HC Deb 10 July 1930 vol 241 cc741-50
Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I beg to move, in page 41, line 4, to leave out from the word "of," to the word "and," in line 8, and to insert instead thereof the words "a council to which this section applies."

Mr. LLEWELLYN-JONES

On a point of Order. There is an Amendment standing in the name of myself and two of my colleagues which proposes to insert in line 6, after the word "district," the words: such council being the road authority in respect of any road within the area of the council which may be specified for the purposes of this sub-section. If the Amendment moved by the Minister is carried, obviously my Amendment will be cut out, and as there is a question of principle involved here I wish to know if we can have an opportunity of discussing it?

Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR

In order to shorten the discussion would it not be possible for the Amendment which stands in the name of the hon. Member for Flint (Mr. Llewellyn-Jones) and myself and another hon. Member to be discussed at this period, since it relates to a matter which will be excluded if the Amendment of the Minister is carried?

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out to the end of line 6 stand part of the Bill." put, and negatived.

Mr. LLEWELLYN-JONES

The Amendment which I desire to move is an Amendment of considerable substance and perhaps the simplest way in which to explain its effect would be to point out that with these proposed words the Clause will read as follows: The Minister may on the application of the council of any county or county borough or of any borough, not being a county borough or urban district, such council being the road authority in respect of any road within the area of the council which may be specified for the purposes of this sub-section.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Dunnico)

I am afraid the hon. Member's Amendment cannot now be moved. He failed to move his Amendment before the Question was put.

Remaining words left out.

Proposed words there inserted in the Bill.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

That rules out the hon. Member's Amendment. He did not move in the appropriate place.

Mr. MILLAR

As this Amendment has been cut out owing to the form in which the Minister's Amendment has been moved, would it not be possible to move it as a manuscript Amendment to the new Sub-section which the Minister proposes to insert later? (8) The councils to which this section applies are the councils of counties or county boroughs or of urban districts having a population of over twenty-thousand according to the last census for the time being.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I am afraid that the Amendment which has just been carried renders it impossible for the hon. and learned Member to move his Amendment. I understood that there was some doubt as to whether the hon. Member's point had not been met by the Government Amendment, but he is too late to move his Amendment now.

Further Amendments made: In line 14, leave out from the word "which," to the word "that," in line 15, and insert instead thereof the words "he is satisfied."

In line 21, leave out from the word "of," to the word "and," in line 25, and insert instead thereof the words "a council to which this section applies."—[Mr. Herbert Morrison.]

Mr. BUCHAN

I beg to move, in page 41, line 25, alter the word "being," to insert the words, or the governing body of any university in the receipt of a grant from public moneys. I understand that the Minister will accept this Amendment. Its purpose is to give the governing body of any university, which receives grants from public moneys, the right to make application to the Minister and for the Minister to have a public inquiry with a view to making regulations dealing with motor traffic in the area concerned. The principle behind it is the simple one that where the State by a grant of public funds declares its belief that a university is doing work of national importance, it should make certain that the facilities for that work are not impaired. The Amendment applies to all universities of the kind which I have described, whether old or new, because the traffic difficulties to-day affect them all, but it applies in a special degree to the older English universities where there are ancient fabrics situated often in narrow and easily congested streets.

In the case of the University of Oxford, the situation is really grave. Oxford unhappily is the meeting place of two great lines of through heavy traffic—between the Midlands to the south, and between London and the West. No doubt by-passes will help to get over the difficulty and ease the situation, but bypasses by themselves will not solve the problem, because we have to face the fact that a great deal of motor traffic comes to Oxford for the purpose of visiting the city. Every day there are hundreds of private cars and scores of motor charabancs full of tourists. Any spring day and any summer day the High Street of Oxford is as congested as the Strand in London. From that situation two very grave consequences follow. The first is that the fabrics, especially the ancient fabrics, are in danger of structural damage. The second is that academic life on these busy streets is practically impossible. No undergraduate whose rooms are on the High or the Broad can possibly work in the day time, and lectures cannot be delivered in lecture rooms similarly situated. Many of the chief colleges in Oxford are situated on these busy streets. The dreaming spires of Oxford have long since ceased to dream, or if they dream nowadays, their dream must be a kind of nightmare. I readily admit that you cannot restore the academic peace which Oxford and Cambridge enjoyed for so many centuries. Those days have gone never to be recalled. But surely it is right that a university should be allowed to procure regulations so as to enable it to conduct its business in reasonable peace. I submit this Amendment with confidence on the simple and sound principle that where the State by a grant of State funds admits the value of a university's functions, it is the duty of the State to safeguard the university in their exercise.

9.0 p.m.

Sir JOHN WITHERS

I beg to second the Amendment.

The position at Cambridge is exactly similar to that which the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan) has described in regard to Oxford. If the Minister will give this matter his consideration, we shall all be extremely grateful.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I undertook that if this Amendment were moved with strict brevity, I would accept it, and I do so.

Colonel ASHLEY

Before the Amendment is carried, I wish to draw attention to a matter of machinery. It may be that my fears are unfounded, owing to the later Amendments of the Minister, but I would point out that if this Amendment, which I entirely support, be accepted, an Amendment may be necessary lower down.

Mr. MORRISON

I shall put that matter right by an Amendment which is down in my name, and I think that the right hon. Gentleman will find that it is covered.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I beg to move, in page 41, line 26, to leave out from the word "make," to the second word "the," in line 28, and to insert instead thereof the words, an order for any of the following purposes:—

  1. (a) the specification of the routes to be followed by vehicles;
  2. (b) the prohibition or restriction of the use of specified roads by vehicles of any specified class or description, either generally or during particular hours;
  3. (c)."
This and the subsequent Amendments are largely of a drafting character. The Clause as it stands enables the Minister to make an order for the regulation of traffic. These words are too wide and vague, and it has been thought desirable to specify more particularly the purpose for which an order may be made. I would draw attention to the proviso, which preserves reasonable access to premises where it is necessary.

Sir G. RENTOUL

This Clause authorises, among other things, the making of an order by the Minister for one way traffic in a street, including the prohibition of the driving of vehicles on any specified road within the area of the council otherwise than in a specified direction. I wish to ask the Minister to explain his view regarding an Order for one-way traffic being made in a street where tramcars and trolley vehicles are moving in both directions. This point was discussed in Committee upstairs, and the Minister then said it was his intention to omit the words "trolley vehicle," but this has not been done. In any event the omission of those words would not quite meet the point, because there is the question of the operation of tramcars in both directions. The whole advantage of one-way traffic is to secure that all the vehicles in a street move in the same direction, and if a driver is proceeding along a street which he is informed is a one-way street and is suddenly confronted with a vehicle moving in the opposite direction there is a grave risk of accident.

Moreover, it would be more difficult for the police to administer the Order, because the driver of a motor-car, seeing a tramcar proceeding along the street in a certain direction, would be apt to assume that he was entitled to follow. This point has been raised by motoring organisations in connection with many private Bills, and the Minister of Transport or his Department has recommended the inclusion in those Bills of a provision that no one-way traffic Order shall apply to any street along which any light railway car or tramcar is operating in both directions. This is a point of some substance, and I shall be much obliged if the Minister will explain his view upon it, particularly having regard to the discussion in Committee.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

The explanation of these words is that it is sometimes difficult to insert words to prevent a possibly foolish Minister doing an obviously foolish thing without automatically preventing him from doing a sensible thing; but it is the view of myself and of the Department that where there is a one-way street we cannot allow tramcars or trolley vehicles to run in the opposite direction in such a manner as to be likely to come into conflict with the other traffic. There may occasionally be an exception. I am speaking from memory, but I fancy that such an exception does exist in Brighton. In that case, however, the tramway is all the time hugging the kerb round a garden; and as long as the tram is on a track near the kerb which no other vehicle as likely to cross there may be a case for an exception. My general view is that it would be sheer insanity gratuitously to mix up one-way traffic with tramcars or trolley vehicles going in the opposite direction, and the hon. and learned Member may rest assured that in the course of administration we shall keep that point of view very strictly in mind and shall observe it.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 41, line 29, leave out the words "within the area of the council."

In line 30, at the end, insert the words: (d) otherwise in relation to the regulation of traffic.

In line 30, after the words last inserted, insert the words: Provided that no order shall be made under this sub-section with respect to any road which would have the effect of preventing such access as may be reasonably required for vehicles of any class or description to any premises situated on or adjacent to the road.

In line 35, leave out from the word "after" to the second word "public," in line 37, and insert instead thereof the words "after holding, if he thinks fit, a."

In page 42, line 4, after the word "uses," insert the words "a vehicle, or causes."

In line 4, leave out the words "the use of."

In line 5, after the word "vehicle," insert the words "to be used."

In line 6, leave out the words "guilty of an offence, and shall be."

In line 7, leave out the words "on summary conviction."

In line 7, leave out the words "the first offence," and insert instead thereof the words "a first conviction."

In line 9, leave out the words "subsequent offence," and insert instead thereof the words "second or subsequent conviction."—[Mr. Herbert Morrison.]

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I beg to move, in page 42, line 13, at the end, to insert the words: (8) The councils to which this section applies are the councils of counties or county boroughs or of urban districts having a population of over twenty-thousand according to the last census for the time being.

Mr. LLEWELLYN-JONES

This Clause lays down the limitation that only local authorities having a population of 20,000 or more are entitled to approach the Minister to ask for Orders for the prohibition or restriction of traffic on specified roads. Under the Local Government Act of last year the classified roads in the smaller urban authorities have passed under the control of the county councils, but in all the smaller urban districts there are a large number of non-classified roads which are under the control of the districts themselves. In the case of the unclassified roads, the urban district is the authority that would be entitled to approach the Minister and make application for the prohibition or restriction of traffic. Take any of the larger counties, the county council is not in touch with the smaller districts in the same way that the local authority is. The local authority is acquainted with the conditions of traffic in the district; they know the roads, where there should be a prohibition or a restriction of traffic, and where there should be a speed limit on the roads They are also the authority which is competent to decide as to any application that should be made under this Subsection to regulate the traffic within the area. I trust that the Minister will see his way to bring within the ambit of this Clause the small authorities which are so intimately concerned with the unclassified roads.

Mr. D. MILLAR

I support the view expressed by hon. Member for Flint (Mr. Llewellyn-Jones). It seems to me quite unjustifiable that a distinction should be drawn between communities with a population of over 20,000 and others with 20,000 or under in relation to roads over which the local authority has direct control. The road authority in respect to unclassified roads ought surely to have the same right in dealing with those unclassified roads that the road authority which deals with the classified roads has in the cases dealt with under this Sub-section. I should like to urge very strongly upon the Government that they are here face to face with a very big injustice to the smaller communities. I know from my own experience that there are many unclassified roads in small burghs in Scotland—I certainly know of them in my own division—where it is quite as necessary that the local authority should be in the position to apply for an order restricting the use of these roads as are the local authorities of the larger burghs.

I have an Amendment on the Order Paper which raises this point in relation to Scotland. I do not know whether it would save the time of the House if we could determine at this stage the question whether this point can be dealt with. If your Ruling is against me on that matter, I should like to take the opportunity of saying that this question is well deserving the further consideration of the Government. In Scotland, although we have substantial powers under the Burgh Police Act, 1892, Section 385, in regard to the regulation of traffic, we have not the same powers that are conferred upon the local authorities in Section 46. It appears to me that it is an unfair distinction which is being drawn between these two road authorities, that it will result in friction, and that the local authorities in the small burghs will feel that they are excluded from the full exercise of the powers which are being given to the larger authorities under this Sub-section. I strongly urge upon the Government that they should consider this question, which is regarded as one of importance by large numbers of small burghs and local authorities in Scotland as well as England.

Colonel ASHLEY

I hope that the Government will adhere to the Amend- ment. I think that it is quite enough to limit to an authority of a district with a population of over 20,000 the right to approach the Minister to make these inquiries. If we allow the smaller urban areas with a population of 3,000 or 4,000 to call for these inquiries, much extra public expense will be put upon the community in the holding of the inquiries. I think that the figure of 20,000 is quite low enough.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I can well understand the feelings of the two hon. Members who have spoken from the Liberal benches, but I am afraid that I cannot accept their views upon this matter. This is the Sub-section which gives power to the local authority to apply to the Minister to make an order for restricting traffic on certain roads. If the unit of application is too small we shall not get a broad view of the requirements of the area as a whole. I started with the intention to limit this provision to counties and county boroughs, and there is a lot to be said for that, but I subsequently agreed to include urban districts with a population of over 20,000. Every additional authority to which we give the right to apply will mean an additional number of inquiries, additional officers and additional expenses in administering the Act. I think I have met the case with reasonable fairness having gone further than I originally intended to do, and I regret that I cannot fully meet the point of view of my two hon. Friends opposite.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. HERBERT MORRISON

I beg to move, in page 42, line 15, to leave out the words "including the City of London."

Mr. MARCH

I should like a little information respecting this Amendment. Why is it necessary to take out the City of London. Is it because it is thought that the City of London is covered by the administrative County of London, or is it because the City of London has become so bureaucratic that they want to do as they please, and that they have been taken out of the Clause so that there will be no control over them?

Mr. MORRISON

There is no significance of policy in regard to this matter. This point is covered in another part of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.