HC Deb 05 December 1950 vol 482 cc318-26

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Sparks.]

9.59 p.m.

Mr. William Elwyn Jones (Conway)

In the debate earlier in the evening we have been discussing communications in South Wales. In the short time at my disposal I desire to discuss the road communications of North Wales and to draw the attention of the House to the condition of Conway Bridge. This is the bridge which links the main route of traffic coming from the counties of Flint and Denbigh and Lancashire—

It being Ten o'Clock, the Motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Sparks.]

Mr. William Elwyn Jones

The Conway Bridge links the main route of traffic from the counties of Flint, Denbigh and Lancashire with the counties of Anglesey and Caernarvon. The bridge is one of Telford's bridges and is now 150 years old. In its day it has served the people of North Wales exceedingly well, but by now it is quite inadequate to carry modern traffic. The bridge belongs to the Conway Corporation, who are the Conway Bridge Commissioners; they acquired it in 1878. They have always employed a firm of consulting engineers to make regular inspections of the bridge and its condition.

In 1933 the bridge engineer and the firm of consulting engineers decided that the time had come for the bridge to be strengthened and enlarged. Unfortunately, the statute under which the Conway Bridge Commissioners operate did not permit them to erect a new bridge, and so an approach was made to the then Minister of Transport with the request that the Commissioners should be allowed facilities to promote a Bill in the House to give them statutory powers for the construction of a new bridge. The then Minister indicated that it was a matter for his Department and that he was prepared to undertake the task of building a new bridge across the river.

Plans and specifications have been prepared. Protracted negotiations have taken place between the Conway Corporation and the Minister of Transport, and by now the plans and specifications for the new bridge have been completed. The time has arrived for tenders to be invited and for the contract to be placed; that is the position at present. I understand that the difficulty is that the Minister has no funds at his disposal with which to carry out the project.

I want to offer to the Minister one or two observations why this matter should be regarded as one of special urgency. As I have indicated, the bridge was considered to be inadequate as far back as 60 years ago. It is much more inadequate today. There is only one-way traffic over the bridge and during the summer months there is serious congestion on the road, which is a most important traffic route and carries some thousands of commercial vehicles and tourists on their way to the seaside resorts of Caernarvonshire and Anglesey.

During last summer there were serious congestions at both ends of the bridge. I was involved in a hold-up myself for at least an hour to an hour and a half, and this kind of thing occurs constantly. The bridge which was designed to carry the traffic of 1826—pedestrians, horses, animals, carts, and so on—is totally inadequate to carry the modern traffic of 1950. This inadequacy of the bridge to carry modern traffic is the first point I want to make.

The second point is that it is dangerous. Tests have been made, and in consequence it has been found necessary to place certain restrictions upon the traffic which crosses the bridge. A white line has been placed five feet from the edge of the bridge on the sea side. This has been done by the Commissioners at the request of the Ministry with a warning notice that traffic crossing the bridge should not go over any part of the bridge which is within the white line. That is one step taken to reduce the danger of crossing the bridge.

The second step was to reduce the weight of vehicles allowed to cross the bridge. This has now been reduced to 7 tons 15 cwt. laden weight. These restrictions materially affect both commercial and passenger carrying vehicles which go to Caernarvonshire and Anglesey. They have a detrimental effect on the industrial development of North Wales. We have been discussing the economic prosperity of North Wales and this is an important factor in that respect.

May I give an instance of the way in which this restriction is injuriously affecting the economic prosperity of one part of the County of Caernarvonshire? I am informed that the Penmaenmawr Granite Quarries have been given notice by the Commissioners that only vehicles under a certain weight may cross the bridge This affects the production costs of the company and may affect the prosperity of that industry. This company employs a large number of men at Penmaenmawr and it would be regrettable if the inadequacy of the bridge were to affect their livelihood. Another way in which the restrictions affect prosperity is in regard to passenger vehicles. Double decker buses are not allowed to cross the bridge and during the summer months, the House will appreciate, there is very serious congestion caused to tourist traffic to the Caernarvonshire coast.

The third point is that the most modern traffic passenger vehicles are not able to use the bridge. I understand that the new regulations prescribe a width of 8 ft. for modern vehicles. I trust the Minister will correct me if I am wrong. I am informed by the Crosville Motor Company, the main passenger company operating in North Wales, that they will experience considerable difficulty in manœuvring their vehicles across the bridge. I am informed that a bus fitted with a frame 8 ft. wide, which is the new width regulation, can only go through the bridge with very considerable difficulty. The actual width of the entrance at road level is 9 ft. 6 in., leaving only 9 in. on either side. The walls have been widened to give an aperture of about 10 ft., five feet high, but even then it is a very tight squeeze. As a temporary measure I understand the company are asking the Commissioners to give permission to paint white lines on the roadway so that the front wheels of 'buses can follow them to make sure of getting through the bridge without accident. It is an intolerable state of affairs that there should be only this margin of a few inches for a vehicle to go through under the new regulation.

Finally, it is a toll bridge and this in this year of grace 1950 is an anachronism. Passenger vehicles and commercial vehicles make such a large contribution to the Road Fund, and should not be called upon to pay additional toll in this way. A toll bridge really is an intolerable anachronism in 1950, and it should be abolished as soon as possible.

I believe that the Minister of Transport is very well acquainted with this bridge. I am certain he will agree that the facts that I have given to the House are strictly accurate. I am, of course, aware of the difficulties of finding sufficient money for this kind of project, and that funds which my right hon. Friend has at his disposal for new works are strictly limited. I would say with as much emphasis as I can that the Government must now face the fact that the roads of this country as a whole are now becoming so bad that this position cannot possibly be held much longer. I ask him to exercise his influence with his colleagues in the Government, the Chancellor of the Exchequer in particular, to ensure that a more adequate sum is provided with which to carry out new road works, and in particular to carry out this project, which has been too long delayed.

This project cannot be allowed to remain in abeyance much longer without doing irreparable damage to the system of communications in North Wales. The appeal which I am now making is supported by all the local authorities in North Wales, about 40 in all. It is not a local but a national matter. I ask my right hon. Friend to treat it as being a matter of the gravest urgency, and to seek the necessary powers to enable him to invite contracts immediately in order to construct a new bridge. It has been suggested that a temporary Bailey bridge be erected across the river. I would ask my right hon. Friend to consider that project. But it is only a palliative. The need is for a new modern bridge to carry the modern traffic which runs along this important artery of communications in North Wales.

10.12 p.m.

Mr. Goronwy Roberts (Caernarvon)

I rise to express briefly, but most strongly, my support for the plea which my hon. Friend the Member for Conway (Mr. William Elwyn Jones) has made. I do so for a variety of reasons: first, that until the last General Election this bridge was in my constituency; secondly, during my carefree childhood I frequently risked my life, in common with the other children in the neighbourhood, climbing the sides of this bridge. During the last Parliament I led a deputation from the Conway Bridge Commissioners to the Ministry of Transport, where we put the case before the then Parliamentary Secretary who is now with the Admiralty. Although we were received with a good deal of sympathy we did not get very far. I hope that my hon. Friend has better success than I had. As we have heard, the bridge was constructed by Act of Parliament. I hope that it will not need an Act of Parliament to repair it.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Conway has said, when the bridge was constructed there was very little heavy traffic, it was a matter of pedestrians and cart horses. With the coming of vehicular traffic, however, the bridge has from time to time had to be strengthened and has had a footbridge added to it for pedestrians. The nub of the matter is that as far back as 1933 the consulting engineers reported that the time had arrived, from the point of view of human safety, for the bridge to be strengthened and enlarged.

As the Act which vested the bridge in the Conway Bridge Commissioners did not empower them to take the necessary steps, the Minister of Transport was consulted. The Commissioners were informed that it was the intention of the Minister to build a new bridge, and also a new arterial road in conjunction with the bridge. Since then a lengthy correspondence has ensued, the only result of which has been that we have been repeatedly informed that the matter is a No. 1 priority, but that nothing can be done until the economic position is better. The matter now stands there.

I should like to make the following points. First, we in that part of the country believe that the bridge is unsafe, if my right hon. Friend is unable to help us on the major point, I hope that he will be able to say something about that. There is considerable misgiving and concern locally. Secondly, there is no doubt at all that this bridge, in its present condition, is a veritable bottleneck affecting the passage both of road haulage and omnibuses, particularly now that the 8 ft. span rule is in operation. There is a bottleneck between the agricultural area of North-West Wales and the industrial area of Flintshire, Wrexham and Lancashire, which we feed at least with milk and with most of the lamb which we produce.

That vital traffic is slowed down in such a way as to add to the costs of the manufactured articles coming into North-West Wales and the foodstuffs which are exported from that area. It has been pointed out before, I believe at Question time, that many lorries have to make a 21 mile detour to avoid this bridge which is far too narrow and fragile to carry that sort of traffic. I earnestly hope that the Minister of Transport will take up this matter with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and try to do something about this vital problem.

10.17 p.m.

Mr. Emrys Roberts (Merioneth)

I add my support to the plea put forward by the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. William Elwyn Jones), who has done a useful service by raising this matter. I know this bridge very well. It is in my native country, and I think that I have paralleled the exploits of the hon. Member for Caernarvon (Mr. G. Roberts) in climbing it in days gone by. This bridge is not only of importance to the county of Caernarvon. It is of importance to the transport and communications system of North-West Wales as a whole. It is thoroughly unsatisfactory that the bridge should have been in this condition for 17 years. It is high time that the problem was tackled. I know that that is the feeling of local authorities outside Caernarvonshire, and I hope that the Minister will take cognisance of that fact.

10.18 p.m.

Mrs. Eirene White (Flint, East)

I should like to support the plea which has been put forward, because my constituency is a point of entry for a great deal of the North Wales traffic, particularly industrial and tourist traffic, to which reference has been made. As the Minister knows, there is congestion along the North Wales trunk roads, but no traffic problem is more serious than the one we are discussing. It affects the speed of traffic along the North Wales coast. It adds very much to costs and causes delays. We in North Wales hope very much that the Minister will be able to give a favourable reply to the debate.

10.19 p.m.

The Minister of Transport (Mr. Barnes)

It is appropriate that at the conclusion of a debate on Welsh affairs we should direct our attention to a specific matter affecting Wales. I am the first to acknowledge that the Conway Bridge is an important link between Lancashire and the North Wales coast. We are faced with a difficult problem, because, in the nature of things, there are no suitable alternative routes to take the place of the one over this bridge. The case which my hon. Friend the Member for Conway has submitted is in no way exaggerated, and I do not intend to dispute in any way any of the arguments which he has put forward. My only regret is that the financial circumstances of the moment, which he himself has referred to and has recognised, do not permit of me giving a favourable reply.

I do not dispute in any way that this bridge is in a relatively poor condition, although I do not think it can be closed as being unsafe for traffic. This property, as my hon. Friend has indicated, belongs to the Conway Corporation, and, of course, the Conway Bridge Commissioners are the executive authority of the Conway Corporation, who are responsible for the safety of the bridge. If I may refer to the immediate difficulty, which my hon. Friend has mentioned, in regard to the new regulations that permit the use of 8 ft.-wide buses, I would point out that it is within my province to restrict or prescribe certain areas or roads where they should not be used if the width of the bus is likely to create dangerous traffic conditions.

We are concerned with an important trunk road from Chester to Bangor. As my hon. Friend has recognised, the Ministry of Transport brought the whole of the plans for this new bridge to the point where we are in a position to ask for the necessary contracts whenever the funds are available. It is a rather ambitious scheme. It proposes to eliminate the level crossing near Llandrindod Junction, provide a modern bridge over the Conway and by-pass Conway town. I think that this is very necessary, because on many occasions I have had to wend my way through that particularly difficult bottleneck. It will provide a new link road through a tunnel under the public highway. To construct the bridge alone, quite apart from the ancillary work, will cost approximately half a million pounds.

The Caernarvon County Council and other local authorities have pressed upon me the desirability, if we cannot provide the funds for the full scheme, to construct at least one deck of the bridge. That would cost £350,000. As I repeatedly pointed out, if we could undertake any of these schemes alone it might be possible to find the necessary funds, but I want to remind my hon. Friends that as late as 23rd November, when the Prime Minister was asked whether it was possible to provide additional funds out of the Road Fund, the Lord President of the Council made this statement.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister regrets that, in present circumstances, it is not possible to allocate to the roads as large a share as we should all wish."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd November, 1950; Vol. 481, c. 338.] Hon. Members have accepted that authoritative statement from the Government, and we cannot contract out of that for any specific project.

I quite agree, however, with my hon. Friend the Member for Caernarvon that we cannot continue indefinitely, in the face of the development of modern transport, to allow our roads to be in the condition in which they are today. The fact is that, whereas before the war we were spending between £60 million and £70 million a year on our roads, today we are only able to allocate just under £50 million for that purpose. If we take the increased cost of such work since before the war, that means that, relatively, we are only spending between £25 million and £30 million today compared with £60 or £70 million before the war. In practice, that sum only permits the maintenance of our existing road system at not more than about 70 per cent. of the standard at which we used to maintain it before the war.

In these circumstances there are not the necessary funds available with which to undertake any new construction work. Apart from eliminating a limited number of exceedingly black or dangerous spots on our roads where the accident rate is exceedingly high, and maintaining the essential communications, there are no further sums available for new construction of this description.

As I have indicated to my hon. Friend the Member for Conway who, I think, is fully justified in emphasising to Parliament, to the Government and to the public the danger of this state of affairs, while Parliament accepts the general policy that has been laid down, it is not possible for me to give any undertaking that I can find the funds for work of this description. I regret it, but there are many other similar schemes that deserve equal consideration.

However, I promise my hon. Friend that this matter will engage my earnest attention, and I would leave the House in no doubt that at the earliest possible moment when funds are available we at the Ministry of Transport, recognising the urgency and importance of this task, will bear it in mind as being one of the first to receive consideration.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-eight Minutes past Ten o'Clock.