§ 26 and 27. Mr. W. Griffithsasked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation (1) the number of zebra pedestrian crossings authorised by him in the City of Manchester; and how many sites proposed by the Manchester Corporation have been rejected since January, 1953;
§ (2) why he has refused to permit the Manchester Corporation to operate seven new zebra pedestrian crossings at road junctions considered to be dangerous by the Manchester Corporation.
§ Mr. MolsonOne hundred and thirty-nine zebra crossings have been authorised in Manchester. Since January, 1953, there have been applications for seven more, of which one has been rejected because there are already two crossings near the proposed site and six are still the subject of consultation with the City Corporation.
§ Mr. GriffithsWould the Parliamentary Secretary tell me how he and his advisers in the Ministry in London are able to determine the appropriate number of pedestrian crossings in the City of Manchester? Is he aware that the delay in granting permission for this and other crossings is the cause of great concern in the city because of the dangerous state of the roads at the proposed sites? Does he think that the local authority and people of Manchester are not more qualified to determine the site of local pedestrian crossings than the Ministry in London?
§ Mr. MolsonThe hon. Gentleman will be aware that his right hon. Friend who was Minister of Transport in the last Government issued a circular on 20th June, 1951, calling for a reduction of two-thirds in the number of pedestrian crossings. In the case of Manchester, that reduction has been made. As regards the question who is in a better position to decide where a crossing is required, this responsibility is delegated to the D.R.E.
§ Mr. MitchisonCan the hon. Gentleman explain why canal fencing is a matter for local consideration and zebra crossings are decided in Whitehall?
§ Mr. MolsonBecause road traffic is a national problem, since vehicles pass all over the country, whereas the problem of canal accidents chiefly concerns those who live near canals.
§ Mr. E. JohnsonWill the Minister reconsider the unfavourable decision which I understand has been made in regard to the crossings outside the Christie Hospital?
§ Mr. MolsonAll these matters are being considered at the present time. It is found that some of the crossings that were decided upon when the original reduction was made are not particularly necessary, and this matter is being discussed between the D.R.E. and the Manchester Corporation, as some of the new crossings which have been applied for might with advantage be substituted for some of the others at the same time.
§ Mr. GriffithsI beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.