HC Deb 16 November 1932 vol 270 cc1119-20
24. Mr. HALL-CAINE

asked the Minister of Transport what reductions have been, or are being, compulsorily made in the coach services hitherto serving Poole and Bournemouth, and the outside districts?

Mr. PYBUS

Records are not available which would enable me to furnish the information asked for by my hon. Friend.

25 and 27. Mr. HUTCHISON

asked the Minister of Transport (1) whether he is aware that, owing to the imposition of a minimum fare of 1s. on the motor-coach service provided from Upminster to Aldgate by Upminster Services, Limited, the average number of passengers carried has decreased from over 40,000 in one week during September to under 10,000 for the week ended 16th November; and whether, in view of the inconvenience caused to residents in the Upminster area by the imposition of fares which it is beyond the means of most to pay, he will take immediate steps to cause the matter to be reconsidered;

(2) whether he is aware that the Metropolitan traffic commissioner has refused to grant a licence to proprietors of the Crown coach service to run a motor-coach service between Upminster and the Ford works; and whether, as these coaches have carried approximately 365,000 passengers a week and the only alternative service by the London General Omnibus Company takes over twice as long on the journey as Crown coaches, he will investigate the matter with a view to ensuring reasonable transport convenience to a large number of persons concerned?

Mr. PYBUS

I will answer these questions together. Both the cases to which my hon. Friend refers are under appeal to me and I cannot therefore properly discuss them. I must not of course be taken as accepting any of the figures stated in the questions, particularly as I have been to-day informed by him that the figure of 365,000 passengers should in fact be 3,650.

Mr. HUTCHISON

When the Minister of Transport is considering these appeals will he take note of the fact that passengers wishing to go from Upminster to Ilford, a matter of four miles, have now to pay 1s. instead of 4d.

Mr. PYBUS

These cases are on appeal, and the hon. Member is not in order in making ex parte statements concerning them.