RAILWAYS (HOUNSLOW EAST STATION) (Hansard, 28 February 1961)

§ Mr. Reader Harris (Heston and Isleworth)
I should like to begin by thanking my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport for kindly attending to answer this short debate, particularly as he must be very heavily engaged on Ministry duties as a result of my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary being in hospital. We all hope that my hon. Friend's health will be speedily restored so that he can return to his duties.
Hounslow East Station is in my constituency. The last four stations on the Piccadilly Line are situated in the Borough of Heston and Isleworth; and I represent seven out of the nine wards. The penultimate three stations are, therefore, in my constituency. The last four stations on the line are Osterley, Hounslow East, Hounslow Central and Hounslow West—which is the end of the line. Three of the stations are more or less new: Osterley, Hounslow Central and Hounslow West are very fine stations and, on the whole, adequate for their job. Hounslow East is really a shocking abortion of a station.
The Hounslow Trades Council has been pressing me for the last three or four years to bring to the notice of my right hon. Friend the fact that Hounslow East station needs rebuilding. I have been active in bringing this to the attention of the London Transport Executive, but the last time I did so I was told that there was not enough money in the "kitty" to do anything about it for the time being. As that last approach was made over a year ago, I feel that it is my duty to bring the subject to my right hon. Friend's notice.
The importance of Hounslow East is that it does not serve merely the people who live in its immediate vicinity. Almost adjacent to the station there is a very big bus garage which is the terminus for a number of bus routes, and, as a result, people come to the station from a very wide area—Twickenham, Whitton, Isleworth, Sud- 1550 bury, Heston, Bedfont and Hanworth. The number of people using the station is very great.
I know that many people get workmen's tickets in the morning from Hounslow West at the end of the line to go to London. When they come home in the evening they get off at Hounslow East in order to get a bus at the terminus, which they might not be able to board at Hounslow West. They prefer to pay an extra penny or two to be sure of getting on the bus.
My first serious charge against this station is that the platforms are too narrow. That does not, perhaps, matter so much on the up line, but it is a serious matter on the down line. Because the platform is so narrow, and the exits are so narrow, many people are left on the platform. During the rush hour many people are left on the platform from one train when the next train comes in, and there is a further crush to get through the narrow exits.
On the down line the passenger exit where the tickets are collected is right at the end of the platform. In the rush hour, another small exit is opened in the middle of the platform. That takes passengers down a sort of narrow footpath at the back of the platform, but it does not relieve the congestion, because where the path comes parallel to the end of the platform those using it meet the passengers from the normal exit. They then all gather on a stairway that is fairly steep, has a number of steps and is only about 7 ft. broad. It is quite inadequate for its purpose at the peak hours.
The platforms are only about 10 ft. wide. When I have had occasion to go to my constituency by Underground I have noticed that on leaving a train the passengers have to queue right across the platform for the exit. One of these days someone's shoulder will be caught by the train as it moves off again, or even by the next train coming in. I am afraid, and so is the Hounslow Trades Council, that one day there will be a serious accident. I want to raise these points before such an accident occurs, although if it did something would be done.
On the up platform the main cause of complaint is that the shelter which 1551 passengers have against wintry weather is a small hut—it is not very much more than that—about as long as the Government Front Bench. The shelter for the down platform is about half the size of the Table on which the Mace rests, but that does not matter very much because there is never a big queue of passengers waiting to go down to the last two or three stations on the line. The up line has a very long platform and passengers have to spread themselves along the platform to get into the trains because Underground trains stop at the station for only a few seconds and a passenger has to nip into the train fairly quickly.
It might be suggested that a canopy should be put up; some sort of a roof over the up platform. I am not sure of the truth of this, but I have heard a rumour that the foundations of the platform are not sufficiently strong to take a canopy. Whether or not that is true, it is a further argument for rebuilding the station in toto and having a proper one where passengers can keep reasonably warm and stand in comfort, as passengers do on the other stations.
On the south side of the station, that is to say, adjacent to the down platform, there is a large stretch of London Transport land which, I believe, is for sale. It stretches from the back of the houses to the bus garage and there is plenty of room there if the Minister wanted to rebuild the station. At any rate, he could widen the platform without inconveniencing anybody and without having to purchase more land to do it.
The most important thing to do is to get the down platform and the stairs down which the passengers have to go widened. The stairs are only 7 ft. wide, fairly steep, and there are a lot of them. On both sides of the stairs there are earth banks with bushes growing out of them. There are many earth banks there because I understand that a lot of earth was deposited there from the excavations for the Piccadilly tube when it went through London
I hope that before long the Minister can give us hope that he is prepared to let London Transport have the money with which to rebuild the station and, therefore do something which not only 1552 my constituents but those of neighbouring constituencies want to see done.

§ Mr. A. E. Hunter (Feltham)
I want, briefly, to support the hon. Member for Heston and Isleworth (Mr. R. Harris), who stated the case in his usual clear way. Hounslow East station is in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, but many of my constituents in Feltham, Bedfont and Hanworth use the station for the bus garage which is just down the road when they take buses, especially in the peak hours in the morning and evening, to the districts that I have mentioned. Also, when they go to London they use not only the Southern Railway station to Waterloo, but they go by bus to Hounslow East station and then travel to the various Underground stations. It is no exaggeration to say that Hounslow East must be the most poorly constructed station on the Piccadilly line. I know the line well. I cannot recall a worse station. Some parts of it remind me of the temporary halt stations, of which there used to be a number on the old railway lines.
The platforms are narrow, there is little shelter and in the rush hours there could be danger. I use the station a good deal, although not so much during the peak period, so I speak with knowledge. The station needs to be completely rebuilt. I support the case put by the hon. Member and I trust that the Minister will urge London Transport to include the complete rebuilding of Hounslow East station in its programme for early attention.
I am not sure whether the Minister knows the station. If he visited it between 5 and 6 p.m. or between 8 and 9 a.m., he would support our plea. Accidents could happen during those peak hours. The station is completely out of line with Hounslow West, Osterley and the other stations on the Piccadilly line. I very much hope that in the interests of the thousands of people of Hounslow, Feltham, Bedfont, Twickenham and surrounding districts who use the station, it will be rebuilt without delay.

§ The Minister of Transport (Mr. Ernest Marples)
I start by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Heston and Isle-worth (Mr. R. Harris) for his graceful tribute to my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary, who, unfortunately, 1553 is in hospital. The Joint Parliamentary Secretary, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Hay), has been diligent in carrying out his duties. He has had a shrewd assessment of the problems involved and I am grateful to him. He has been a great help to me, and I am sure that we all wish him well in hospital. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I will convey to him the kind wishes of my hon. Friend the Member for Heston and Isleworth.

§ Mr. Hunter
Will the Minister convey my wishes, too?

§ Mr. Marples
Yes, I certainly will.

§ Mr. Tom Driberg (Barking)
The good wishes of the whole House, in fact.

§ Mr. Marples
I quite agree.
My hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary has done a difficult job. I did it myself for over four years. It is considered to be the lowest form of political life outside this House. It is arduous and hard. Those who do it do not get many thanks. They get many kicks and stay up late to answer Adjournment debates. Tonight, however, my hon. Friend is in hospital. I will convey to him the kind wishes of the House and I am sure that he will be delighted to have them.
The constituents on my hon. Friend the Member for Heston and Isleworth will be grateful to him for the assiduity with which he pursues their interests. He shows great ingenuity in getting both Questions and Adjournment debates past the Table. It is not for me to know how he does it. I simply congratulate him on doing it, because I am certain that if I were a back bencher I could not get them past the Table.
Tonight, my hon. Friend has been concise, lucid and reasonable, and he has put his case clearly. As Minister, however, I have only a limited interest in the matter. Whatever the merits of the case, it is not my duty to carry out the improvements to which my hon. Friend has referred. The House has decided that the nationalised industries should carry out these improvements and not I as Minister, so I am not directly responsible.
Under the Transport Act, 1947, as amended by the Act of 1953, it 1554 is the duty of the British Transport Commission to provide or secure the provision of an adequate and properly co-ordinated system of passenger transport for the London Passenger Transport Area". The 1947 Act confers on the Commission the power to provide in Great Britain such … amenities and facilities for passengers and other persons making use of the services provided by them as it may appear to them requisite or expedient to provide. Therefore, under the arrangements which this House imposed on the Transport Commission, it is not the business of the Minister to interfere and tell the Commission what to do.

§ Mr. Driberg
What?

§ Mr. Marples
No, it is not—and it is still less his business to tell any of its constituent bodies or the London Transport Executive how, in detail, they should carry out their duties.

§ Mr. Driberg
The Minister is not putting it quite fairly. The House, by a self-denying ordinance soon after the Nationalisation Acts, agreed not to ask Questions about day-to-day management, but on major issues such as this it has always been understood that the matter could be raised by hon. Members in debate and that the Minister is responsible.

§ Mr. Marples
I do not complain about it being raised, but all I say is that the Minister has no power to go into the day-to-day management. It is quite right for my hon. Friend to raise it, and I should not be here if it were wrong for him to raise it. All I say is that on the day-to-day management—

§ Mr. Driberg
This is not day-to-day management.

§ Mr. Marples
Yes, it is.

§ Mr. Driberg
Oh, no.

§ Mr. Marples
The hon. Member, for whom I have great respect in many ways—not, of course, always in other ways, though in this particular way I have—

§ Mr. Driberg
Which way?

§ Mr. Marples
The hon. Member is wrong. I had better not go on, because there is so much controversy on that side of the House that, if I were to join in, 1555 things would become so much more confused that we should not know where we were.
Quite frankly, I say that it is not the duty of the Minister to interfere and tell the Commission what it should do in carrying out its duties. This is one of the great difficulties we have had in the nationalised industries, not only in the Transport Commission but in the others as well, and it is something which neither side of the House has solved.

§ Mr. Driberg
This side has.

§ Mr. Marples
That side of the House will never solve anything.
If I may say so, the course which my hon. Friend has followed is correct. He has made representations to the London Transport Executive. The immediate responsibility for passenger transport services in London has been delegated to it by the Transport Commission, and it rests with the Executive, not with me. If my hon. Friend is dissatisfied with the results of his approaches to London Transport Executive—I think I am right in saying that he has not recently made any approach to it, though he has in the past—

§ Mr. R. Harris
About a year ago.

§ Mr. Marples
Well, then, a year ago—perhaps I might mention another course which is open to him, because I want to be constructive. It is no good asking me. I am not running the show. I am not the managing director, and I aim not responsible.

§ Mr. Driberg
But the Minister can give a general instruction.

§ Mr. Marples
The hon. Member is very naive if he thinks that a general instruction could be given about a particular station. Where should we end if I were to give general instructions about particular stations? If I were to give general instructions that particular station's among the thousands there are throughout the country should be dealt with in a certain way, we should get into an awful mess. I am sorry, but the hon. Member's sedentary interruptions, though very agreeable, are not very apt.
So far as my hon. Friend is concerned, the Transport Users' Consultative Committee for the London area would consider the matter if it were put to it. I 1556 want to be as constructive as I can within the framework of the Act. I suggest, therefore, that my hon. Friend might consider pursuing that point. It is the duty of the Committee under the Transport Acts to consider any matter affecting the services and facilities provided by the Commission. The local authorities or other organisations which may be interested here—the hon. Member for Feltham (Mr. Hunter) can join in—may care to consider any suggestion Which is put forward.
The essence of the problem described by my hon. Friend is common to many London stations and, in particular, the suburban stations of London Transport and British Railways. Let us face it—we have often dodged it—this is caused by a large number of passengers emerging on to the platforms at peak hours and queuing up at the exits. It is worse when people are leaving the train in the evening than when they are getting on in the morning. It is one of the aspects of the peak hour problem and it happens for a short period during the evening peak hour. I think my hon. Friend would agree with that.

§ Mr. Harris
Yes.

§ Mr. Marples
This does not happen only at Hounslow, East. Look at the House of Commons Chamber now. We have seats here for about two-thirds or three-quarters of our Members. At peak hours they cannot all be seated. Look at the Chamber now. There are one, two, three, four, five, six, seven hon. Members in the Chamber—

§ Mr. Driberg
The right hon. Gentleman had better be careful, or he will be drawing attention to the fact that there is no quorum.

§ Mr. Marples
The quorum is outside.
The point is that here we have a Chamber which is not built for peak hour traffic, but for half of the peak hour traffic.

§ Mr. Harris
Other stations are built for peak hour traffic.

§ Mr. Marples
Not Liverpool Street, or Victoria, or London Bridge. I have been there and seen them. They are not built for peak hour traffic.
The same things happen at cinemas. When a first-class film is showing people queue up to see it and they cannot all 1557 get in the cinema. The same thing happens at hotels—I cannot hear what the hon. Member for Barking is saying.

§ Mr. Driberg
I said, this is the old law of supply and demand—or something.

§ Mr. Marples
I am grateful for the support of the hon. Gentleman for private enterprise and supply and demand.
The same sort of thing happens in respect of the catering at the House of Commons. We have an all-night sitting and the supply and demand goes wrong again. There is a tremendous demand for cups of tea, and nobody to supply them or to clean the cups. It always happens. We cannot build anything for peak hours. The same thing happens at bathing pools, and at Wembley Stadium at the Cup Final. There might be 100,000 people watching the Cup Final and for the remaining 364 days of the year the stadium may not be used.

§ Mr. R. Harris
I appreciate that my right hon. Friend may not have any power to say that this station should be rebuilt in the interests of convenience. But surely he has a special responsibility if there is a question of safety involved. One of the big troubles about this station is that we regard it as unsafe and that one day there may be an accident. That is what we are trying to prevent.

§ Mr. Marples
May I ask my hon. Friend whether an accident has occurred?

§ Mr. Harris
Not yet.

§ Mr. Marples
I am grateful to know that an accident has not occurred. I can assure my hon. Friend that many accidents occur at road junctions and on certain parts of the railways, but mostly on road junctions. If an accident has not occurred at this station, and we have nothing to prove that an accident has occurred, I do not think, with respect to my hon. Friend. that that is a very powerful point.
The question is: how much are we to spend on stations purely for the sake of this short period of time? There is no one at Hounslow East station now. There is plenty of room for everybody, including my hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Feltham. To what extent 1558 is it reasonable to expect travellers at the height of the peak hour to endure discomfort in order to save capital expenditure? If we are searching for perfection there are other ways in which we could spend our money.
My hon. Friend said that the platforms are too narrow. This varies from station to station. London Transport must decide its priorities, and it does so with great care. If I were to support the idea that a number of stations should have their platforms widened, I should have to go into the respective merits of every other station.

§ Mr. Driberg
Hear, hear. Bring them all up to standard.

§ Mr. Marples
That would mean that I should have a greater burden of work than I now have.

§ Mr. Driberg
Hear, hear.

§ Mr. Marples
If the hon. Gentleman wants that, all I can say to him is that most of the right hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition Front Bench—who are not here at the moment—say that I am taking on too much work. The hon. Gentleman is now telling me to take more.

§ Mr. Driberg
The right hon. Gentleman has full responsibility.

§ Mr. Marples
No. The hon. Gentleman is wrong. I must disagree with him. I shall find it difficult to sleep tonight. because I have disagreed with him.
I am told that the platforms at Hounslow East are loft. wide, which is 2 ft. narrower than the normal width at Underground stations. The London Transport Executive is aware of the shortcomings and intends to rebuild the station. It also hopes, as part of the scheme, and if it can get planning consent, to develop the large area of land on the south side of the line. It is preparing outline plans for a scheme of this kind. I cannot say at present when it will be able to start work. That will depend on the amount of money that is available to it for capital investment over the next few years and on the priorities given to such work within the investment limits.
1559 My hon. Friend approached the Executive in 1959 and was told that it had first to deal with other stations which were more heavily used and had a greater need than Hounslow East. For example, the station at Notting Hill Gate has been completely reconstructed, and it is used each year by about 10 million people. Wapping Station was seriously damaged during the war, and this has now been completely rebuilt. Plans for this year include making good the war damage at the Bank tube station, and for a new platform at King's Cross, which is a very busy Underground station.
This is a relative question. Is Hounslow East worse than the others? That must be the measure. It is not up to me as Minister to decide it. It is up to the Commission, under the terms of the Statute, and its subsidiaries, such as the L.T.E., to decide for themselves. I must end where I began. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this subject and to the hon. Member for Feltham for his remarks. I realise the difficulties at this station, but I must emphasise that it is not my business to interfere with the Commission or the L.T.E. in carrying out their duties. It is not for me to run either British Railways or the L.T.E. If it were, I should 1560 run them as I ran the Post Office when I was Postmaster-General.
In that office, the Post Office was my responsibility. This question is not. I will do my best to pass on the requests of this House, make them known to the Executive and to the Commission, and see that they know what my hon. Friend and the hon. Member have said. But it is not my job to run the Commission and the L.T.E. If it were, I should expect to get the salary which attaches to the chairmanship of the L.T.E. and to the chairmanship of the Commission. I should be grateful to get such a salary, because both of them get more than I do as a Minister.
It is not my job, and I will not have it thrust upon me. It has not been thrust upon me by Statute, and I cannot usurp it from these people. The needs of Hounslow East are kept well in the mind of the L.T.E., and will be dealt with when its turn comes. I promise that the report of this debate will be sent to the Executive by me, with a personal letter, and to the Commission, so that they can consider what has been said.