RAILWAY CLOSURES (Hansard, 9 February 1965)

§ Sir Alexander Spearman (Scarborough and Whitby)
I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to enable the Minister of Transport to rescind his consent to a closure of any station or of railway passenger services on any line. I know that an important debate is to follow and I will detain the House for only a small part of the 10 minutes which are usually taken up on these occasions.
The purpose of my proposed Bill is to enable the Government to honour the written pledge made by the Prime Minister to my constituents on 15th September. During the election, and after the former Minister of Transport had consented to the closure of the Whitby-Scarborough and Whitby-Malton lines, the Prime Minister wrote to the chairman of the Scarborough and Whitby Labour Party. That letter pledged that a Labour Government would halt these particular closures while the new regional authorities prepared transport plans for their areas. That letter was published in the local paper, the Whitby Gazette, on 25th September, and I have with me a copy if anyone wants me to read it.
Now the Prime Minister states that the Government do not have the power to do this. His actual words to the House on 22nd December were as follows: Under the terms of the 1962 Act we could not halt the closure which had already been decided."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd December, 1964; Vol. 704, c. 1046.] It may be said that anyone expecting or hoping to become Prime Minister should not make a pledge unless he had, or intended to take, the power to enable him to carry it out. I am not, however, saying that the Prime Minister has broken this particular pledge—he has not broken it yet; but time is short. These lines are due to close on 8th March.
Last month, the Prime Minister's secretary wrote, on his instructions, to my constituents, a letter which was published in the local paper on 21st January. I want to quote one sentence from it: This decision, made by the former Minister of Transport in his concluding days of office, is a matter of great regret to us, for we would have wished, but for the 1962 Act, to stop these closures pending a broad review of transport problems which we are undertaking. 211 I suggest to the Prime Minister that there is a simple way out: he can accept my proposed Bill, which would enable him to do what he says he wants to do.
I hope that the Government will welcome the Bill. Indeed, I am quite sure that some hon. Members opposite will do so. One of them, in fact, has asked to have his name on the Bill. I ask the Government to welcome it. I ask them to provide time to see it through all its stages. Then, the Prime Minister can fulfil the pledge which he gave on 15th September so clearly, so precisely and so unconditionally.
I have only one thing more to say. I realise—

§ Mr. A. E. P. Duffy (Colne Valley)
On a point of order—

§ Lieut.-Colonel Sir Walter Bromley-Davenport (Knutsford)
Sit down.

§ Mr. Speaker
Interventions are not allowed on proceedings under this Standing Order.

§ Sir A. Spearman
I realise that except for those of us who are directly concerned, the Whitby railways are a comparatively small matter, but for a Prime Minister to make a positive pledge and fail to fulfil it is not a small matter for any of us who believe in democratic government.