safety value is needed before considering whether their use should be made compulsory.

Is the Minister aware that in my part of the country local road safety people and the police recommend that reflective number plates are extremely valuable? Will he, therefore, make a start by making their use obligatory on commercial vehicles which at present normally have extremely bad number plates?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that in the White Paper on Road Safety my right hon. Friend suggested that road safety measures should be looked at in terms of their cost effectiveness. While the signs about the idea of illuminated number plates are encouraging, it is felt that a period of about two years should be allowed for any new device to operate, before deciding whether it is the best way to spend the money to ensure road safety.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she will introduce legislation to ensure that no breath-testing device is exhibited or advertised for sale to the public unless it bears a clear warning that it provides only an approximate indication, and that the alcohol content of blood can rise after the last drink is taken.

I understand that these points are already covered in a Code of Rules recently issued by the Advertising Standards Authority.

Will my right hon. Friend take steps to publicise these rules and does not she agree that many of the existing "get-ups" are calculated to make people think that they have beaten the breathalyser, and this is very dangerous?

I agree with my hon. Friend that any attempt to encourage self-testing is to be deplored. I think that the firms concerned are complying with the Authority's code.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she will take steps to expedite the flow of traffic along the A47 road at its junction with the entrance to the Hardwick Road industrial estate.

It is expected that an improved junction, designed to facilitate turning movements, will be completed and in use next month.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the blockages at this junction already mean delays of 25 minutes or half an hour even in the winter months and that in the summer delays with holiday traffic are absolutely intolerable? Will he continue to keep a close eye on the need for improvements?

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend is keeping a close eye on this matter. As my hon. Friend is aware, the King's Lynn southern bypass, which is the real long-term solution to this problem, is hoped to be available in the early 1970s, and we hope that it will take about half the through traffic which now passes across the junction.

asked the Minister of Transport if, having regard to town centre traffic problems in Hythe, she will arrange for a scheme to widen Prospect Road to make it suitable for two-way traffic to be prepared, with estimates of cost, and include such a scheme in her present road programme.

Proposals for widening Prospect Road to make it suitable for two-way traffic have been agreed in principle. The work is to be carried out in stages, the first of which is estimated to cost £30,000 and expected to start shortly. Further stages, each complete in itself, will be prepared and programmed by the divisional road engineer as funds permit.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the first £30,000 is just for pulling down premises to make access for large loads to the Dungeness Power Station, which has very little effect on Hythe? Could he expedite the rest of the work which is necessary?

The road, as planned, does not warrant a high priority in the national roads scheme and it is believed that, if progress is made on sections of the road as and when funds become available to the divisional road engineer and those sections are made to comply with the final envisaged road, this would be the best way to tackle the problem which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned.

asked the Minister of Transport when the single carriageway sections of the A1 between South Mimms and Welwyn will be converted to dual carriageway.

There are two short sections still to be dualled—one as a motorway. Preparatory work, including the statutory processes, still have to be completed on each scheme. We cannot give firm dates, but we hope work will start on both sections in the early 1970s.

Since the hon. Gentleman told me seven weeks ago in answer to a Question that the traffic flow on this section of single carriageway is greater than that on the motorway dual section North of it, is it not ridiculous to leave this section as one bottleneck in the A1 between London and the North of England?

We are of course pressing ahead and that is why this is included in the scheme and we hope that it will be started in the early 1970s. The choice of the best line has presented practical difficulties: there are engineering and economic factors involved, also amenity considerations. That brought in National Trust park interests, residents at Ayot Green and others, which caused a delay. This is always a difficulty when people have an important right to demand that amenity be considered, but it holds up the programme which the Ministry intends to get ahead with.

asked the Minister of Transport whether she will make a further statement about the date when work will begin on the Dovercourt-Harwich Bypass.

This scheme is in the principal road preparation list and decisions on its construction will depend on the progress made by the Essex County Council, as highway authority, in preparing the details of the scheme.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he continually stalls about when this road will be begun? As a considerable amount of traffic is going for export, will he do his best to see that it is done fairly soon?

Far from stalling, my right hon. Friend has approved this scheme for preparation. It now depends on how quickly the highway authority can prepare details of the scheme. We are well aware of the problem here and this scheme will be committed to the programme as rapidly as possible. One thing which we have done in the mean time is to get on with the improvement to the A.604 over an eight-mile stretch.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress she is making with the survey of the East-West Motorway routes, particularly between South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire and Cheshire and Lancashire; and whether she will publish a White Paper.

We are at present considering a report on the study of trans-Pennine traffic movement carried out under the agency of West Riding County Council. My right hon. Friend hopes to be in a position to reach a decision on future strategy and priorities for the improvement of trans-Pennine communications after consultation with local authorities and other interested bodies. She does not propose to publish a White Paper.

May we have some infomation as to when we shall know what route has been chosen and what decision has been made as the construction of good east-west communications is urgent? Both sides are grey areas.

I appreciate the feeling of urgency on the part of those concerned. Copies of this report have only recently been sent to local authorities. The next stage is for us to enter into consultations and to get all the views of the local authorities. As soon thereafter as possible my right hon. Friend will issue a statement about the conclusions which we have made.

Would my hon. Friend agree that it would be highly desirable that such a route should avoid the Peak District National Park?

asked the Minister of Transport when she expects the link between the M1 and M6 motorways to be completed.

By the end of 1971.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) whether she will take steps to expedite decisions on the line of future road schemes, especially by-passes, so that local planning authorities can give prompt decisions on development plans;

The lines of future trunk roads are fixed as expeditiously as possible in accordance with the statutory procedures laid down in the Highways Act, 1959. Local planning authorities are consulted and kept fully informed.

Yes, but is the Minister aware that the indecision of her Ministry is holding up the development of many alternative routes, particularly bypasses, and that this is having a very frustrating and annoying effect? Will she take real steps to hurry up the decision?

I am not quite sure to what point the hon. Member is referring, but if it is the case which we have been considering, the planning applications were not referred to the Ministry of Transport at all. I shall certainly be very pleased to look into further details if the hon. Gentleman will give me the cases he has in mind.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there are examples in my own constituency where there does appear to have been very dilatory action on the part not only of his Ministry but of the Ministry of Housing also? As far as he is concerned, would he consider, as a matter of regular routine, publishing in these cases a full account of the chronology of events which have led to the completion of the major projects?

If my hon. Friend will supply me with details I will certainly look into them. Obviously we do not want to be responsible for holding up developments or creating red tape in this respect. Both my hon. Friend and other hon. Gentlemen will be aware of the difficulties connected with the forward planning of road schemes and the effect these may have in rendering some land sterile. If my hon. Friend will supply me with details of other land he has in mind I will certainly investigate them thoroughly.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress has been made in the negotiations between the Bideford Bridge Trustees and her Department on the transfer of Bideford Bridge to her control.

As we have already announced, negotiations with the trustees have been successfully concluded. The trustees have relinquished all their interests in the bridge and we have assumed full and sole responsibility and control.

While welcoming this decision—and I am sure it is the right one—now that the Ministry of Transport will have control of this bridge, will it look into the possibility of raising the weight limits so that heavier lorries may use the repaired bridge?

This is being looked into, and it is hoped that the weight limit, which is restricted just now, will be increased to allow traffic as it was before the damage to the bridge was caused.

asked the Minister of Transport, in view of the need for a new bridge at Bideford, what progress has been made in the review of priorities for this area.

Priorities were reviewed when communications across the river were severed. Repairing the existing bridge offered a quick and effective means of restoring traffic flow: advancing the priority of a new bridge did not. We shall continue to keep the matter under review.

Yes, but surely the Minister would agree that the ultimate solution in this area is a new bridge to deal with local traffic and the whole of the difficult problem of traffic in North Devon. Will he advance the plans as quickly as possible?

If there had been restrictions on the bridge there would have been need for the advancing of the priority, but without any restrictions on the existing bridge it is not felt that advanced priority for a new bridge in this area would necessarily be beneficial for the special roads in the South-West, or fair to the rest of the country.

asked the Minister of Transport when she expects to have the report of the traffic investigation for the area covering Kingswood Junction, Bilbrook, Staffordshire.

The report on this investigation, which covers the whole question of communications between the Wellington / Oakengates / Dawley complex and the Wolverhampton / Birmingham area, is expected by the end of this year.

Is the Minister aware that "by the end of this year" is a very long way ahead? Is the Ministry really prepared just to sit back and wait till a serious accident happens at this spot, which is causing very great concern to local people? Will he take no action at all?

I think the hon. Member may know that some important changes in road communications are going to take place involving the expenditure of many millions of pounds. In view of that, we want, of course, to get the best possible technical advice as to how this should be done, and, in the meantime, to take no action which would prejudice road improvements which are to take place in this area. That is the reason for the delay. If in the meantime there is any action we can take to meet matters, we will certainly take it.

asked the Minister of Transport when road improvements at Lloyds Hill, Penn, Staffordshire, are likely to take place.

A detailed scheme has been prepared and a decision on its inclusion in the firm programme will be taken when an accurate cost estimate is available.

Could the Minister give any date, approximately, when this is likely to be decided, because this is a very dangerous bottleneck, as I am sure he is aware, which causes tremendous inconvenience to all the people of this area?

Yes, I am aware of the need for urgent action in this respect. We are waiting for the district valuer's report and cost estimates. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that action will follow immediately.

asked the Minister of Transport when work will start on the parts of the M4 on which agreement by all the interested authorities as to the siting has been reached.

We expect to start construction in 1969 on the whole of the 71-mile length between Tormarton and Winnersh for which the route has been fixed.

Could the Minister not consider starting, in 1968 even, all of the road except the 6¼ miles he told me about last time, and would he not agree that the link up of the two halves of the M4 is of equal importance with the M1 and M6 link up, the two most important roads being built in this country at the present time?

Yes, but we are now dealing with the side road orders and these orders have been published for the length at Tormarton and Winnersh, and objections may be forthcoming, and until these side road orders have been completely cleared it is impossible to start to complete the road.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the town of Reading is almost completely blocked every day by the very heavy traffic to and from Wales and the South-West and London, and if so could not work be started on the road from Winnersh south of Reading to provide a by-pass at Reading for this heavy traffic?

There are these difficulties, as I said to the hon. Member, of public inquiry and the side roads and the difficulties of getting authority to go through, but if there are increased difficulties in Reading because of the construction of these roads, and the delayed construction, special traffic arrangements will be made to try to get the traffic away from Reading.

asked the Minister of Transport what proposals she has for the provision of overnight accommodation at motorway service areas.

Motorway service areas are designed for the needs of short stay users. We have no plans to provide overnight sleeping accommodation.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is an increasing need for this kind of accommodation both for transport drivers who have to lay up in inclement weather and, particularly on the M1, for the very many continental tourists who use it? Could not the areas allocated for services but not currently used for this purpose be put to more profitable use?

The motorway service areas have been designed, in terms of their parking facilities, for the short stay user. We do not desire people to occupy the spaces for long periods. My hon. Friend's Question is really a matter for the industry providing hotels and hostels. If he cares to draw my attention to particular needs and areas in this respect, I will consider what action can be taken.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing about the difficulty of obtaining planning permission for motels along the motorways or near to them?

I am not aware that there are great difficulties. I know of some motels which have been constructed quite near to and accessible to motor ways. Again, if the hon. Gentleman cares to draw my attention to particular cases, I will investigate them.

asked the Minister of Transport when she now expects Tewkesbury will be completely bypassed by the M5.

By December, 1970.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why there has been such a long delay in getting the tenders ready for the section from Bredon Bridge to Eastington? Secondly, will he undertake to see that the motorway is completed by the end of 1970, as has been promised?

There have been delays largely because of the many objections to the proposals for the alteration of side roads, footpaths, and so on, in the draft Section 13 Order for the Bredon Bridge to Eastington length, including a statutory objection from the Gloucester County Council. These take some time to be met and discussed. Every effort will be made to meet the date already promised, but it will depend on the seeing through of these objections and the possible accommodation of objectors.

asked the Minister of Transport when work will begin on the improvement of the A40 between Stoken-church and the Wheatley bypass.

Preparatory work is in progress for a new motorway to relieve the A40 between Stokenchurch and the Wheatley Bypass. Construction will depend on the completion of the statutory procedures and availability of funds.

Bearing in mind that traffic on this section of the route is building up all the time and that much of the benefit of the other sections of motorway which have been constructed are wasted while this section is in its present condition, can my hon. Friend give an assurance that work will start at the earliest possible moment?

I can assure my hon. Friend that work will start at the earliest possible moment, but there are difficulties in the part of the country through which it is proposed that this road should go. There is a route, for instance, across the Chiltern Escarpment which presents great difficulty and is likely to be highly controversial from the point of view of amenity.

asked the Minister of Transport when work will begin on the proposed improvements to the Oxford northern bypass.

As soon as practicable after we have made the necessary Orders under the Highways Act, 1959, objections to which we are now endeavouring to resolve.

While everybody would wish householders affected by the proposal to have every chance of making statutory objections, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the people of Oxford have been waiting for over 10 years for these improvements to be made? May I express the hope that the improvements will start as early as possible?

It is hoped that if the objections can be resolved and there is no public inquiry it may be possible to start work at the end of this year.

Can the hon. Gentleman expedite the statutory processes for the new Chesterton Bridge Road in Cambridge, about which I am in correspondence with him?

The statutory processes are not easy to expedite if one wishes to give citizens and local authorities the very desirable right to defend the amenities of the countryside.

asked the Minister of Transport what answer she has sent to the Sutton Council in reply to their request that a pedestrian crossing be provided in Carshalton High Street.

Our correspondence has been with the Greater London Council which is the highway authority. It has advised the Department that failing road widening and the provision of a central refuge, it considers than an X-way pedestrian crossing would be the most suitable facility here.

In view of the longstanding demand for this crossing, which is essential, will the hon. Gentleman do all that he can to speed up the matter?

I hope that very shortly we shall have reached a conclusion about the future of the X-way pedestrian crossing. We have this recommendation from the highway authority, and as soon as the matter has been cleared I promise to notify the hon. Gentleman of our decision.

asked the Minister of Transport what is her estimate of British Railways profits or losses for 1967 to 1968, 1968 to 1969 and 1969 to 1970.

The deficit of the British Railways Board in 1967 was £153 million, and I estimate the 1968 deficit at about £152 million. In 1969, I hope that the Board will be able at least to break even within the new financial framework provided by the Transport Bill.

Is the Minister aware that presenting a £60 million debt to the ratepayers and writing off £1,250 million commencing capital debt makes these figures completely "phoney"?

I could not accept that for a moment. I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman does not realise what a tough challenge we are giving to the Railways Board in the Transport Bill. As from next January, it will be expected to break even and there will be no more deficit financing. It is a tough challenge in which the whole House should support British Railways.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if she paid attention to the suggestions of hon. Members opposite and did not transfer traffic to the railways, the deficit would be much higher still and the ratepayer would suffer?

I entirely agree that the inconsistencies in the Opposition's transport policy beggar description.

asked the Minister of Transport what has been the total sum expended by British Railways on capital works since 1950.

About £1,754 million on railway investment.

In the light of that figure, how can the hon. Gentleman possibly justify writing down the capital debt of British Rail to £300 million in the Transport Bill? Can he wonder that many people consider that he is just using accountancy gymnastics to shuffle the deficit under the rug?

The hon. Gentleman has got the figure of £300 million wrong. The total value of the assets, including the capital debts, of British Rail is over £700 million. But the writing off of capital, which is urgent and imperative, is a colossal indictment of the gross mismanagement of the control of investment by our predecessors. After all, this is the responsibility of Ministers.

asked the Minister of Transport what was the total sum spent by British Railways on the electrification programme in 1967, 1966, 1965 and 1964, respectively; and what is the anticipated capital spending on electrification in 1968.

£6 million, £20 million, £20 million and £17 million, respectively. The budgeted figure for 1968 is £4 million.

Is it not short-sighted to cut down so drastically on the electrification programme and at the same time to spend millions of pounds on further nationalisation? Can the hon. Gentle man say when he hopes that the electrification to Glasgow will be completed?

I thought that it was apparent to the hon. Gentleman that it is important that investment should be made in those portions of the railways which are justified. Secondly, it is also important that there should be the fullest possible examination of proposals. Thirdly, there is no proposal before the Minister concerning the electrification to which the hon. Gentleman refers. Fourthly, the hon. Member is well aware when a decision is likely.

asked the Minister of Transport what estimates she has made of the capital expenditure which will be incurred on existing freight depôts, parcel sorting depôts and freight liner depôts between now and 1980 to implement her proposal for reorganising freight transport.

The proposals for the reorganisation of freight transport in the nationalised sector provide the framework for a more efficient service based on integration and the elimination of wasteful competition. It will be for the National Freight Corporation and the Railways Board to implement these proposals and to make estimates of any capital expenditure required on depôts.

Is it not absolutely ridiculous to have a Transport Bill without being able to give the Government and the country some estimate of the capital expenditure involved in taking 30 per cent. more freight traffic?

I had always understood that the Opposition's line was that they wished the two organisations to operate commercially. This they will certainly do within the framework of the Transport Bill.

asked the Minister of Transport what inquiry or survey has recently been made on behalf of her Department with regard to the extent to which trade and industry uses, or is prepared to use, rail transport for the carriage of their goods; on what basis the survey was carried out; and whether its conclusions will be published.

I assume the hon. Member is referring to a small survey recently carried out in the Midlands by Dr. Sharp, of Leicester University, with the support of my Ministry. The fieldwork has been completed, and a report is being prepared. Publication is expected about the end of April.

Is this the report from which the right hon. Lady gives the impression all the time that trade and industry are biased against the railways?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is talking about references in the White Paper to the broader Shipper Survey which has been undertaken.

asked the Minister of Transport what has been the total capital investment in the Scottish Region of British Railways in each of the last five years; what has been the profit or loss in that period; and what are the estimated figures up to 1970.

For 1963 to 1967 the figures for fixed assets only are £1·9 million, £2·5 million, £4·7 million and £5 million. For 1968 the estimate is £5·5 million Firm figures are not available for later years.

First, can my hon. Friend say why this is not done; and, secondly, what proportion of that capital investment in the last two or three years has been devoted to the development of freightliner services?

I cannot give the proportion for freightliner development, but my hon. Friend will be aware that we have set up a number of freightliner depots in Scotland and they have been very successful.

asked the Minister of Transport what proportion of total rail mileage in Scotland is defined as commercially unprofitable; and how much of this mileage it is her policy to keep open for social reasons.

I understand from the Railways Board that on present indications few, if any, railway passenger services in Scotland are commercially profitable.

Is my hon. Friend in a position at this moment to state how much railway mileage has been kept open by the present Government which, under the Beeching proposals supported by the party opposite, would otherwise have been closed, and whether those lines will be subsidised by profitable lines elsewhere?

I cannot give the details without notice, but my hon. Friend will be aware that last March when we published the basic railway network map for the future of 11,000 miles, this was substantially in excess of what would have been the inevitable result of the Beeching proposals; and a large number of railway lines, which would inevitably have gone under the Beeching proposals, were saved specifically by my right hon. Friend's basic railway network map.

The hon. Gentleman's reply referred only to passenger services. What about freight services? To what extent will the iniquitous quantity licensing provisions of the Transport Bill oblige the Government to retain for social purposes freight services which would otherwise have been closed down?

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman wants them retained or not. Our proposals will help the freight system of British Railways. I hope that the hon. Gentleman understands this, although he may have voted against the Transport Bill. The freight lines themselves are matters for British Railways.

asked the Minister of Transport for what vessels she maintains mooring buoys at an annual cost of £168,000; and why she has increased the number of these buoys from 131 to 141 since 1963, at an increased annual cost of £30,000.

For ocean-going and smaller merchant ships in a war emergency and for 22 ancillary barges to provide a water supply. Moorings for these barges have been provided since 1963 to secure their safe dispersal. Apart from this, there have been small reduction in the number of other moorings, and the total is now down to 134. The increased cost of maintenance is due entirely to higher wages for seamen and higher prices for materials.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there are more of these buoys than there were some years ago and that large numbers of them are used for only a few days in the year. In these circumstances, is not this a waste of money, and would the hon. Gentleman undertake to look into the whole question?

I have looked into the whole question. I have noticed the number of occasions on which the hon. Gentleman has raised it and on which a predecessor of mine went to considerable trouble to explain the position to him. It would be very difficult to achieve any substantial saving on account of hiring storage space on land which would be required if that is what we resorted to. In any case, those responsible still consider that these moorings are necessary in case of an emergency.