Proposed Closures

HC Deb 23 December 1964 vol 704 cc1219-23

11. Mr. Mathew

asked the Minister of Transport what criteria, other than those already announced by his predecessor, he intends to use when making decisions on Transport Users' Consultative Committee reports on proposed rail closures.

Mr. Swingler

As my right hon. Friend explained to the House on 4th November, he proposes to take more account of the wider social and economic consequences of rail closures than did his predecessor.

Mr. Mathew

Will the Joint Parliamentary Secretary give some details? This really means that in the case of those branch lines in respect of which notice of closure has been given by the Railways Board and in respect of which a T.U.C.C. inquiry is to be held, there is to be no change whatsoever. Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the letter which was sent to a constituent of mine in Sidmouth, where the T.U.C.C. is due to sit at the end of January, I believe, which stated that the closure of that line would be postponed until there was a regional survey, was in fact another breach of promise by the Government?

Mr. Swingler

No, Sir. There has been no breach of promise. I cannot prejudge my right hon. Friend's consideration of any particular T.U.C.C. report. We shall consider any T.U.C.C. report which has a bearing on the hardship involved, but we shall also consider the wider question of the social costs and benefits of transport in these areas.

Mr. Galbraith

Could the hon. Gentleman be a little more specific? What does he mean by "take more account of the wider social consequences"? What more could be done? [Laughter.] It is all very well for hon. Members opposite to laugh, but what more could be done than taking account of industrial development, housing, population growth, the pattern of road transport and the condition of the roads? What further social considerations can the Minister take into account? Will he tell the House in detail?

Mr. Swingler

It is not a question of what could be done. The Government are establishing a network of regional planning boards and councils in order to survey comprehensively all these questions in relation to the future population and economic needs of the areas. These are the matters that we are taking into account.

Mr. Lipton

How long does it take the Ministry to come to a decision when, as in the case of East Brixton station, the Transport Users' Consultative Committee recommended that the station should not be closed?

Mr. Swingler

How long it takes depends upon the complexity of the issues that may be involved. Again, I do not want to prejudge any particular case. We shall give to each case the amount of consideration that it warrants.

Mr. Powell

Are we to understand that the closures are not to take place until the planning boards and councils have done their work? Otherwise they are absolutely irrelevant.

Mr. Swingler

I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman heard my right hon. Friend's statement on 4th November setting out clearly the criteria which we are applying and the fact that we will judge whether a proposed closure is major by taking into account the regional needs.

Mr. Webster

Will the Parliamentary Secretary be precise and tell us of one single criterion which is additional to what there was before?

Mr. Swingler

The criterion which is additional is the assessment of social costs and benefits and the regional transport needs.

Mr. Galbraith

But these are general terms. Will the hon. Gentleman tell us precisely what the difference is, instead of talking in general terms which mean absolutely nothing?

Mr. Strauss

rose—

Mr. Speaker

That has been asked before. Mr. Strauss.

Mr. Strauss

Is it not a fact that while the criteria which the Government will consider are exactly the same as previously, the Minister will give far greater weight to these social considerations than the previous Government did?

Mr. Swingler

I am sorry to be repetitious, but I must say again that we are introducing as a criterion the needs of regional planning on a comprehensive basis; we are looking not merely at one form of transport and one system of accountancy for one form of transport, but at all the forms of transport in relation to one another, taking into account the social costs and benefits involved.

17. Mr. Webster

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will issue a general direction to the Railways Board to notify him as soon as possible of major closure proposals, in order that regional surveys can be instituted without delay.

Mr. Tom Fraser

No, Sir. The institution of work in connection with regional planning is not dependent on the publication of closure proposals by the Board though, as I explained in my statement on 4th November, regional planning considerations will be taken into account in deciding whether passenger closure proposals should proceed through the full statutory procedure.

Mr. Webster

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his maiden statement as Minister caused a great deal of doubt whether there was any change of policy regarding rail closures by his Government compared with the previous Government? Would he not agree that it is essential that we should have this clarified, preferably not by a statement made on Christmas morning? It is very much to be hoped that the matter will be speeded up. That is the reason for my Question.

Mr. Fraser

I shall speed it up all I can. I shall not make a statement on Christmas morning. The hon. Gentleman has asked me to give a direction to the Board which would require it to decide which were major closures and which were not. Clearly, it is impossible for the Board to decide that.

Mr. Powell

As my hon. Friend's question refers to regional surveys, would the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the question which was put to him, on Question No. 15, by my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Mr. Awdry)—namely, what bodies are to do this work in the respective regions? Until we know this and until they are set up, there is bound to be continuing uncertainty.

Mr. Fraser

If I were to respond to the request made just now, I should have thought that I would be increasing the uncertainty. Until the regional boards are set up and until the persons who are to serve on them are identified, clearly it is impossible for me to say who will be on the boards and who will represent transport interests on them. My Ministry will, of course, be represented on them. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are treating the matter with the utmost seriousness. If the House will be patient a little longer, we shall get the boards established, and then it will be seen that the transport requirements of the region are adequately safeguarded as the boards get down to work.

Sir Knox Cunningham

Is the right hon. Gentleman going to make his statement to the House, and if not, why not?

Mr. Fraser

The statement that I said I would issue within a few days will be about closures. These statements have not been made to the House in the past. Normally they have been made by the Railways Board and not by the Minister. All I have indicated is that I have been making a few decisions and think it proper that I should let the public know what the decisions are by means of putting out a statement. On the other hand, I could just leave it to the Railways Board, as my predecessor did.

33. Mr. Mathew

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give an assurance that, when authorising railway closures in respect of which a Transport Users' Consultative Committee has found that hardship will result by depriving school children of transport to school, he will make it a condition of his assent to the closure that adequate and comparable alternative transport will be provided by the Railways Board.

Mr. Swingler

Responsibility for providing transport to the nearest school for children living beyond walking distance rests on the local education authority. When considering a proposed closure, my right hon. Friend will consult the Secretaries of State for Education and Science and for Scotland as necessary, and will take into account any hardship it might cause to school children and any additional cost to public funds of providing alternative arrangements.

Mr. Mathew

Is the hon. Member aware that when the Railways Board instituted recent inquiries in the south-west of England it stated that it considered it to be the responsibility of the local authority and not the Board's responsibility to provide alternative accommodation for school children? In view of the fact that Section 56 of the Transport Act contemplates the provision of alternative services and most certainly does not differentiate between the various types of user of the railways, is not this indefensible?

Mr. Swingler

No Sir. But, of course, I am completely sympathetic with what the hon. Member said, which is that the Railways Board has responsibility only for the railways services and that we have the responsibility for providing adequate transport arrangements. I can assure the hon. Member that in considering any report on this matter, including hardship to school children, we shall ensure that adequate transport arrangements are made, whether by rail or by some other form of transport.