HL Deb 09 June 1942 vol 123 cc210-26

VISCOUNT MAUGHAM had the following Notice on the Paper: To ask His Majesty's Government whether, having regard to the great economy in the use of motor vehicles as regards tyres, petrol and oil and maintenance generally resulting from comparatively low speeds, they propose to take steps during the present emergency to prevent high speeds in the driving of any motor vehicles: and to move for Papers. The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, the Motion in my name was down for discussion before your Lordships some little time ago, and was adjourned to meet the convenience of the Minister of War Transport. It has come on to-day but, unfortunately, the Minister of War Transport has been called away on Government business of an urgent character, and he is, therefore, unable to reply to what I am about to put before your Lordships. He has, however, arranged for the noble Lord, Lord Templemore, to fill his place, and I wish to say that I have no complaint at all against the Minister of War Transport for his unavoidable absence.

The matter with which my Motion is concerned, relates to the economical use of mainly three substances, which after two and three-quarter years of war have become substances of considerable rarity in this country—namely, petrol and oil for use in various machines, rubber for use in tyres, and such substances as steel and other like things which are utilized in the upkeep and repair of vehicles. There may be other substances about which the Government may be in some trouble, but these are three of the very important substances, and all of them are consumed in the ordinary use of cars whether they be private cars or Government vehicles. Now upon the fact of the great economy which can be obtained from the use of these vehicles at a moderate speed I have no doubt at all that it will be found from the Minister's reply that there has been a great deal of ignorance. Until quite recently, I believe, people have not realized what a considerable increase in the amount of fuel consumed and in the wear and tear of tyres is caused by the use of vehicles at a rapid rate on the roads. The Government some time ago, after, I believe, a considerable amount of inquiry, placed upon the coupon books which are issued to people in connexion with the use of petrol, a statement to the effect that the amount of distance which you travel for a particular gallon of petrol is largely dependent on your using the car at a speed between 28 and 30 miles per hour.

I am not sure when they first put that in print for the benefit of the public, because, like a great many other people, I am afraid that I do not read everything that comes before me in war-time, and it was not until quite recently that this statement on behalf of the Government came to my notice. But, having made that statement, there can be no doubt at all that they have for some time been aware of the serious waste which is occasioned, in respect of petrol at any rate, by the high speeds on the road. It seems a little unfortunate that they have allowed two and three-quarter years of war to go by before taking steps to prevent the driving of motor vehicles at speeds which are uneconomic from this point of view.

My attention was largely drawn to this matter by information which reached us all in the columns of The Times in regard to the action taken in a country where there are millions of automobiles in use, and where petrol, as your Lordships know, is called "gasoline"—namely, the United States of America. The New York Times on March 22 of this year published an article which was referred to in a letter by Professor Goodhart to The Times. I have procured an extract from the New York Times, and, with your Lordships' permission, will refer to some portions of it. It begins by saying that with proper enforcement of the 40 miles per hour speed limit on the highways, which was urged upon the Governors of all States by President Roosevelt, several useful purposes would be served. It is said that Connecticut many weeks ago anticipated this action, and set its top speed at 40 miles per hour, and that New York and New Jersey might be expected soon to follow suit. I understand that one of them at least has already done so. Then, after referring to the natural trend of raising speed limits on roads before the war, the article goes on to say: The wisdom of reduced speed is manifest when we must save both rubber and gasoline. Reference is then made to articles in which comparative costs have been studied, and in particular the New York Times says: It is shown, for example, that the driver saves less than 2 minutes in going 5 miles when he drives at 45 miles an hour as compared with 35 miles an hour. However, he uses 5 more gallons of gasoline in a thousand miles driving at 45 than at 35, and 12 more gallons at 55 than at 35. Tyres wear out almost four times as fast at 45 miles an hour as at 25 miles an hour, and the difference in the tyre wear cost for a thousand miles of driving is $1.35 for the additional speed of 10 miles an hour as between 35 and 45. Maintenance, depreciation and oil costs likewise go up, so that the total cost of operation of the average car per mile, as revealed by these studies, is 2.4 c. at 35 miles an hour, 3 c. at 45, 3.35 c. at 55, and 4.9 c. at 65 miles an hour, That is the view which has been obtained as the result of very careful inquiries in the United States; and I would observe that, since the matter was raised in The Times by Professor Goodhart, he has obtained a number of statements by various correspondents with regard to two matters.

First of all, there are those who say that they have never been told the facts, and they never realized that they were wearing out their tyres and uselessly expending petrol; secondly, there are letters from people who state that they could give astonishing figures concerning the life of tyres which have been carefully used as compared with those which have been used without consideration of speed. I have seen some of those statements, and they are indeed surprising. He has also obtained and given to me information with regard to what people find is in fact the speed at which Government vehicles as well as private cars have been and are being driven. Your Lordships know that at the end of this month there is going to be a very severe restriction of the use of private cars, and therefore the observations with which I am troubling your Lordships to-day are largely connected with the use by the Government, and necessarily the increasing use, of lorries, tractors and all the other Government vehicles which we see travelling about the country. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Templemore, who is replying for the Government, will not be induced by any statements which may have been put before him to express the opinion that Government vehicles are generally driven at very moderate speeds. Since I put down this Motion, I have been looking at the speeds at which such vehicles are driven, and it is really idle to say that they are driven at an economic speed.

Moreover, I have obtained other information. I know of a gentleman whose business it is to travel round the country making speeches at camps and elsewhere. He is provided—because, of course, this work is unpaid—with a Government car, and he tells me that he is continually driven at speeds exceeding 50 and 60 miles per hour. He gives me a particular case where, going to a somewhat distant camp, he averaged 40 miles per hour for the trip, and for long stretches went at 60 miles per hour. There was no need for this speed, because it brought him to his camp about an hour before his lecture.

I have also in my hand a statement by a coroner for a district in the Midlands. He tells me that in his part of the world every day along the arterial roads from north to south lorries forge ahead, even with heavy loads, and sometimes with trailers, at 40 miles per hour to 55 miles per hour, according to his own careful checking. He adds, of course, something about the increase in accidents due to these speeds. But with regard to that, for my part I intend to say nothing today. We have debated this over and over again in this House, and apparently the Government are not persuaded as to the matter of increase in accidents. I am merely concerned with something of which the Government know far more than I do—namely, the great economy which can be obtained now quite readily by insistence on any economic speed being used by Government and other cars, and the emergencies at the present time in regard to economy in the various matters I have mentioned—a position which will get more and more serious if the war goes on for any length of time, particularly having regard to the unfortunate and untoward events in Malaya and elsewhere.

The Government must be in a position—and I hope to hear something about it—to tell us what information they have obtained from the records in various districts as to the petrol consumption of the vehicles under various commanding officers' control. My information is that there is a very wide difference between the number of miles per gallon which are in fact achieved by Service vehicles in different parts of the country, and I believe that very largely those differences are due to the fact that some commanding officers are very strict with their men about their driving at moderate speeds, and in other parts of the country they are not. I have obtained information from certain persons to show that drivers of Service vehicles in many parts of the country say that they have never been told anything about speeds from the point of view of economy. They have been told that they must drive carefully, and that is what their commanding officers tell them in some places. In other places they have been told that they must drive at the moderate speed of 30 miles per hour, for instance, and if there are heavy vehicles it goes down to 20, according to Government Regulations, in some places. And there petrol consumption is diminished.

Of course it is not only petrol consumption and rubber tyres which suffer so much from fast travel, but there is also—especially in the case of Government cars—the matter of upkeep. If you drive a heavy vehicle, a trolley, laden with anything you like for Government service, at 40 miles per hour or more on an ordinary road, the trolley is apt to be shaken to bits after a mileage which is far too little, and far less than it would have been able to stand if only the driving had been at a very moderate speed. The Government know all about this, but so far very little has been done to enforce the use of economic speeds in these cases.

It is quite clear that it is no good making regulations if you do not have them obeyed, and to me it is clear that the police have been increasingly careless on the subject of attacking people for excessive speed, that is in the case of private motor cars—I do not suppose that in the case of public service vehicles they interfere at all, or practically not at all My suggestion, with all respect, to the Minister of Transport or anybody else who may be concerned, is that they should really take steps from now on to make it almost impossible for cars to be driven at high speed during the currency of the present war. I would observe in passing that we must not expect to get petrol and rubber easily again when the war comes to an end. Rubber trees take seven years before you can tap them. Oil wells that have been destroyed will take years to be put once more in a position where pumping operations can be resumed. We must be content in this country to wait quite a long time after the war before petrol and rubber are once more available almost without stint, and we must make up our minds to be economical in our use of those valuable articles. The same is true with regard to wear and tear of cars. We shall not get cars after the war for a long time at ordinary prices. They will be in the nature of a luxury which can only be obtained by care and the possession of plenty of money. So far as. I can make out from the evidence, roughly the Government can secure an extra mileage of five miles per gallon from an ordinary light Government vehicle, and they can save, I believe, at least 50 per cent. of the cost of the tyres, by really insisting upon the sort of speeds which they themselves say are the right speeds—28 to 30 miles an hour.

Before sitting down I should like to say a word on a cognate subject. As I have already pointed out, at the end of this month we are going to have a great diminution in the number of private cars, which are going to be laid up in very large numbers. I should like to remind the Minister that there are a great number of people, owners of generally quite small motor cars, who live miles from a town and miles from a 'bus route, people who live in small houses with quite moderate gardens, parts of which are now used for raising potatoes and green vegetables, and who spend nearly all their time, apart from their children if they have any, in war work of one kind or another. If the Government are unable to economize petrol and rubber in the way which I suggest, I feel that the Minister will be compelled to exercise with a stony heart his powers of driving these people off the roads by refusing them licences to drive. If he feels bound to do so, the position will be that a great number of these people will be driven to leave the villages or the places where they live and to go into the towns to swell the large number of people who have already gone there, and all the very useful work, essentially of the nature of war work, which they are doing in the villages all over the country, will, unfortunately, come to an end.

That will not be for the benefit of the country as a whole, and really the amount of petrol which they need, more particularly if they, too, are compelled to keep to a maximum of 28–30 miles an hour, is a small amount. All of it, I am perfectly certain, can be saved by the kind of measures which have already been taken in the States and which already ought to have been taken here. Although I know that the Minister of Transport is bound to present a very stony countenance to the world, I believe it is possible that beneath that granitic exterior, he may have a heart of gold. I should like to believe that, for if he really realizes the position and the number of people for whom I am specially pleading, and the useful work they are doing all over the country, he will see if he cannot be somewhat tender in his treatment of them, and will see that every possible endeavour is made to enable them to carry on their most useful service in the neighbourhoods where they live.

I have already said I am deliberately leaving out any possible saving in life or injury to man, woman, and child, but it will perhaps not be wrong if I mention that in Canada, where they have recently been engaged in reducing the speed of motor vehicles of all "kinds, they have found that mortality and injury of people on the roads have been very largely diminished. If that should happen, nobody surely would regret it, but that is not the point I am on at the moment. I am saying "Leave that out, treat yourselves as economists in this matter, and see if you cannot do something to reduce the expenditure of the articles I have mentioned, before you find yourselves in a still worse position." I beg to move for Papers.

VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD

My Lords, I do not wish to detain the House more than a few moments in following my noble: and learned friend who has spoken with such great force and such wealth of information. He finished by saying he did not wish to go into the question of the diminution of mortality and injury which would take place if there were a reduction of speed. No more do I. We have had the opportunity of discussing that question once or twice in this House. I hope we may have more opportunities in the future until we have succeeded in converting, not the Government, but the powers that organize the political forces of the Government, who do not see that many votes are to be gained by diminishing the slaughter on the roads. All I would add on that particular side: to-day is that slaughter on the roads does mean a very great economic loss as well. That is quite obvious, and though I do not wish to go into it, it comes into the considerations which my noble and learned friend has in view.

As to the main point he makes, there is no doubt at all, I suppose, that not only with respect to motor cars, but with respect to locomotive engines, steamships on the sea, and so on, there is always an economic speed. Everybody has always been aware of that, and if you go beyond it, the cost of moving is out of all proportion to the actual increase of speed. That is the fundamental point of my noble friend's Motion. I hope the Government will be able to do something to meet him. The present time, when long-distance private travelling on the roads has been cut down, and is going to be cut down further, is an appropriate moment for trying this experiment because it will not inflict any great hardship or any great inconvenience on anybody. There are cases, no doubt, in which Government vehicles—not only Army vehicles—are driven too fast. But I cannot say from what I have personally observed in the part of the country where I live, that that is the case. But there is no conceivable reason why, in the vast majority of cases, they should be driven fast, and if the Government arrive at the decision that, roughly speaking, 28 to 30 miles an hour is the economic speed, this is an admirable opportunity for trying that out as a definite source of economy.

There is one other point I should like to mention if only for the purpose of asking the Government to inquire into it. From various information that has reached me, it is suggested that Government cars used in the kind of way they were used by my noble friend who went about speaking—that kind of use—are frequently of a size and horse-power quite unnecessarily high. As my noble friend is well aware, every increase of horsepower immensely increases running costs. I do not know whether my noble friend will institute inquiry on that point, and find out whether the necessary work of Government could not be carried on by using cars of less expensive type than I have indicated. I do not wish to detain the House further, but would only express my warm agreement with the views put forward by my noble and learned friend.

LORD BRABAZON OF TARA

My Lords, I am sure we are very grateful to Lord Maugham for having given us an educational lecture on the economics of transportation. We have got to remember that, to-day, transportation by mechanically-propelled road vehicles is divided into two classes—one with very little petrol and no possibility of buying any tyres, and the other, the Services, with all the petrol and ail the tyres they require. I do not think the noble and learned Viscount could possibly say that private motorists have not already learnt the real lessons of economy as to speed, because the general speed of private cars up and down the country has got down to-day to the economic level. I do a good deal of motoring about the country, and I very seldom see a car going much more than 30 miles an hour. That is not true about Service vehicles. They are going a good deal faster than is economically sound. I might remind my noble friend that, as far as heavy vehicles are concerned, the speed limit has always been 30 miles an hour and in some cases 20, so that theoretically there is a law against their travelling above the economic limit.

My noble friend did forget one particular point about which I should like to remind the House. Although there is a lot of wear and tear in the respects he mentioned, he entirely forgot the wear and tear on the roads, which is far and away the most expensive contribution towards transportation in this country. I wish my noble friend Lord Croft had been here to listen to the wise words of my noble friend Lord Maugham, because they were really addressed to the Services rather than to the Minister of Transport who is quite guiltless in this matter, whereas the Services can always issue their regulations.

But if we are to talk about economy of fuel, there is one point I would like to bring before the House, and that is in reference to the ridiculous regulations which are still in force, such as the abolition of directive signposts. The waste of petrol which goes on in this country through stopping at a corner and asking the people the way—and they are invariably refugees who do not know—is much worse than any fast driving. There was a time when perhaps the abolition of those signposts was an important contribution to our safety, but I maintain that that has now gone. We have now a very efficient organization, the Home Guard, and is it really not possible that they could not take down all the signposts in England overnight if danger arose? When people say that this his been done in order to confuse parachutists, I would ask, have we been having the number of parachutists which justifies such a great inconvenience as has resulted from taking down the signposts? I think it is time some of these absurdities, which were introduced at a very critical time, were done away with. I noticed even to-day that a certain bank must cross out the name of the place where the branch is situated when it refers to a particular locality, but it can leave it in anywhere else. These things are reducing our war effort to an absurdity, and I think it is high time we got the signposts back throughout rural England.

LORD GIFFORD

My Lords, I should like strongly to support the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon, in what he said about the private motorist. The private motorist has learnt from bitter experience that he has got to economize in order to make his supplementary ration do. He never gets the amount for which he has asked, and the only way he can do his duty is to economize his petrol. I also suggest that any further legislation brought in now would add many extra duties to those already discharged by the police. The police are already driven almost to the end of their tether, and to bring in legislation that would impose extra duties upon them is in my view unnecessary, because the private motorist well knows he has to economize if he is going to be able to do the duty for which petrol is given to him. I listened with great interest to what the noble Viscount, Lord Maugham, told us about what can be done by means of low-speed, but we all fully realize this. The Government have given us a great deal of propaganda on this aspect of the matter. If I might make one other suggestion, it is that when each application for supplementary rations is made there might be above the signature a form of undertaking by the applicant that he would, where possible, drive his car at an economical speed. Having said this, I will not further detain your Lordships.

LORD WARDINGTON

My Lords, before the noble Lord replies may I ask one question? I do not know whether he has any figures that he can give us showing the economy which can be effected by what is called "coasting." I did before the war try and arrive at some answer to that question, and on some long journeys of about ninety miles, according to the rough calculation that I made, I was coasting—that was, going with petrol shut off—for twenty-eight miles, or nearly one-third. I know that when you shut off the engine and start again you are wasting a certain amount of petrol, and that when you shut it off you are probably wasting a further amount before the engine stops, but I imagine there must be some authoritative statement that can be made on this question. There is the possibility of very considerable economy, I should imagine, by coasting wisely.

LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, my noble friend the Minister of Transport has been called away on urgent business connected with his Department, and he has asked me to reply, which I am doing at very short notice. I will, therefore, ask my noble friend Lord Maugham and your Lordships to forgive any shortcomings in my answer. His Majesty's Government, I am sure, are very grateful to my noble friend for drawing the attention of the House to this matter, which is of the utmost importance. It is of vital importance to make every possible economy in the use of rubber of which, of course, we have lost vast quantities, as one noble Lord said, and also, as I think my noble friend Lord Cecil pointed out, there is the effect of the general wear and tear of motor vehicles. This is a point which we think should be driven home at every available opportunity. The importance of cutting out every wasteful or non-essential use cannot be over-stressed.

It is common ground, as all my noble friends who have spoken have said, that the driving of motor vehicles at high speeds is very wasteful of rubber and fuel, and the Government have given most careful consideration to the best means of reducing unjustifiable extravagance of this type. The maximum speeds of commercial vehicles are already fixed and in no case exceed 30 miles per hour. The question of further limitation of speed, therefore, applies only to private cars. As my noble friend who moved this Motion has said, the President of the United States has requested the Governors of States to introduce overall speed limits of 40 miles per hour, and it is known that seven States have already done so. The first point, therefore, that we had to decide was whether the Government should take similar action in this country, and after very careful deliberation the Government have come to the conclusion that in the circumstances now obtaining in this country such action would not be expedient. I will inform your Lordships of a few of the reasons which lead them to this conclusion.

As your Lordships know, after the end of this month there will to all intents and purposes be no private motoring in the United Kingdom owing to the abolition of the basic rationing, and, apart from minor exceptions, it will only be possible to use a motor car for purposes directly connected with the war effort. Therefore the private motorist, as such, will have ceased to exist for the time being. The number of cars on the roads will in consequence be very drastically reduced. In these circumstances the saving of rubber due to the imposition of a maximum speed limit of 40 miles per hour on private-cars would be small. Nevertheless, in present circumstances, we cannot neglect the smallest saving, and if there were no further objection we should have imposed such a speed limit, but there is very substantial further objection. This I think was touched on in the speech to which we have just listened by my noble friend Lord Gifford. The Government had to consider whether such a speed limit would be enforceable—your Lordships are quite aware that it is no good making a road regulation if you cannot enforce it properly—and whether any such enforcement would be economical of men and materials. The Government concluded that in present circumstances they could not enforce it unless they greatly increased police supervision and in particular mobile patrols. The increasing demand for man-power for other purposes would make it difficult to do this, and the extra mobile patrols would need many fast cars and would themselves consume rubber. A reasoned appeal to motor drivers would be as effective as an unenforceable regulation, and the Government, therefore, are about to appeal to all drivers of vehicles not to exceed a speed of 40 miles per hour, and by careful driving to minimize their consumption of rubber and fuel.

Now I pass to the question of cars driven on Government business. In this case the Government are not content only to appeal to drivers. One or two speakers, including, I think, the noble Lord who introduced the subject, have referred to the great speed at which Army and Service vehicles are driven. Speaking for myself, I must say, living in a part of the country where there are a great many troops, that in the last few months I have seen a very great improvement in the speed and the care with which military vehicles are driven. I must say that in justice to the Army. Whereas some time ago one was in fear of being killed at nearly every corner by fast-driven vehicles, that sort of driving is now very much the exception. It shows that the Departments concerned have taken the action which is required. The Fighting Services are issuing instructions that their cars should not, in ordinary circumstances, be driven at speed over 40 miles per hour. All Civil Government Departments are to issue instructions that cars under their control should not, save under exceptional circumstances, be driven at speed over 40 miles per hour. My noble friend the Minister is arranging with the Ministers of Information and Supply for full publicity to be given to these instructions and for an appeal to be made to private drivers that they should comply with the rule laid down for the Fighting Services and for the Civil Departments.

LORD GAINFORD

May I ask whether that applies to motor bicycles as well as other vehicles?

VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD

They are commonly driven much faster than that.

LORD TEMPLEMORE

I have had no notice of the question but I should say that it will. However, I will bring the matter to the notice of my noble friend. As your Lordships are aware, a system of tyre rationing has been introduced and we are seeking a means by which this system of control can be administered on the basis that cars are not to be driven at speeds exceeding 40 miles per hour. Thus a new tyre might not be obtainable when the old tyre has been used extravagantly. Furthermore, every Government Department is once more to review the number of cars maintained under their control both at headquarters and in their regional organizations, and we are asking them to make a further reduction in their number. I believe that the War Office have already instituted a sweeping examination as to the number of cars, and I think that a number of Staff cars are to be reduced in size in future.

While I have directed my remarks in the main to the question of tyre economy, the noble Viscount will appreciate that the measures which the Government are adopting will also achieve savings in fuel, oil and maintenance. Of all the major war materials of war, rubber is perhaps the most precious. We are taking every practicable and reasonable step to effect economies so far as motor transport is concerned, but much must depend on the care and public spirit of each and every user. My noble friend Lord Brabazon, whose speech we were pleased to hear, raised the question of the abolition of signposts, and the wear and tear on roads. I cannot give him an answer to-day, but I will draw the attention of my noble friend to this matter. My noble friend Lord Wardington spoke about coasting. I have no figures about that. I agree that it is a useful thing to do, but I am afraid it is a thing that one always means to do and always forgets. My noble friend tells me that he coasted thirty miles out of ninety, which is very good. That is a matter which I will also bring to the notice of my noble friend the Minister. I can assure your Lordships that the Government are quite alive to the seriousness of the issue and that they will not hesitate to take any effective step to conserve rubber for vital purposes. I have answered this debate at short notice, and I am afraid very imperfectly, but I will most certainly see that the views expressed by the noble Viscount, Lord Maugham, and other speakers are brought to the notice of my noble friend the Minister and his advisers.

VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD

May I ask why the Government have fixed a speed of 40 miles per hour when they have said, I understand, that 28 to 30 miles is the most economical speed?

LORD TEMPLEMORE

I am afraid I cannot answer that, but I will inquire and let my noble friend know privately.

VISCOUNT MAUGHAM

My Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble Lord for the reply he has made and I am very much obliged also to the noble Lord, the Minister of War Transport, who unfortunately is unable to be here to-day, for the care and pains he has taken in considering this problem. I must say, however, that the point just mentioned by my noble friend, Viscount Cecil of Chelwood, has also occurred to me. It is most difficult to understand why the Government, who say they are desirous of saving every gallon of petrol and every ounce of rubber—if you reckon rubber in ounces—should yet be so chary about taking a firm stand that, knowing 28 to 30 miles an hour to be the economic speed, they advise people not to travel at more than 40 miles per hour. To advise people—that is going to induce a number of persons to raise the speed at which they have been travelling, as we are told, in many parts of the country, from 30 miles to 40 miles per hour. I should have thought that, if the Government were really anxious to save all they can, they would have made the speed 30 miles and not 40 miles.

My noble friend Lord Brabazon said that private people driving private cars had already learnt all about economic driving, and I gathered from him that driving at an economic speed was now almost universal. All I can reply is that that is not my experience. Within the last week I have been driven by a member of your Lordships' House, who is in frequent attendance here, at a speed much nearer 50 miles than 30 miles an hour. I protested and I told the noble Lord that I should complain of his conduct in this House. I have complained, although without mentioning his name. I can assure your Lordships that the speed did not seem very fast and that he was perfectly unconscious of the fact—because, like everyone else, he is short of petrol—that he was driving at an uneconomic speed. I have had similar experiences during the last month or so when being driven by others. I do not believe, with all respect to the noble Lord, Lord Brabazon, that people do keep to 30 miles an hour. I was driven a short time ago by a member of another place. I thought that we were travelling at a very moderate speed, but we were held up and he was fined. I was quite unaware, because I was not thinking about it, that we were driving at an uneconomic speed. He was driving in London at more than 30 miles an hour.

I said nothing about wear and tear of roads to which, I think, Lord Brabazon very usefully called attention. That was simply because I had not got any figures or any other positive evidence which I could put before your Lordships. The facts which I have put before your Lordships are, I believe—speaking as one who has been accustomed to judge evidence for many years—conclusive to show that the case I have endeavoured to make before your Lordships is a sound one, and that economy will be obtained in all these various directions by a reduction of speed to the utmost economical limit. Being accustomed to be fair, I wish to say that I believe it is true that Army lorries are now, and have been during the last year, driven with much more care than they used to be, and I am only too glad to give my testimony in favour of that view.

There is only one other thing which I wish to say. The Government propose to make no regulation, because, they say, they have no means of enforcing it. I believe it to be true that they have no means of enforcing it, but I do not believe that that is a good reason. My experience is that this is a law-abiding country and if the people are told that 30 miles an hour is their maximum legal speed, the great number of them who, at present, do not think about it—such as the noble Lord to whom I have referred, who drove me during last week at the high speed I have mentioned—will endeavour to comply with the law, although there is not a policeman to stop them at every corner, nor a patrol car to catch them up and prevent them going on. I am convinced that the great majority of people will abide by a definite rule, and there is no way of showing more clearly that the Government are in earnest about this matter than by making a definite regulation. If the Government have made up their minds upon this, of course, I say no more, but I do earnestly hope that they will consider the matter of 40 miles an hour and reduce it to 30 miles in the admonitions which they propose to give to the public. I am quite sure that by that they will save millions of gallons of petrol in the course of a year, many, many tons of rubber, and it may be, incidentally, though I am not laying stress on it, thousands of lives. I am obliged to the noble Lord for the speech which he has made, and I beg leave of the House to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.