§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain McEwen.]
§ Mr. Tinker (Leigh)I put a Question down a few weeks ago to the Ministry of War Transport about an accident which took place on the London-Manchester express on 6th February. It was rather a serious thing, and it might have been worse but for one or two unusual circumstances. I received a letter from one of my constituents who happened to be on the train, and I passed the letter on to the Minister, for him to make inquiries into it. It was a well-written letter, and I think I ought to read it to the House. It was dated 8th February, two days after the accident, and it reads as follows:
You have probably noticed an account of a fire on Sunday last on the London-Manchester express. I was on this train in the coach immediately behind that in which the fire started. I had, with others, to quit the coach hurriedly, for smoke was pouring into it. I passed through the next coach, but further progress to the rear was stopped, as the door which is adjoining the first-class compartment was locked. Congestion at this point was avoided by passengers jumping out on to the track, and there was no serious danger. The locked door caused much annoyance. It was subsequently opened, too late to be of any use. I think it must be evident, to anyone as near to the burning coach as I was, that we owe our immunity to the fact that the number of passengers in the first coaches was comparatively few, for these days. Had these coaches been full, the tale would have been very much different.From Servicemen who gave assistance, there can be no doubt that locked doors, again protecting first-class passengers, were respon- 361 sible in a great measure, if not wholly, for the casualties that did occur. I have written to you in the hope that if you think you can take any useful action you will do so. It does seem to me that some protest should be made by those who realise how near to danger we were and how materially that danger would have been increased if the train had been full. The locked doors which stopped progress down the train might have become a death-trap.It is evident to most of us who travel regularly that the locked door is becoming a source of danger. I do not care who it is that travels some distance, he will find at some part of the train a locked door, stopping communication between one part of the train and another.
§ Colonel Sir Joseph Nall (Manchester, Hulme)Suppose there is no corridor?
§ Mr. TinkerSomething should be done about this matter to see whether the danger can be avoided. It should be made public what doors aught to be locked. I had recent experience of this matter travelling up from Liverpool. I wanted to get into a first-class compartment, hut it was locked. I saw a porter and he unlocked it. When I got in he locked it again. I protested, but he said: "If I do not lock the door, other people will get in, and I shall have trouble to get them out." I had the thought in my mind that when I got to the next station the door might not be unlocked. I asked him to unlock the door and chance whether anyone got in. He did so. I have been on stations when trains have come in and passengers have been clamouring and making a row because doors were locked. It seems to me to be altogether wrong.
On Saturday last I had a similar experience. I was travelling from Manchester to St. Helens. I got into the end part of the train, into a third-class compartment. The train was a long one and it had to draw up at several stations twice. At one station it did not draw up twice. The guard came along saying, "Anyone wanting to get out make for the front of the train" I thought I would make for the front of the train. As I went along I came to a locked door. I was rather anxious as to what would happen when the train got to St. Helens. The carriage I was in stopped just short of the platform on the slope. Many more people had followed me and they began to clamber out and had to drop about a yard. I followed the rest. I do not know 362 whether it was right. But here was an example, in my own experience, of the locked corridor door. The question I want to put to the Minister is whether, at a time like this, we could not have a proviso that no doors at all should be locked. There seems to be some trouble about first-class passengers not getting their seats unless the doors are locked, that is, that first-class ticket-holders will not get their seats.
§ Mr. Bartle Bull (Enfield)Surely, the only way to get a first-class seat is to hold a first-class ticket?
§ Mr. TinkerThat may be so, but at a time like this, when trains are overcrowded and someone has to stand, is it too much to ask first-class passengers to take their turn?
§ Mr. TinkerWe are in agreement on that. It is something I have been leading up to.
§ Mr. TinkerI am putting to the Minister the danger and inconvenience caused by locked doors on trains. Why not have no locked doors and let everyone take their chance? It would be far better. I put it seriously, can he see his way to issue an order that no doors be locked either on corridor trains or non-corridor trains, and let us see how that works? If he cannot do that will he have a notice put up on doors that have to be locked saying that they have to be locked for a special purpose so that we know that it is an order? As the position is now we do not know whether it is done at the whim or the caprice of some official who has some friends coming, first-class passengers, to prevent someone else from getting their seats. No one seems to know the order. In the case I have mentioned it seems that those responsible had no right to lock the doors. Some action should be taken against those people. That is what I want to clear up to-day.
I want the Minister to make it definitely known what power the railway companies have to lock doors. If they have power let it be known what doors shall be locked. Then, when we are standing on the platform, we shall not be wondering who is attempting to do this thing and challeng- 363 ing railway officials. That kind of thing is happening every time we travel by train. I want to remove that. The Minister has a big task here. If accidents happen and deaths occur, who is responsible? Is the man who has locked the door to be responsible, or the Minister who gives the order for locking the door? Fatalities could easily happen. On this express from London to Manchester there were only six casualties, none serious, but there might have been six deaths. Luckily the fire was seen and everyone was able to get out. It is our duty to stop this kind of thing. I call upon the Minister to make the position clear, and, if possible, to prevent any doors being locked.
§ Mr. Tom Brown (Ince)In the first place I want the Minister to understand that I am not making an attack on him, on his Department, or even on some of the railway officials; some of them play their parts with magnificent courage and with very sweet tolerance. What we expect to-day, with all the difficulties which the war strain has thrown upon us, is a more accommodating spirit, not only from the railway companies but from the travelling public. Let us frankly admit that the Ministry of War Transport have done, and are doing, a splendid job of work, with limited rolling-stock, limited personnel, and the thousand and one difficulties that war conditions have thrown up. These difficulties have to be dealt with, but I personally desire that, in dealing with them, some consideration should be given—not for my own comfort, but for that of the travelling public—to the people who travel, and especially to the members of His Majesty's Forces. If there are any who deserve comfort and accommodation, it is the troops, who experience so much discomfort in other aspects of their life. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of War Transport said a few weeks ago, in this House, in answer to a question, that 80 per cent, of the people travelling to-day were members of the Forces. The locking of carriage doors, whether interior or exterior doors, creates added danger and added discomfort. One thing of which we can be sure is that at the port of embarkation for foreign service the doors of the carriages will not be locked—I say that in no sarcastic sense.
May I tell what I myself saw a few days ago, when travelling from London 364 to the North? A train drew in at one of the Midland stations. Immediately the train stropped there was a rush by the troops for the carriage doors. I saw a man with a gold braid band round his cap—I presume that he was the assistant stationmaster or somebody else in authority—deliberately go to the carriage doors and lock them. The troops, scurrying from one end, of the platform to the other, could not get into that train at all. They tried the carriage door which had been locked. Eventually, when the train was on the point of starting, one of the men had to clamber through the carriage window to get his seat. There was that added danger. He knew that that was a violation of the regulations. Immediately he had got through the carriage window, another very humble servant of the railway company came along and unlocked the carriage door, and the remaining four members of His Majesty's Forces walked into the carriage. But that was not the end of it. At once the man who had locked the door had the audacity to take the name and address of the sailor who had got through the window, though he was himself responsible for that man's violation of the regulations.
§ Mr. BullDoes the hon. Member mean that he locked all the doors of the coach, or just one compartment?
§ Mr. BrownI mean what I say. He locked every compartment in the first-class carriage from one end of the carriage to the other.
§ Mr. BrownThere was on this train, because I was sitting in it myself. What I want to stress is that if that railway servant had had the common courtesy to accommodate those troops, then that charge which was brought against that man would never have taken place. I went to the sailor myself and asked him what was the trouble, and he said "I was in duty bound to get through the carriage window in order to catch my train to get the boat at Stranraer."
§ Mr. BrownHe could not get in. I hope the hon. Member opposite will not interject in that manner. I witnessed this a few weeks ago. I am pleading, 365 along with the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker), that something should be done in order to assist not only the travelling troops and the travelling public but the railway servants in carrying out their duties, which are very great at the present moment. Only last Friday, travelling from London to the North, I actually saw men who could not get into a first-class carriage, where there was accommodation, because the doors' were locked, and they had to undertake their journey from Euston to Wigan sitting on the luggage rack. If there is anything that grieves in these days it is to see members of His Majesty's Forces, maybe coming home on leave, sitting on racks when they ought to be provided with proper accommodation. That could have been avoided last Friday, and I am asking that steps should be taken, on the lines suggested by the hon. Member for Leigh, to see that, where carriage doors have to be locked for certain purposes, notices should be posted to relieve railway officials of the responsibility.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of War Transport (Mr. Noel-Baker)I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) for raising this matter to-day. It certainly deserves discussion, and I hope that what I have to say will remove some misapprehensions which there may be. I am very grateful for the moderation and courtesy with which he puts his case, which the House appreciates very highly.
Let me deal first with the facts about the train to Manchester on 6th February, which first drew the attention of my hon. Friend to the locked doors. On that train, the 10.15 from Euston, a fire broke out in the second coach behind the engine at Leighton Buzzard. The fire was caused by a cinder from the engine, which ignited the canvas cover of the gangway between the first and second coaches behind the engine. The second coach, which caught fire, was a composite coach, that is to say, it contained both first- and third-class compartments, and the door in the corridor between the first-and third-class compartments was, as my hon. Friend has said, locked. He said the fact that it was locked made it more difficult for passengers to get to the rear of the train and added to the danger of serious results. Moreover, as he said to me in private conversation, and as 366 other hon. Members have pointed out in private conversation with me, there were other doors on the train which were locked, and they have said, what other hon. Members have said outside the House, that no doors should be locked in corridor trains at all; that locking must increase the risk to passengers in case of accident or fire; that, in any case, it prevents the easy movement of passengers from one part of the train to another, and may cause needless overcrowding and discomfort in one part of the train, while there is ample space in another part; that, if these doors are locked in order to protect first-class passengers they ought not to be locked; that it would be wrong in peace-time to lock them, and that, in conditions of war, with heavy traffic, it is doubly wrong to lock them. With that case so stated, very few people would seriously disagree. But, with respect, it is not quite the whole, complete and accurate picture of the case.
Let me deal first with the doors which which were locked on the Manchester train, which is a very good example. There was a door on the second coach which caught fire, the composite coach, the second behind the engine. That door was in the middle of the coach. The exit in front was blocked by fire and in consequence the passengers could not get to the coach in front and could not move back because the door was locked. What happened? How did they get out? The communication cord was pulled. There were two engines and both engine drivers acted very promptly and brought the train quickly to a stop. The passengers got out through the outer doors of the coach; there were 12 such doors, all of them unlocked. As I have said to my hon. Friend, the door in the corridor ought not to have been locked. It was a breach of the instructions which we have given. Three years ago, in April, 1941, there was a serious accident in the North in which a coach caught fire. The communicating door was locked in a composite coach and six Ampleforth college boys lost their lives. After that the instructions were changed and it was laid down that in no case should the door in the middle of a corridor in a composite coach between first- and third-class compartments ever be locked. Then there was the episode at Leighton Buzzard. I regret it. I have given instructions which, I hope, will ensure that that rule 367 will be rigorously observed in times to come.
Does that wholly dispose of the safety aspect of the matter? Ought not all doors to be left open against risk of fire? Well, it has never been envisaged that the right system for passengers to escape from a burning coach was by passing right down the train to the rear or the front as the case might be. In fact, as has been pointed out before, there are still in use many passenger coaches which have no corridors. It sometimes happens that you have en route to slip part of a train at its destination and you cannot unlock the doors. Therefore, that system would not be a safeguard. What we always regard as the safety system was exactly what happened in this case. The communication cord should be pulled and the train stopped as rapidly as possible, and the communicating door between the compartments being open, the passengers would always have an exit in order to get down on to the line, and in this case they had many exits. That system, as amended in 1941, and as it is to-day, is really sound. We have never had an accident which has resulted from it. Our inspecting officers are unanimously of opinion that the safety provision it makes is adequate, and in view of their expert knowledge and of the immense trouble with which they make out their reports on accidents and the care with which they do their work, I think the House would be justified in accepting their opinion as decisive.
I turn to other doors that were locked on the Manchester train. Why were they locked? There were on this train of 17 coaches, five which had brake compartments, what we call luggage vans. Three of them were loaded with passengers' luggage, mails and other valuable goods. The doors were locked. Why? Because the company had no spare guards who could travel in these brake compartments to look after the goods and because, in fact, all the companies are suffering every day grievous losses from the thefts which are taking place on these trains.
I ask my hon. Friend to consider the scale and the gravity of the thieving which is happening now. Last year the L.M.S. alone had claims against them for £1,000,000 worth of goods which were stolen whilst in their charge, nearly £3,000 368 a day. We know that black market operators are at work. We know that there are highly organised gangs. Only the other day a gang of passenger train thieves were convicted at the Old Bailey and their work in wartime conditions, of course, is very much easier than it is in times of peace. Lack of lighting—the dim irreligious light which we are allowed in the corridors and the brake vans—makes it much easier for them to make away with the goods.
The reason why these doors were locked was simply that, and I venture to suggest to my hon. Friend that there is no other way in which the passengers' luggage, and these other goods, can be protected except by locking the doors; there is no other way of checking the anti-social activities of these unpatriotic bandits who take advantage of war conditions and the difficulties of the railway staffs. The only doors which were locked on the Manchester train were locked for that reason; not a single door was locked in order to protect the privileges of the first-class passengers. I feel sure my hon. Friends will agree that it was right to lock those doors. I believe I am not overstating it if I say that in nine cases out of ten when doors are locked to-day on trains it is for that reason, to prevent theft. Of course, my hon. Friend is right when he says that the instructions do allow doors to be locked between first and third-class compartments in order to control the movement of third-class passengers into first-class accommodation. That is allowed, and it does happen, but, as I said, it is only in a very small minority of cases. I venture to say with respect that it is right, if you maintain first-class travel at all, to allow it.
I have not the time to argue the case in favour of retaining first-class travel. I admit that the arguments against in wartime are very strong, but the Government think, and I think, that the arguments in favour of retaining it are even stronger. In any case, the Government have decided that it must be retained and, if it is retained, you must make it possible for the railway staff to do their job. It is hard enough in any case. Does this lead, in fact, to the unequal loading of which I spoke? Do you get great congestion in one part of the train, while there is empty space in another? I do not say that never happens, but I do not think it happens very often. I have to travel a great 369 deal for my sins and I have constantly seen guards and ticket collectors—
§ Mr. Noel-BakerI travel first-class. I constantly see train attendants, ticket collectors and guards asking people to go down the train, instead of standing in the corridor, to places where there are empty seats. Often they go and, of course, the guards always open the doors to pass them through, but sometimes they do not, and I have seen people prefer to stay where they are and stand. I have a letter here from a senior and responsible official, for whose opinion I have great regard, who travelled from Chester to Euston in a third-class coach, in which there were only four passengers. He had a four-place cubicle and table all to himself, while down the train in the luggage vans and the brake compartments and in the corridors, there were many Service people standing in great discomfort. He went and told them to come up to the empty seats, but they said they were all right where they were; they would not bother, and they travelled to Euston like that. That might very well lead my hon. Friends 370 to think this a grievance which must be put right. I think the railway staffs do, whenever they can, distribute the load as equally as possible. I hope I have satisfied my hon. Friend that the safety instructions as they stand are really all right.
§ Mr. TinkerWhat about putting up a notice about locking the doors?
§ Mr. Noel-BakerI was coming to that. I hope I have satisfied my hon. Friend that the safety instructions are all right; that we must really lock the doors of brake compartments to protect the goods against theft, that if you have first-class travel, you must allow the staff sometimes to lock doors, and that they do not always do so by any manner of means. I will consider his practical proposal of putting up notices and see what can be done.
§ It being the hour appointed for the adjournment of the House, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.