asked the Minister of Transport if he will take steps to arrange for all junctions where two or more roads cross one another to be made box junctions.

No, Sir. This marking is intended to relieve particular congested junctions. Wholesale provision would be expensive and unnecessary.

Would not the Minister agree that if box junctions were universal it would not be necessary to have warning notices, but only markings on the road, because everyone would know that these were box junctions? Would not that be a better way of relieving congestion at all junctions?

No, Sir. These box junctions are primarily intended for those signal controlled or uncontrolled junctions where real difficulties arise from vehicles blocking the exits. The junctions are very costly to provide, and their maintenance is very costly, too.

asked the Minister of Transport when the five-mile length of trunk road Al north of South Mimms will be brought up to dual carriageway standard.

We hope that work will start in the early 1970's, but cannot give a firm date because preparatory works, including the statutory processes, have still to be completed.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, according to an Answer given to me by the Minister of Transport himself a few weeks ago, there were 147 accidents involving personal injuries on this stretch of road in two years? Does he not think that this length of road deserves a much higher priority for dualling than 1971?

We are well aware of the accident rate, but it is a question of national priorities. It has to be borne in mind that this 5½ miles of dual, three-lane carriageway will cost £6½ million.

asked the Minister of Transport what action he intends taking on road pricing in the light of the Road Research Laboratory's recent Report No. L.R.165.

The report is an exploratory theoretical study of the effects of changing the mode of travel of people working in central London from cars to buses of various types. It does not have any special relevance to road pricing and therefore does not call for special action from my right hon. Friend in that field.

But it involves the possibility of road pricing. Will the Minister guarantee that if road pricing is introduced it will not be used as a method of fleecing the motorist further, but that any money gained from it will be used to improve roads?

No, Sir. I am not prepared to give any such guarantee, because road pricing at the present time is simply a theoretical possibility. We do not even know yet whether it is technically feasible, and we certainly do not know what such a system would cost and whether the benefits would be worth while in terms of cost.

asked the Minister of Transport what are the alternatives to road pricing which the Road Research Laboratory are considering in their investigations into this matter.

More extensive parking control and the reservation of road space for buses at peak hours are techniques which could result in a better use of town roads. The Department, including the Road Research Laboratory, is undertaking general research and taking part in studies of particular areas which will help to define the scope for these techniques.

Is the Minister still prepared to consider all possible ways of minimising congestion, or has he now reached a conclusion in favour of one or more methods for further examination or trial?

Studies of congestion in every respect are being continued and my right hon. Friend has not made up his mind on one final solution.

asked the Minister of Transport when work will start on the construction of the D ring road to the north of London; when he expects the work to be completed; and whether he will make a statement.

Construction of the section between the A.1 and the A.10 is planned to start in 1971. Works are expected to take about 2 years to complete.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is a welcome improvement on earlier answers about this very important matter? My constituents and others in the northern parts of London and the surrounding area will be pleased to hear the reply and would be even more pleased if the final date could be brought forward if possible.

We have very complicated statutory processes to go through on such a wide ranging scheme, but as soon as we get through these we shall start work as soon as we can.

asked the Minister of Transport what plans he has to assess the effects of the new Road Safety Campaign on a regular basis.

Market research consultants and the Road Research Laboratory are periodically investigating how much the publicity has been seen and how far it has produced changes in road users' knowledge and behaviour.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the frustration and thrombosis of traffic congestion are great factors in road safety? Will he bear them in mind in any future road safety campaign?

Certainly one of the factors which will be studied and tested will be the degree of frustration. Certain studies were made before my right hon. Friend's recent announcement about a stepping-up of the road safety campaign. After a certain period there will be further studies, and by this means we shall be able to test the efficacy of the campaign.

asked the Minister of Transport what estimate he has formed of the effect on road casualties that has resulted where "halt" signs have been replaced by "give way" signs.

It is still too early to judge, but results so far do not show any general effect either way.

Is not the Ministry conducting any systematic research into this problem? Is not the hon. Gentleman aware of the example in my constituency where there have been serious accidents and deaths at cross roads as a result of this change? Will he not recognise that, whatever the fine theories may be, the test of any such change will be found in practice and measured in human terms?

We recognise the problem, but the accident rate at the Mault-way—Chobham Road junction, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, since the change of sign does not indicate any effect either way.

asked the Minister of Transport how many lines for future roads are held by his Department in the preparation pool; and in how many cases the local planning authorities have been asked to protect the minimum amount of land for road junctions by refusal of planning permission for building.

The information is not readily available, but there are 171 trunk road schemes in the preparation pool including improvements to existing roads. The schemes are at various stages of planning, and the extent to which local planning authorities have been asked to protect them and junctions associated with them depends in each case on the stage of planning reached.

Is the Minsiter of State aware that the indecision of his Ministry and the pressure which the Ministry exerts or. local authorities sterilise thousands of acres of land which are ripe for development in the meanwhile?

I realise that this nap-pens and I am afraid that it is bound to happen in some cases. The hon. Gentleman will know from correspondence which he has been having with my hon. Friend and which he is now having with me about another by-pass scheme that it all depends on the stage of planning. In many cases we are not consulted by the local planning authorities and we do not give them any direction until a late stage.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will seek to amend the Highways Act, 1959, so as to speed up the statutory procedure laid down for planning the routes of trunk roads.

Possible ways of improving the statutory procedure laid down in the Highways Act, when Parliamentary time permits, are being considered now. The procedure for long-term planning of trunk roads will be improved by a new clause in the Town and Country Planning Bill now being considered in another place.

Will the Minister of State try to "come cleaner" with the general public about the lines of by-passes, because there is so much uncertainty about the lines of future by-passers?

As the hon. Gentleman will realise, these projects have to be planned many years ahead, but not until detailed surveys have been made can the lines actually be fixed, and thus there is bound to be a period of uncertainty. I assure the hon. Gentleman and others that if they have particular cases in mind on which we can help by reducing the uncertainty, if they will let us have details, we shall investigate them.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects to reply to the application from the London Borough of Bromley, made to his Department in June 1967, for the installation of a pedestrian crossing in Plaistow Lane, Bromley.

A reply, refusing this application was sent on 28th May. The council have requested reconsideration and this is now in hand.

Is the Minister of State aware that that reply will be received with great disappointment in my constituency? Will he realise that, in the view of local residents, the need for this crossing has been clearly established? What makes him think that his judgment is superior to that of Bromley Council and my constituents?

It is not only the judgment of the Ministry of Transport; it is also that of the police and others who have to be consulted and who have discussed this matter on the site. I appreciate the present disappointment. At the crossing there was restricted visibility on the downhill grade coming from the East. This matter is now being investigated to see how that visibility may be improved in order to make the crossing viable. I will let the hon. Gentleman know the result of this reconsideration as soon as I can.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will take steps to amend the Road Vehicles Lighting (Standing Vehicles) (Exemption) (General) Regulations, 1956, to permit the use of a hurricane lamp, placed on the ground, as a parking light.

No, Sir. We do not think that this would be as safe as the present requirements.

I find that reply slightly disappointing but not unexpected. Is it not the case that hurricane lamps are so used in certain parts of London and, in any case, fairly widely used by contractors digging holes in the road and leaving various kinds of obstruction? Will my hon. Friend undertake to look into this matter again?

It is true that some people are using hurricane lamps as parking lights in defiance of the law, but if road works are marked by hurricane lamps that is an entirely different thing, because no source of power is available.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is serious danger if hurricane lamps are used at skips used for collecting refuse and that when they are removed, the skips constitute a great danger to motorists? What is being done about that?

That is another matter, but it is worth considering and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall do so.

asked the Minister of Transport what is his policy with regard to the routing of major access roads to motorways through narrow residential streets.

No single policy can be laid down in circumstances which vary so much from place to place. Where non-trunk roads are concerned, the local highway authority is responsible for deciding in each case, in the light of the funds available, and having regard to the views of local residents, how best to meet traffic needs with the least detriment to the local environment.

Is the Minister aware of the serious danger existing in the Holling-worth Lake area of my constituency? This is a major beauty spot in Lancashire, and there is an access road through it to the new Lancashire-Yorkshire motorway. This road goes through a residential district and, as there is an alternative road, would he consider a weight restriction for the road which runs through the residential district?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern, of which I have had notice, but he will realise that we have no power in this matter. It is a matter entirely for the Lancashire County Council. The decision is entirely for it to take, but we will bring the hon. Gentleman's views to its notice.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will now reconsider the question of unilateral parking and pedestrian crossings on the A6 in Clapham, Bedfordshire.

The traffic situation still does not justify the restriction of waiting vehicles.

I understand that the parish council has pressed that a pedestrian crossing should be provided and that the county council, which is the agent authority, has invited it to make specific proposals.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the difficulty, on a Saturday morning in particular, of crossing that road, as most of the shops are on one side while people live on the other side?

We are aware of the situation, but we are also acutely aware of the fact that if unilateral parking was introduced it would have to be on the side opposite the shopping parade, thereby creating much greater danger for pedestrians.

asked the Minister of Transport when he anticipates publishing revised proposals for the M4/A4 interchange and the diversion of trunk road A4 at Theale.

Revised proposals, replacing those published in mid-1967, were published at the end of May.

May I say that I appreciate the need to give careful consideration to these objections and that, along with many others, I appreciate too the careful consideration which has been given to these matters by the staff of the hon. Gentleman's Department. Can the hon. Gentleman assure us that he will press ahead with the alternative proposals as soon as possible?

I can give that assurance.

asked the Minister of Transport when he anticipates that tenders will be invited for the construction of the M4 motorway between Tormarton and Winnersh; and what is the estimated date of completion.

We expect to invite tenders for two contracts, covering the 30 miles between Tormarton and Lidding-ton, in January, 1969, and three contracts for the remainder in the latter half of that year. We hope to complete the greater part of this 71-mile length of motorway by the end of 1971; however, preparatory work on the 16½ miles between Wickham and Theale in Berkshire has encountered unforeseen difficulties and this section is unlikely to be completed until the first half of 1972.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the volume of traffic on the A4 is already excessive and contributing to danger and fatal accidents? Will he therefore press ahead as fast as he can with the M4 route?

We are well aware of the urgent need to go forward with this programme. Unfortunately, the incidence of foot-and-mouth disease, and the restrictions imposed then, delayed the soil survey for a considerable period and that is the reason for the delay, explained in the latter part of my reply. In every other respect we will go forward.

Would my hon Friend agree that there are sections of the A4 which are particularly hazardous and dangerous? Could he concentrate on getting work started on these sections?

As my hon. Friend knows, this is being constructed section by section, according to a definite plan based on the priorities. If there are any particular cases to which my hon. Friend wants to draw attention, I should be pleased if he would let me have the details.

asked the Minister of Transport when a pedestrian crossing will be provided in Broad Street, Teddington.

Census figures are being obtained and a decision will be made as soon as these have been considered.

Would the Minister of State take into account the fact that the people of Teddington have been waiting some time for this pedestrian crossing and that it is really needed?

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that we did not get the application from the council until January this year. It is necessary to make traffic counts, pedestrian counts and so on. I assure him that the gathering of this information will go forward as rapidly as possible and that we will give a decision at an early date.

asked the Minister of Transport by what date he intends to complete his survey of the use and effectiveness of X-way crossings; and how long a delay this will entail before the X-way crossing authorised on 29th March for the A3 at Burpham, and now partially installed, may be completed and put into operation.

We have asked for some further information so that we can complete the survey. My right hon. Friend still hopes to announce his decision shortly.

In the meantime, and pending that decision, we have decided to let the Burpham crossing come into operation.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is welcome but belated news? Although it has taken many months to reach this decision, many parents will be thankful for the fact that their children will be safer as a result of it.

asked the Minister of Transport what action he intends to take to reduce the increasing loss on British Railways.

The results so far this year do not suggest an increasing loss.

No, but even if there will not be an increasing loss, does the Minister not intend to do anything to reduce the loss, which is almost as important as preventing it from going up?

If the hon. Gentleman is wrong in his basic assumptions, he really cannot switch the question. The point is that British Railways will not, on their results so far, show an increasing loss. The evidence is that the new arrangements for dealing with their finances will make British Railways a more viable proposition in future.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the solution of the Southern Region commuting problem which has been pressed by hon. Members on both sides will be solved only if we have substantial public expenditure, and will he resist the blandishments of hon. Members opposite, in their own interests as much as ours?

I think that my hon. Friend misrepresents the views of hon. Members opposite. It is not so much that they are arguing against public expenditure on the railways, which is obviously essential, but merely that they are obsessed to take any opportunity, however unfounded, to denigrate nationalised industries.

asked the Minister of Transport what will be the effect of the setting up of the new freight authority upon the transport police; what consultations on this matter have taken place between his Department and the Transport Police Federation; and if he will make a statement.

The Transport Bill includes power for the Railways Board to enter into an agreement with the National Freight Corporation for making available to that body the services of the British Transport Police Force. But, as my right hon. Friend's predecessor explained when she met representatives of the British Transport Police Federation, it will be for the N.F.C. to decide what police services they need to enable them to discharge their responsibilities. There will, of course, be an opportunity for the Federation to make whatever representations it wishes to the N.F.C. when it has been set up.

Since the Transport Act could be the cause of the redundancy of about 500 police officers, why is it that no meetings or consultations have taken place since my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport met the chief officers of the Transport Police Federation in September, 1967?

The present position has been fully explained in correspondence that we have had with the Federation, and I can assure my hon. Friend that its views are fully understood and that it will be able to make representations later to the N.F.C. when it is set up.

Would the hon. Gentleman undertake that if the officers of the Federation want talks because they are concerned about this, he will immediately grant them an interview?

There has, as I said, been considerable correspondence, and the position is understood between the Federation and the Department as a result of that correspondence. No precipitate action will be taken on the lines suggested by my hon. Friend. There will be no possibility of the break-up of the transport police unless there has been very full consultation.

asked the Minister of Transport, having regard to the requirements of the Government's prices and incomes policy, and the continuing trading losses of about £3 million per week on British Railways, what steps he is now taking to prevent rises in rail and travel fares.

I would refer the hon. Member to the recent debates on the relevant parts of the Transport Bill, and the Report of the National Board for Prices and Incomes, which the Government have accepted.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that those were quite inconclusive? Will he tell the House whether it is the policy of the Government to endorse the substantial increase in fares which the British Transport Commission and others are now seeking in order to make the railways more commercially viable, or whether the Government propose to adhere to a 3½ per cent. increase only for fares in conformity with the prices and incomes policy?

The Prices and Incomes Board Report No. 72, of 30th May, which I have said the Government have accepted, makes it quite clear. The conclusion of the Report is that the Railways Board, in order to set up an overall increase across the board, should consider the market pricing question in regard to fares. I refer the hon. Gentleman to Report No. 72, which very fully explains the matter.

But surely the hon. Gentleman will agree that the increase will mean an average increase in fares very much higher than 3½ per cent?

Not necessarily. With certain classes of fare this may very well be so. My right hon. Friend said on the Third Reading of the Transport Bill. that, in conformity with the principles laid down by the Prices and Incomes Board, first class fares would not be kept at the same ceiling as second class fares.

asked the Minister of Transport what conversations he has had with executive officers of London Transport to prevent increased fares for commuting passengers; and, having regard to a required increase of fares of 2s. 3d. in the £ sterling, or 11¼ per cent., to make good the anticipated loss of London Transport for 1968–69, what steps he proposes to take to restore solvency.

None, Sir. I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on 8th May. London Transport's proposals for fares increases are with the Transport Tribunal to determine as required by statute. Proposals for London Transport's future financial position will be set out shortly in a White Paper on the reorganisation of transport in London.—[Vol. 764, c. 394–5.]

But this, again, is an utterly inconclusive answer. Will the hon. Gentleman apply himself to the fact that there is a large deficit already and that there are further deficits pending on London Transport account? As the undertaking is required to pay its way, what increase in fares have the Government in mind? Is it to be 2s. 3d. in the £, and if so, will not that breach the prices and incomes policy finally?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will apply himself to the statutory position. If he does, he will discover that the Transport Tribunal is the authority with the power of decision in this matter. This is the position which we inherited in 1964. We are now awaiting the decision on the matter by the Transport Tribunal as the statutory authority.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give a general direction to British Railways to provide improved facilities for the transport of shellfish from West Scotland to the South of England and the Continent.

No, Sir. It would be quite wrong for my right hon. Friend to give a general direction to the Railways Board on a detailed matter of commercial management like this.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a keen demand on the Continent for winkles particularly? Is he further aware that Highland transport charges are preventing the rapid expansion of the market? Will he look at this again to see if he can do something to help?

I am aware of the market for winkles on the Continent and of its great importance to the hon. Gentleman's constituency. But neither the Railways Board nor the Ministry of Agriculture has had any complaint for a long time about any difficulties arising from transport charges for these commodities and it would appear that the charges suit most of the producers in the area of the hon. Gentleman's constituency.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will undertake an urgent review of the salary of the Chairman of British Railways.

This will be done when appropriate.

Surely it is completely inappropriate that the Vice-Chairman of British Railways should be paid more than the Chairman, when the duties of the Chairman are greater than those of the Vice-Chairman? Is this not making an absolute nonsense of the management structure of British Railways? Will the Minister take further action in this matter?

It ill-becomes hon. Gentlemen to say "Hear, hear", because the problem we face is one of the failure of Governments to solve this problem over a very long period of time. Clearly the salaries will have to be reviewed in due course. At present there are problems in terms of prices and incomes policy, which I am sure the hon. Gentleman will understand.

Would the Minister conduct a survey in private industry to see how often this sort of thing happens there?

At the moment my time is adequately filled with the nationalised industries.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has yet received the proposal for the construction of the Fleet Line.

No, Sir, but we understand from London Transport that planning work is actively proceeding.

Would the Minister agree that it is becoming increasingly urgent to increase the commuter capacity in South-East London, and would he therefore stimulate the earliest possible publication of these proposals so that action may be taken?

My hon. Friend will know that a number of consultations are going on about the best proposals to deal with the situation. We recognise that some very important decisions will have to be taken. British Railways and London Transport are going forward with these proposals, and I hope to hear from them in the near future.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the reason for the delay of more than a year in announcing his decision following the public inquiry into the proposal to close the Hurst Green-Tunbridge Wells-Lewes railway line; if he is aware of the delay that will be caused to the completion of stage one of the Lewes relief road if a decision is not now made with regard to the Lewes-Barcombe Mills section of this line; and if he will now announce his decision.

The delay in reaching a decision on this proposal is due, as the hon. and gallant Member is well aware, to the particularly complex issues involved.

We are fully conscious of the implications of the proposal for the timing of roadworks connected with stage I of the Lewes relief road. My right hon. Friend will announce a decision as soon as he is entirely satisfied that all the necessary investigations have been completed.

Since it is 14 months since a public inquiry strongly and unanimously recommended that this railway line should be kept open, is it not high time that a decision was made? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the failure to make a decision, unless one is made very soon, is almost certain to result in unnecessary waste of public expenditure on quite a large scale?

I am aware of the long time this matter has taken. I would not agree with the results of delay suggested by the hon. Gentleman. It is an extremely complex question. The relief road and the railway line are involved. It is right that my right hon. Friend should arrive at a correct decision rather than a quick decision.

asked the Minister of Transport what study he has made of the degrees of inflammability of varying grades of diesel fuel for trains; and if he will make a statement.

The selection of a suitable fuel for use on trains is a matter for the British Railways Board, but I am informed that the fuel oil in use on diesel locomotives and multiple-unit trains is to British Standard 2869/1957, Class A, which specifies a minimum flash point of 130°F.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the incidence of fire on diesel units is far too high and that the risk attaching to the existing grades of fuel is quite unacceptable to passengers who have to travel on these trains? What does he propose to do about this?

There have been serious problems, but I think that the hon. Gentleman would do well not to exaggerate them and cause unnecessary worry. These are the minimum flash points. The fuel involved in the accident at Sandridge on 18th August, 1965, had a flash point of 170°F. Comparing that with petroleum spirit or other light fuels, which have a flash point of about 73°, this is a pretty big margin.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will introduce regulations laying down minimum standards for retread tyres for sale to the public.

A British Standard for retread tyres has been prepared and should lead to improvements in quality. I do not propose further action at present.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that, while we appreciate the tireless work already done by his Ministry in the tyre field, we should be very happy if he gave his blessing to the British Standard when it appears, possibly this autumn?

Yes, Sir. I should expect to receive the revised Standard probably towards the end of this month, and it would be my intention to ensure that publicity is given to it. One will then have to see how best to deal with it, and whether the knowledge that particular types of tyre do not reach the published specification would not in itself be of great assistance in this field.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will commission an inquiry on the lines of the Third London Airport Inquiry to consider the full implications of the decision to proceed with the construction of a Channel Tunnel.

No, Sir. Before any final decision can be taken to begin construction of the Channel Tunnel, legislation will be presented to Parliament seeking the necessary enabling powers. This will provide ample opportunity for public consideration of all the issues involved.

As I understand that the decision has been taken in principle, would not my right hon. Friend wish to emulate the action of the President of the Board of Trade who very courageously and, I believe, wisely commissioned an inquiry into the Third London Airport? Surely the decision about building the Channel Tunnel is even more important. Can we be assured that the questions will be looked at?

To make the point clear, no decision has been taken about the building of the Channel Tunnel. It is a matter for Parliament to decide in the light of all the facts which will then be presented to Parliament. The big difference between Stansted and the Channel Tunnel is that Stansted did not require legislation whereas the Channel Tunnel does. I fully accept what my hon. Friend says with regard to consultation. Consultations are already in progress with local authorities and other affected interests, including the South-Eastern Economic Planning Council.

asked the Minister of Transport if he has considered the effect on the proposal to construct a Channel Tunnel of the ability of large, fast, economical hovercraft to operate from existing East and South Coast ports to most countries of Western Europe; and what conclusion he has reached.

In past Anglo-French decisions to pursue the Channel Tunnel project, full account was taken of the available information on hovercraft; but before any final commitment to construction of the Tunnel, there must be a further review of its viability and, for this review, new cost and revenue studies will be made. Hovercraft, as one of the methods of cross-Channel transport, will be among the factors in these studies.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that the potential for hovercraft to operate from the whole length of the East Coast and the South Coast to various ports in Europe must surely affect the proposal to build the Channel Tunnel based on probably the most inconvenient corner of the United Kingdom?

No, Sir. The preliminary evidence at this moment does not show that. Of course, British Rail is bringing into operation its first cross-Channel hovercraft ferry service this year, and this is one of the things on which we shall want to get some experience. All the previous economic appraisals have indicated that hovercraft will be faster but not necessarily cheaper than ships, that the Channel Tunnel will be cheaper and give better journey times than other methods, and that the Tunnel will avoid double handling on long journeys.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the development that is going on with container ships and the effects that this may have on the question of the Channel Tunnel?

What I have said is that the Government will want to get the fullest and most up to date information on the alternative forms of transport in relation to the Tunnel. This evidence will be given to Parliament, and Parliament will have the opportunity of debating it fully. All the preliminary work so far indicates that the Channel Tunnel is viable with or without hovercraft.

asked the Minister of Transport when he will now carry out a review of the salary structure of senior managements of the industries for which he is responsible.

Any decision to review the salary structures of their senior staff is a matter for the boards of the undertakings.

As the Chairman of British Railways now gets £1,500 less than his own Vice-Chairman and considerably less than the Chairman of the Steel Board, will the right hon. Gentleman now carry out a complete review in order to get rid of the anomalies?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is on the wrong Question. There is a subsequent Question relating to the salaries of board members. This Question relates to senior managers; they are different people.

asked the Minister of Transport what recent representations he has received from the waterways community about the effects of the Transport Bill on their interests; and what reply he has sent.

A large number of individuals and organisations concerned with transport, fishing, water supply, boating drainage and other uses of the waterways have commented on the Bill and it would be impracticable in an answer to a Parliamentary Question to summarise the replies that have been sent to them.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Schedule 12 of the Transport Bill, which lists the cruising waterways amongst other matters, was not discussed either in Committee or on the Report stage because of the Guillotine and that it omits large sections of our waterways which those concerned feel should be part of the Bill? Will he look again at this and see whether at a later stage these parts could not be added to the Schedule?

This matter was discussed in principle on the Bill and the fact that we were not able to reach certain Clauses is not the responsibility of the Government. But the hon. Gentleman must be aware of the attitude of the Government to the inland waterways. We are anxious to get the maximum from them for recreational facilities for the nation and this is provided for in the Bill.

asked the Minister of Transport what is now delaying the publication of the Survey of Transport from manufacturing establishments commissioned by his Department.

It is expected that it will take some time for the full report to be printed, but a summarised version is being prepared for earlier publication and we hope this will appear in the late summer.

As the unnecessary and idiotic restrictions on road transport, sometimes known as quantity licensing, proposed by the Government in the Transport Bill were supposed to be based on this information, why it is taking so long for the report to be made public?

The hon. Gentleman has specialised in misleading himself. No such suggestion was ever made and we undertook the taking of the necessary decisions on the reform of the licensing system. Nevertheless, the information came from 720 manufacturing firms all over the country and will give us some information as to how successfully these proposals will work.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will now announce details of the new arrangements for the compensation of the victims of hit-and-run accidents.

Although the main shape of the new arrangements has been settled, it has not yet been possible to settle all the details which must go into a formal document. We hope to be able to inform the House of the new arrangements before the Summer Recess.

Why has there been this delay? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that negotiations have been going on for over two years and that four months ago the House was told that the new procedure would be brought into effect very shortly. Nothing seems to be happening.

I must correct the hon. Gentleman. He says that the House was told that the new procedure would be brought in very shortly. On the contrary, my predecessor said that he hoped that this would be so. He did not say that it would be. The hon. Gentleman asks why these details have taken so long. They are proving very complex. The field for the necessary consultations is very large. It includes the whole of the insurance market and other Government Departments, especially, of course, the Law Departments, and all this necessarily takes time.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he has taken in accordance with the Government's prices and incomes policy to ensure that the abolition of the no-standing rule for London's buses is part of the productivity agreement currently being negotiated between the London Transport Board and the Transport and General Workers' Union.

The London Transport Board is keeping us informed of the progress of its negotiations. It would not be helpful to the parties if we were to comment at this stage on matters under discussion, and the possible content of any productivity agreement.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Londoners bitterly resent the prospect of further fare increases while the many restrictive practices within London Transport, such as the idiotic no-standing rule and the failure to extend one-man bus operations, are allowed to continue? Cannot the Government give a positive lead to London Transport on this matter?

We have been giving a positive lead on this matter, which is why these discussions have been going on. It is only possible to make progress on the matter by careful negotiation between the management and the trade unions in London. I believe that we can get a successful productivity agreement, but it is best left to the parties to reach agreement.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many people who travel on the buses do not consider this rule as particularly idiotic and that we do not want to reach the position in this country in which, like the people of Paris and Rome, we are herded like cattle on the buses?

I shall make no comment on the relative idiocy or otherwise of any of these things. What we want and need is higher productivity and one-man operation. That is what the management and the trade unions are negotiating about, and we hope and trust that the negotiations will come to a successful conclusion.

How does the hon. Gentleman reconcile his statement a few moments ago that he is giving a lead to London Transport with his earlier reply to me that he has no statutory authority to deal with the fares charged by London Transport? The two statements are in contradiction.

The hon. Gentleman should try to abstain from misrepresenting what I say. I did not say that we had no statutory authority. I said that under the legislation brought in by his party the Transport Tribunal in London was set up as the final authority on questions of fares and that we are awaiting its decision. The hon. Gentleman must also bear in mind that for over two years the Government have kept down fares in London.

Will my hon. Friend also consider the safety aspect of this proposal as well as productivity?

Of course. That is precisely why all these matters must be carefully negotiated between the management and the trade unions.

asked the Minister of Transport what plans he has to extend the scope of the driving test, with particular reference to vehicle control in adverse road conditions, driving on motorways and night driving.

None, Sir. We do not consider it either necessary or practicable to extend the scope of the driving test in the particular ways suggested.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that, after passing his driving test, a new driver still needs much more experience before becoming fully qualified? Is there not a case for a probation period after the test in the general interest of road safety?

That is a different question. One certainly agrees, however, that, following qualification in the driving test, it is experience which really makes a good driver.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that it is illogical that we should repeatedly test old motor vehicles while the passing of one test entitles a driver to drive for the rest of his life? Will he look at the possibility of a repeated test after a licence has been held for a number of years?

That also is another question. If my hon. Friend puts it on the Order Paper, we will endeavour to answer it.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware that a recent study by Mr. Meyer H. Parry, a copy of which has been sent to him, shows that motor drivers exhibit an overt aggressive behaviour on too many occasions to other drivers often with serious results to themselves and other road users; and what steps he intends taking to improve behaviour while driving on the roads.

The steps we are taking to improve driver behaviour were outlined in the Government's White Paper—" Road Safety—A Fresh Approach " [Command 3339]. We have already inaugurated the publicity programme and action to implement the other proposals outlined in the White Paper is well advanced. Research by the Road Research Laboratory into the problem of driver behaviour is also continuing.

I agree with what is being done, but does my hon. Friend agree with me that the social misbehaviour reported by Mr. Parry, added to driving misdemeanours, results in a toll of death and injury to Britons which is a disgrace to the country? Does he not agree that more traffic wardens, both mobile and stationary, would be of immense help in reducing this burden?

While I do not want to comment on Mr. Parry's book, I agree generally with what my hon. Friend has said, and I am sure that my right hon. Friend will consider his proposition.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he is taking to improve the road and rail links between the industrial areas of the Midlands and South-East and the high-capacity sea container freight service centres such as Harwich with their connections to Europe.

The trunk road programme and preparation pool contain a large number of schemes designed to improve road communications between the Midlands and South-East and the ports of Harwich, Felixstowe and Tilbury. It is for the British Railways Board to plan rail links and to seek my right hon. Friends approval should major expenditure be involved in any project they may have in mind.

Is my hon. Friend certain that these improvements go far enough? Is he aware that the roads and railways from East Anglia lead to London? Does he not agree that it is virtually impossible to carry freight efficiently from industrial areas like the Midlands and South Bedfordshire to Harwich and the other East Anglian ports?

It is recognised that there are difficulties in the London conurbation and that railway lines and roads tend to lead to London, but British Railways has forward planning schemes which, we believe, will adequately cater for the expected traffic in containerised freight by sea, and in the roads programme priority is being given to roads serving the docks, particularly the container ports.

Will the hon. Gentleman also keep in mind that, in the absence of by-passes, traffic congestion is yearly getting worse in places such as Cambridge? Will he consider putting an East Anglian highway higher up his batting order of desirable trunk improvements?

As traffic increases, some of our older towns are obviously bound to become more congested, but there are plans for special roads, not by any means to motorway standards, but to good adequate standards, for these ports and we hope that to some extent they will alleviate the present congestion in towns.

In view of the introduction of the " roll-on roll-off" service from Great Yarmouth to Scheveningen and the possible introduction of passenger services from Great Yarmouth to Holland, will my hon. Friend look at the whole question of the road network leading to the Midlands the North and the North-East from Great Yarmouth and other East Anglian ports? Is he aware that these are very insufficient for the development foreseen?

I can assure my hon. Friend that because of the explosion in container traffic and the "roll-on roll-off " service the whole question of the roads to ports is continually being looked at. My hon. Friend can rest assured that the questions he has raised will not be overlooked.

asked the Minister of Transport what consideration he has given to alternatives to the quantity licensing system as envisaged in the Transport Bill.

I have considered various alternatives, but none of them is likely to be as effective as the limited form of quantity licensing proposed in the Transport Bill.

Will the Minister give further consideration to the suggestion put to him by the industry of a system whereby British Railways are informed of the rates charged and can put forward their quotation, thus eliminating all the system of tribunals that would otherwise have to be set up?

The present position under the Transport Bill saves a great deal of bureaucracy, in that it releases something like 100,000 vehicles from licensing. The difference between us is that the Dutch system, which is basically what is being proposed here, would present information but in the last resort the consignor could still stick to road transport in the face of all the evidence that rail was just as good.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) if it is still his intention that the ports will be taken into public ownership by 1970; and if he will make a statement;

(2) to what extent his plans for ports reorganisation include the taking into public ownership of privately-owned ports, stevedoring and lighterage companies.

asked the Minister of Transport when he proposes to introduce legislation to take the ports into public ownership.

I am not yet able to make a statement on this subject, but will do so as soon as possible.

Will the Minister bear in mind the assurance given by his predecessor on 22nd February last year, that she hoped to take the ports into public ownership by 1970? Will he appreciate that any attempt to back-slide on an election pledge, freely given, will cause further dismay to Labour supporters throughout the country?

The answer I have given is that I will make a statement on this subject as soon as possible. There is no reason for my hon. Friend to believe that people are back-sliding on election pledges.

Will the Minister give an assurance that a Bill to bring the ports into public ownership will be introduced in the next Session?

As I have already said, I am not able to make a statement on this subject at present.

As the Government have back-slid on every election promise, surely it will not matter at all if they abandon the nationalisation of the ports —it being manifestly in the public interest so to abandon it—or ask the Lords to throw it out, which would be better still.

I do not know what is causing all this heat in the Chamber this afternoon. There is no proposal to withdraw from the decision, which the Government believed was a right one, that there is a need for an extension of public ownership in the British ports system.

First would my right hon. Friend ignore the Buffoonery we have had from the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro)? Would he take into consideration the very serious nature of the Question of my hon. Friend? This is a pledge given to the electorate, it was in the election programme, and any back-sliding will certainly be resisted by the entire Labour movement. Is my right hon. Friend aware that we want to see nationalisation of the docks at the earliest possible moment, including the stevedoring companies as well?

On the first point, one never does take any notice of the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro). As to the second point, all I have said is that in due course, as soon as I can, I shall make a statement on the whole issue.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is now in a position to state his Department's policy towards planning applications involving land used for agricultural and horticultural purposes following the Minister of Housing and Local Government's consultations with the local authority associations.

Yes, Sir. In future it will be our policy to provide local planning authorities with a technical appraisal of the agricultural factors relevant to each application. The aim will be to show the degree of need for the development and the agricultural consequences of disallowing it, so as to assist the planning authority in weighing these factors with the other material considerations.

We propose also to arrange that where a public inquiry is held into an appeal against the refusal of planning permission, a witness from my Department will be able to give evidence in support of the Department's technical appraisal.

My right hon. Friends the Minister of Housing and Local Government and the Secretary of State for Wales will be issuing a Circular to local planning authorities bringing these arrangements into force as soon as possible.

Is that very welcome announcement likely to result in less good agricultural land being lost than has been the case all too often in the past?

What will happen is a matter of opinion.

Is it not time that the hon. Gentleman has a survey made of all agricultural land and grading done from it and excluded the best agricultural land from planning permission for dwellings, motorways and things like that?

I must put the hon. Gentleman right. This matter is to do with agricultural dwellings. It has nothing to do with motorways, and so on.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the complaint in the past has been that his Ministry has not expressed any view in this matter? Does this change mean that positive action will be taken?

We had to give an opinion on the long-term benefit to the land of any development of this nature. Now we are simply prepared to give an opinion in order to help the planning authority on the benefit to agriculture in general and not simply on the long-term benefit for the land.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects the Northumberland Committee to report.

My right hon. Friend hopes that the Committee will make an announcement about its plans very soon.

What does "very soon" mean? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that farmers are no less apprehensive as time goes on of the danger that they are in? Does he not think that to suspend all consideration of measures which may be taken against infected meat imports while awaiting the results of the Committee's deliberations is not good enough? Is the hon. Gentleman and the Committee seized of the urgency of the matter?

The Committee was appointed on 28th February and it had its first meeting on 14th March. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will think back to the Gowers Committee and of the enormous job which it had to do. I do not think that we can rush the Northumberland Committee's deliberations. The Duke of Northumberland fully appreciates the worry of farmers on the subject, and I do not think that it would do any good to rush the Committee. As I say, it is up to the Committee to decide whether it should make an interim report. We have given it a job to do, and we should allow it to do it in its own way, because it is a Committee of experts.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now limit the present dumping of foreign dairy products on the British market.

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given to the hon. Members for Torrington (Mr. Peter Mills) and for North Angus and Mearns (Mr. Buchanan-Smith) on 15th May last. We are actively considering the representations that have been received but I cannot say anything further at present. —[Vol. 764, c. 1199 and 245–6.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, apart from the subsidised imports of butter, the imports of milk products and cheese are at such a level that, without exaggeration, they are threatening the complete collapse of the dairy products market? The time has arrived when something must be done about this.

We appreciate the situation. Although the figures for this month are greater than they have been, the overall percentages of imports against our own production have been roughly the same year in and year out. We have the situation very much in mind. It has arisen just recently. We would rather take the right action than hasty action.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the E.E.C. is paying a subsidy of about 600 per cent. on butter? If this is not dumping, what on earth is?

Anti-dumping legislation is the concern of the Board of Trade. If the hon. Gentleman puts down a Question to the Board of Trade, it will deal with it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will exempt women in Scotland who are retired from work at 60 years of age from the payment of prescription charges.

No, Sir.

Is it not the case that many women are being compelled by their terms of employment to retire at 60? Men get the benefit of the Health Service at their retirement age. Should not that apply equally to women?

This matter was debated quite recently. The criteria are based on need. If there is need, the necessary exemptions will be given.

Is the hon. Gentleman still examining the general question of exemptions, because there appear to be considerable anomalies? For example, is he satisfied about the situation concerning people suffering from serious mental illnesses who have to take expensive drugs but who, without the drugs, would still be in hospital?

The hon. Gentleman will have to see how the matter works out. We are looking at all possibilities. As he knows, we keep all the medical services under review.