FORTH ROAD BRIDGE

HC Deb 17 November 1952 vol 507 cc1543-52

11.0 p.m.

Mr. John Taylor (West Lothian)

I have no doubt that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport will think it a very unfortunate circumstance that after a heavy day for his Ministry this Adjournment debate should fall to his lot, but equally, no doubt, other Ministries will think themselves fortunate.

I am pleased to have this opportunity, however brief, of opening a discussion on the subject of the Forth road bridge. My purpose is to ask the Government to take a final step in this matter to enable a start to be made on this great project. I wish to make it clear that the familiar fobbing-off answer will no longer be acceptable either to myself, to Scotland, or, I suggest, the country as a whole. It is no longer either reasonable or well-founded. The usual answer is that the country cannot afford to build this bridge. My case tonight is that the country cannot afford not to build this bridge. Delay in commencing building operations is unsound nationally, economically and strategically. It is also unsound from the point of view of national prestige.

Sometime I hope to have an opportunity to develop the point that restrictions on capital investment for great projects of national development are going too far. They have now reached a stage when they are actively threatening our future ability to expand our industry and production as we must. They have reached a stage when they are defeating their own ends, and running down our national economy. This is not the time to develop that point fully, but briefly, the recurring postponement of sanction to build this urgently needed transport link is a very prominent case in support of that argument.

Apart from hydro-electric development in North Scotland, there has not been any great State-inspired edifice or great constructional work in this country for nearly 40 years—not one in all Britain. The time has come when we should attempt to show our faith in our own future—not with empty words, but with steel, concrete, granite, and the skill of our constructional engineers. Imagine the world-wide effect that such a project would have. The fact that the greatest bridge-building operation in the world today had been started here would have an immense prestige value, apart from its value to our internal affairs.

Where in Britain today is the greatest expansion of the coal industry? On either side of the Firth of Forth. It is to the immediate north and south of the Firth of Forth that there is the greatest influx of new population. A new town is springing up. Many new villages have come into existence, and in the aggregate they equal four or five new towns, although they do not receive the publicity and fuss of the new towns. The economic value to the nation of the Lothians and Fife is an increasing factor. It is one of the very few areas of which this can be said. It is an area that has more prospects than history. Alas, many of our industrial districts have more history than prospects. Therefore, I submit that the bridge which links those areas with each other and the rest of the country is a sheer and absolute necessity. It is a cast-iron, grade one, super-priority over super-priorities.

So much has already been done. The Forth Road Bridge Joint Board, which consists of representatives of West Lothian, Mid-Lothian and Fife, the town councils of Edinburgh, Dunfermline, and Kirkcaldy, and several other local authorities in East Scotland, has worked hard and long. Plans for the bridge are practically complete; the surveys have been completed; considerable sums have been allocated for preparatory work; general approval of the scheme was given by the Ministry of Transport in 1946; a provisional order has been granted; the Royal Assent has been received.

All that remains to be done is for the Minister to press the button which will bring on the green light which will allocate the finance and the materials, and set the builders to work on a project which has been striven for for 30 years and visualised for 100 years. Tonight, I ask the Minister to lift his finger and press that button. If he persists in stone-walling, as his Written answers to the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. W. Hamilton) today indicated, will he at least authorise a start on the foundations, the piers, which will take some time but which will require very little steel or labour? A start on that could be made in a very short time. I believe it could be started tomorrow.

A final but not unimportant point. A Labour Government enabled all these preparations to be made. If this Government wants to be really popular in Scotland, the action I now advocate would be a sure and certain way to popularity. They will not get it by messing about with constitutional changes; they will if they produce steel and concrete achievements. I ought not to pass on this tip, but I am more concerned with the bridge soaring over the silver Forth as soon as possible than with party kudos.

Every day that passes 2,500 vehicles are using precious dollar-costing fuel taking the long detours—30 avoidable miles by the Kincardine Bridge and 50 avoidable miles by Stirling. It is wasting time, fuel, labour, engines, and money, and if the Minister would end this stupid and out-of-date state of affairs tonight, he would earn the gratitude of this, and future generations of his fellow countrymen. He would have deserved well of his Ministry, and of his country.

11.11 p.m.

Lieut.-Commander Clark Hutchison (Edinburgh, West)

I am pleased to follow the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. J. Taylor) because, for many years past I and a number of my hon. Friends have taken an interest in this very important structural work. I have always firmly believed that the provision of a road bridge at Queensferry would be very helpful, not only in developing trade and industry in Scotland generally, but also because we now have the new coal fields coming into development on both sides of the Forth. Furthermore, a road bridge would prove a great boon to the many travellers who come that way, especially in the summer months, as there are often long delays at the ferry. I do hope that tonight the spokesman for the Government will be able to give an assurance that work will be started at the earliest possible moment.

As I understand, there are two main difficulties in the way of making an immediate start: first, shortage of materials, particularly of steel; and, secondly, the question of finance. Of course, it is common knowledge that there is a shortage of steel at the moment and that it is not possible to carry out all the capital works that are desired, or required throughout the country. I do not for a moment suppose that anyone would wish to divert steel from the building of dwelling houses, new factories, or schools; but, while I have no inside knowledge of the steel producing industry, I am informed by those who have some knowledge of it that it is likely that, before long, there will be greatly increased supplies of steel available. The measures which the Government are about to take will assist in the production of more steel, and I hope, therefore, that this materials shortage will pass away in the fairly near future.

On the financial aspect, I would say that one appreciates there must be difficulty so long as we are financing a huge re-armament programme; but in a year or two that ought to be nearing fulfilment, or at least tapering off very much. That should ease our financial expenditure on defence, and I hope that the Minister of Transport will then go along to his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the money necessary to enable this most important work of construction to go on. The new road bridge will be most helpful to the development of trade and industry in Scotland, and, indeed, in the whole of the United Kingdom.

11.14 p.m.

Mr. A. Woodburn (Clackmannan and East Stirlingshire)

I should like to reinforce the plea which has been made tonight. Nearly 28 years ago I was taking part in all-party meetings in Edinburgh on the question of trying to impress on the then responsible Minister the desirability of starting this bridge. I very much regret that the work was not started then; but, we were told that finance was one of the difficulties, as it is now. I suggested that a toll might be put on the bridge to help meet that problem, but that was not considered to be modern politics 28 years ago, although I rather think that it will become modern politics I agree with the hon. and gallant Member for Edinburgh, West (Lieut.-Commander Hutchison) that there is soon likely to be a surplus of steel. It is likely that America will soon be producing millions of motor cars beyond the needs of her own markets and that is bound to have repercussions on steel production in many parts of the world. It may be that in this country our steel production will not be fully utilised.

One of the tragedies of the past in regards to periods of slump and recession has been that other work was not ready to start and we know there has been a great period of preparation which as my hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. J. Taylor) said was very wisely provided for the Ministry for getting the surveys made and general plans laid. It would seem that there is a possibility of the Government making further investigation into the question.

Long before we reached the question of using steel there will be the question of using granite or whatever kind of stonework is utilised for the foundation and piers and it may be that as employment tapers off in some industries labour will become available for the production of granite or other stonework so that a start may be made on some of the preparatory works.

I recognise that the Minister would not be allowed, under the present capital development programme, to make the approach roads in the meantime because he will find that even in Scotland a few people will come along with prior claims on road-making capacity but I should like him to inquire whether some of the quarries where spare labour is not being used could supply stone or some other materials which are surplus and which could be used in preparation.

One other suggestion I should like to make is that in the vicinity of the Forth road bridge, which is to be, there are a great many things which in Scotland we call bings. They are an eyesore to the population of Scotland although, curiously enough, I came across a London artist who thought them beautiful things on the horizon. I hope that scientists might look into the possibility to using that material in regard to building the bridge. That would certainly be a great clearance of the skyline and a benefit to Scotland as a whole, especially to the people in Fife. I am quite sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton) would gladly see these bings removed. They smell and removal would make the villages there less odorous; and I am sure that it would be a great advantage to Scotland as a whole.

11.18 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Gurney Braithwaite)

I should like at once to assure the right hon. Member for East Stirling (Mr. Woodburn) that the points he has put to the House will be meticulously examined. I think he made at least one excellent suggestion.

The hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. J. Taylor) has, with studied moderation, put before the House a problem with which I am not entirely unfamiliar, because it so happened that during the war I was stationed for a short time at Rosyth and had daily evidence of the desirability of this project. Indeed, I spent many hours of frustration waiting for a place on the ferry to cross at that point.

The House will not expect me to go back 100 years in reviewing the problem. What I am going to do is to place quite frankly before the House the post-war history of the matter and how it now stands. When the proposal for a road bridge across the Forth at Queensferry was put forward at the end of the late war, it became clear that the cost, which, in 1946, was estimated at £6.1 million for a dual carriageway bridge and approaches, was so high in relation to the funds likely to be available for road work generally that, in announcing his 10-year programme on 6th May, 1946, the right hon. Member for East Ham, South (Mr. Barnes) did not go further than to state that he would also concentrate upon the preparatory work necessary to bring other major schemes, such as the proposed new bridge across the Forth, to the stage at which they can be commenced at short notice in the light of the policy of timed expenditure on public works."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 6th May, 1946; Vol. 422, c. 592.] That is one of the desirable phrases which often come from this Box as the result of careful briefing by experts in these matters.

The view of the then Government, that the possibility of authorising the actual construction was remote was reiterated in another place by Lord Morrison, and as it occurred so long ago as 6th May, 1947, and not in the current Session, I think I am entitled to quote him. He stated that the Government cannot at present give any indication when a grant may be forthcoming towards the cost of the actual constructional work. Powers were obtained for the construction of this bridge by the Forth Road Bridge Order Confirmation Act. 1947, which states: … the Minister of Transport has agreed to make from the Road Fund at such time as Parliament decides to approve the necessary financial provision … a grant of 75 per cent. of the approved expenditure incurred on the construction. Until the Minister agrees to make such a grant to the actual constructional work, it cannot begin.

In pursuance of the then Minister's assurance that he would concentrate on the preparatory work necessary for such schemes, the Forth Road Bridge Joint Board were told on 26th October, 1948, that: the Government have agreed to this scheme being brought to the contract letting stage, on the clear understanding that, in view of present economic conditions … it will be a number of years before constructional work can be considered. That came, of course, before the rearmament programme was launched and before the outbreak of hostilities in Korea, in 1948.

Accordingly, grants totalling £230,000 have so far been authorised towards the estimated cost of £307,000 for preliminary expenses covering the promotion of the Order, soundings, design work, preparation of contract documents and acquisition of land. Much of this preliminary work has now been completed and it is, therefore, not remarkable that there is now pressure on my right hon. Friend to allow the actual constructional work to 20 ahead.

The Joint Board for the bridge asked in June for an assurance that, when work of the magnitude of this scheme could be allowed to proceed, the bridge would be regarded as first priority. There have been several recent Questions from hon. Members to the same effect, two of which appeared on the Order Paper today in the name of the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton), and I was sorry to hear my careful replies described as "stone-walling."

In each case the answer has been that my right hon. Friend cannot give any indication when it will be possible to allow the constructional work to proceed, and that it is not possible to determine the priority to be accorded to the bridge until the time comes when work of this size can be authorised, and its claims can be assessed amongst other schemes of similar magnitude.

Tonight I am surrounded by hon. Members from Scotland, but I must remind them of some of the projects knocking on the door loudly at Berkeley Square. For instance, there is the completion of the Dartford-Purfleet tunnel under the Thames which is urgently needed to relieve the London crossings of the Thames of some of the traffic. There is the completion of the Jarrow-Howden tunnel under the Tyne, which would divert some of the traffic which now has to go through Newcastle and where the pedestrian and cycle tunnels are completed. There is the proposed Severn Bridge in my own part of the world, which is needed to improve communications with South Wales, and concerning which there is a considerable volume of vocal local complaint.

The resources allocated for road works this year have allowed virtually no works of new construction on roads except the small safety schemes and works in new towns and blitzed cities. I am bound to tell the House that it is unlikely that much more will be possible next year.

Mr. John Wheatley (Edinburgh, East)

The hon. Gentleman has been good enough to inform the House of the major projects in the various parts of the country. The Government must have a certain order of priority. How does the Forth bridge road stand in the order of priority?

Mr. Braithwaite

I have already said that we have not yet arranged the order of priority, nor has the time arrived when we are in a position to do so. We must look at that when we are able to go ahead.

I must remind the House of an argument which I thought might be adduced but which has not been forthcoming. None the less, I want to meet it now. It is true that my right hon. Friend has authorised the preparation of plans for a new high-level bridge across the River Mersey and the Manchester Ship Canal between Runcorn and Widnes, and that he has expressed the hope that the actual constructional work there will be able to start next year.

But this scheme is much smaller than the Forth road bridge scheme, and is estimated to cost about £1,300,000. There is a very great difference between authorising the construction of a new bridge necessary to preserve a long-established link which is breaking down—the existing transporter bridge between Runcorn and Widnes may have to be closed shortly—and establishing an entirely new link.

Like the protagonists of the Forth road bridge scheme, I only wish that the country's resources were sufficient to allow more road schemes to go ahead. But in considering the claims of the roads the Government have to weigh against such projects the claims of the defence programme, housing, factories, power stations, schools and other parts of the nation's economy. It is not possible to say when the state of the country's resources and the weights to be given to competing claims upon them, will make it practicable to strike a balance enabling us to make further provision for roads.

There are, as hon. Members know, certain alternative suggestions. The scheme for utilising the existing rail bridge for the carriage of road traffic has been raised with the Ministry from time to time. It has been thoroughly examined and the conclusion has been reached that a crossing of the Forth to provide adequate capacity for road traffic could only be obtained by the construction of an entirely new road bridge. The other would merely be a palliative, not worth consideration.

Another suggestion is that there might be an improvement in the ferry arrangements—an improvement in the ferry itself. The British Transport Commission may well be reluctant to undertake the work for the very reason that they expect that before long the road bridge will be forthcoming.

The hon. Member for West Lothian held out an alluring prospect to me, that by merely pressing a button the green light would appear and that I could earn the gratitude of generations yet unborn and indeed ensure a comfortable majority for the Government from the electorate of Scotland at an early date. These are all alluring prospects. I only wish that it was as easy as that. However hard I press the button it is not at the moment connected up with the green light. That is the difficulty with which we are confronted.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland who sits beside me says—and this is merely a crumb of comfort, not more, to the hon. Gentleman—that negotiations are now proceeding for the acquisition of land in order to get on with the approaches to the bridge. He tells me those negotiations are going forward. I am afraid that, stonewalling or not, that is the only reply which I can offer tonight on this important topic on behalf of Her Majesty's Government.

11.29 p.m.

Colonel Alan Gomme-Duncan (Perth and East Perthshire)

While thanking my hon. Friend for his reply, and only for that reply, may I ask him where, when the time comes when we can have a priority and when these things become possible, the Forth bridge road plan will come in the order of priorities? If we can get something to tell the people of Scotland that it will be the first priority, as it obviously should be, there will be considerable encouragement and our people will be very much more heartened in knowing that the Ministry of Transport are linking up one of the main arteries—

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'Clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'Clock.