§ 56. Lieut.-Colonel GAULTasked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the question of road restriction signs being so designed as to give the de-restricting indication on the reverse thereof; what saving of public funds would accrue by the adoption of such a sign; and whether 1600 he will give consideration to this proposal?
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAI do not think there would be any saving of public funds in this proposal, but I have it in mind.
§ Lieut.-Colonel GAULTIs the hon. Gentleman aware that in the opinion of many motorists the present sign is too inconspicuous and will he consider erecting a sign which can be more easily seen?
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAI had all those considerations in mind in giving the answer which I have just given to the hon. and gallant Member's question.
§ Major BEAUMONT THOMASDoes the hon. Gentleman realise that in many cases the sign does not exist at all?
§ Mr. SIMMONDSCan the hon. Gentleman tell us when he is going to come to a decision with regard to the painting of lamp posts as a de-restriction sign?
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAThat suggestion was discussed in the House and the predominant view was that a sign separate from the lamp post should be erected.
§ Mr. SIMMONDSWas there not a decision on the part of the Ministry that they would look into the question of marking the lamp posts throughout the length of a road which is de-restricted?
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHANo, Sir, I do not think that that is the case. Certain inconveniences would attach to that course which it would take too long to explain to the House in answer to a question.
§ Captain STRICKLANDWould the hon. Gentleman, when considering this matter, also consider the advisability of having signs on both sides of the road?