ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 1 July 1931)

§ LOUD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE
My Lords, as this small Bill deals with a point which has attracted a great deal of public attention, perhaps your Lordships will allow me briefly to explain its provisions. It consists of only one clause repealing subsection (3) of Section sixty-one of the Road Traffic Act, 1930. That subsection of the Road Traffic Act reads as follows: Where a person uses or allows, to be used without reward for carrying eight or more persons as passengers any motor vehicle ordinarily used for the purposes of agriculture, trade or business, then, except where the persons so carried are workpeople being carried in the course of or to or from their employment, the vehicle shall for the purposes of this Part of this Act be treated as if it was a contract carriage, and the provisions of this Part of this Act and the regulations made thereunder shall apply accordingly. Briefly, that involves preventing lorries being used for the purpose of taking cricket teams and football teams, Sunday school treats, employees' outings, boy scouts and girl guides to their camps, and so on, and it is recognised that this was a genuine hardship. My right hon. friend the Minister of Transport thought the matter out very carefully, and he tried to think of possible amendments to the Act, or the possibility of altering the regulations or issuing fresh regulations; but it appeared to him and to the Government that the simplest way of dealing with this very legitimate grievance and hardship was simply the repeal of the subsection of the principal Act. Therefore this Bill is before you, and I hope your Lordships will give it a Second Reading.

§ EARL HOWE
My Lords, there is only one question that I desire to ask the noble Lord. I quite agree with what he has just said, but there are other flaws which have come to light in the Road Traffic Act with which it may be necessary to deal either by amending the regulations or by means of Bills. What method is the Minister likely to adopt? I cannot help thinking that it would be very much better to have a more comprehensive Bill than this, and to deal with one or two other questions. One in particular comes to my mind in connection with the speed at which trailers are allowed to travel when they are in 554 tow by motor vehicles. The Minister himself has agreed, I think, that the speed laid down in the Act is too low. This would give the Minister a chance to put that point right. I hope we shall not have too many of these Bills, but I think there will be other points which require amendment.

§ LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE
My Lords, in reply to the noble Earl, I may say that the Road Traffic Act has hardly had a sufficiently long trial yet to find out what difficulties there are in it, if any, which require altering—some perhaps by regulation and some, as the noble Earl suggests, possibly by further legislation. But this particular hardship and grievance it was felt should be dealt with forthwith; in fact before the August Bank Holiday. It is on Bank Holidays that this grievance would be felt, as it is impossible to obtain properly regulated motor vehicles for this purpose, and lorries and vehicles of that description are very often used. It was because of its urgency that the Minister felt that this particular grievance should be dealt with forthwith.