HC Deb 22 December 1937 vol 330 cc1968-9
58. Mr. Cassells

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the advantages of all-steel railway carriages over carriages constructed mainly of wood; and whether he is prepared to take steps to make the universal use of all-steel coaches compulsory?

Mr. Burgin

Apart from some all-steel rolling stock, coaches of modern design on main line railways in this country all have steel underframes, with wood, or wood and steel, bodies; they embody 75 to 85 per cent. of their weight in steel. The design of rolling stock is a matter which is constantly under review by the railway companies. My technical advisers feel that there is no justification on grounds of safety for making the use of all-steel coaches compulsory on main line railways, nor have I any power in this respect.

Mr. Cassells

Is the Minister aware that the type of semi-steel coach to which he refers was abolished in the United States of America 25 years ago, and that in Belgium the all-steel coach is universally used; and will he not be prepared in those special circumstances to set up a Government inquiry into this point?

Mr. McEntee

Is it not a fact that the British railways are the safest in the world, and that the present form of steel and wood construction is admittedly the best for our railways?

Mr. Burgin

As I have made clear in the answer to the original question, I am concerned with main line railways in this country. This matter is constantly under review, and my technical advisers take the view that the present type of coach, with the greater part of it steel and with a certain amount of teak or mahogany, is the safest for British traffic conditions. I am satisfied that they know their business, but I am always willing to be informed, and if information is placed before me I will give it detailed attention.