HC Deb 20 June 1963 vol 679 cc621-2
7. Mr. Swingler

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what conclusions Her Majesty's Government have reached on their consideration of the effects of the railway closures foreshadowed in the Beeching Report upon civil defence plans.

Mr. Woodhouse

The effects of possible railway closures are still being examined, but they do not seem likely to lead to major changes in civil defence plans.

Mr. Swingler

In the light of the evacuation plans which have received publicity from the Home Office from time to time, may I ask whether it would be accepted by the Government as a paramount argument against railway closures that the railways would be required in case of war for the evacuation of the population?

Mr. Woodhouse

There are, in fact, no evacuation plans at the moment. There is a plan for dispersal, which is a different kind of concept altogether. But certainly that will be taken into account in any decisions which are reached.

Mr. Swingler

Taking the hon. Gentleman's reference to dispersal, will he answer the question whether the Government accept as a paramount argument against railway closures that such railways might be required for the dispersal of the civil population in the event of war?

Mr. Woodhouse

If they were indispensable, it certainly would be a paramount consideration. If not, it would be one consideration amongst others.

Sir L. Ropner

Would not my hon. Friend agree that railway transport is likely to be much more vulnerable in the event of attack on this country than road transport?

Mr. Woodhouse

That is certainly a point to be borne in mind.