§ 30. Mr. P. Browneasked the Minister of Transport what consultation took place between his Department and the Elder Brethren of Trinity House before the latter took the decision to move the lights at the entrance to the Taw and Torridge estuary.
§ Mr. MarplesThe Elder Brethren submitted their proposal to my Department for consideration and approval in the normal way. After obtaining the agreement of the Lighthouse Advisory Committee of the Chamber of Shipping my Department approved the scheme.
§ Mr. BrowneThat was a pity. Is my right hon. Friend aware that the local master mariners and fishermen who use this estuary are extremely dissatisfied with the proposed new positions of the lighthouses? Is he aware that this will make navigation over a very difficult bar much more dangerous than it already is? Is he quite satisfied that his Department knew what it was talking about when it approved this decision?
§ Mr. MarplesAll I can say is that I am advised that the present temporary lights give a definite lead in at this estuary, and that ship owners and local pilots are satisfied with them. The permanent lights which will replace them shortly will be of much greater power than the lights at the former sites.
§ Mr. BrowneThat is not true.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Question time is impossible if it consists of counter-assertions.
§ Mr. ThorpeIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Member for Torrington (Mr. Browne) is talking very good sense in this matter, and that the feeling of opposition expressed by the fishermen in his constituency is shared by those in my constituency who also use this bar? Will he consider this matter again?
§ Mr. MarplesI will certainly consider it again, but the lights and signals are provided by Trinity House for the benefit of general navigation and not for the benefit of local interests. Fishermen do not pay light dues.
§ Mr. BrowneOn a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.