TRANSPORT (NORTH-EAST SCOTLAND) (Hansard, 13 May 1965)

§ Mr. Gordon Campbell (Moray and Nairn)

Having listened with interest to the affairs of Lancashire, I would now like to move about 300 miles north of that area and draw attention to transport problems in the north-east of Scotland.

These problems have become worse during the last few weeks. The area mainly affected is in four counties, Inverness-shire, Moray, Nairn, and Banffshire. Broadly, the problem is one of communication between this area and the South, and, as the main routes lie through my constituency, it is, I think, appropriate that I should raise this question in the House.

I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary has studied a map, and preferably a map with contours, or even a relief map, to see what these problems are. There is the obstacle of the Cairngorm mountains immediately to the south of the area in question. There is no road, far less a railway, through the massif of the Cairngorms, and, therefore, access to the North must be either round the east coast, or else up the centre of Scotland. For example, if someone is travelling north from Glasgow, the most populated area of Scotland he would proceed up the centre of Scotland and then, if going to Moray, Nairn or Banffshire, he would need to go on along Speyside or over Dava Moor, whether he was going by rail or by road.

This area is extremely high. It is at the foot of the Cairngorms, and in winter can be covered with deep snow. The routes are blocked from time to time in winter, both road and rail, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman will realise that the railways are blocked much less frequently than the roads.

Last year a decision was taken to close what is called the Speyside line, that is, the line from Aviemore to Craigellachie. It was, I think, recognised generally in the area that this was feasible, provided that the more important line from Aviemore to Forres over Dava Moor remained. The decision to close 866 the line was taken despite what we now see in the T.U.C.C.'s annual report that there would be hardship in the Knockando area if that line was closed, and despite, also, the fact that the road bridge at Craigellachie over the River Spey is a narrow one, and one on which there is a limit of 14 tons. There is a very acute bend at the end of the bridge, with a traffic light, and long vehicles have to go back and forth before they can get round this bend at the end of the bridge.

It therefore came as a shock when it was decided, more recently, towards the end of March of this year, that this line, the Aviemore to Forres line, should be closed; or, rather, the position was that the passenger service should be discontinued, but now I learn that British Railways are approaching merchants in the area with a view to closing the freight service, also. It is this recent decision by the Minister which has raised problems of both rail and road in this area.

The Aviemore-Forres line is the kind of railway line which the Government could have decided to retain in the way that the Conservative Government decided last year to retain the lines west and north of Inverness, for four reasons: first, as the Minister's letter states, because the T.U.C.C. reported that there would be "extreme hardship" in the Grantown area if the passenger service were discontinued; secondly, because of the conditions of snow and ice in this high area in the winter; thirdly, because no adequate alternative transport would be practicable; and, fourthly, because of the important winter sports development in this area.

The Minister's decision included conditions and, in the way in which the previous Government had stated that no railway line would be closed unless there was adequate alternative transport, I hope that it was the intention of the Minister in imposing these conditions that the alternative bus services, which are part of the conditions, would constitute adequate alternative transport. But these bus services seem extremely doubtful, and one of them is on a route which, as far as I know, within living memory has never had a bus service on it before. That is the route over Dava Moor. I should like to know what happens if the alternative bus services proposed in these 867 conditions later disappear. I know from paragraph 3 of the Ministry's letter that the Minister has to be informed of such a development, but there is nothing to indicate whether he has to take any action. Further, if the additional and revised bus services never come into operation, am I right in assuming that the closure will not take place at all? It is, after all, an essential ingredient of the Minister's decision that these conditions should be fulfilled. I know that the Parliamentary Secretary will probably say that it is then a matter for British Railways, and that they will be responsible for running these bus services, but surely the Minister of Transport himself must still be involved, as the conditions are part of his decision. I would, therefore, like the Parliamentary Secretary to tell me what the position is.

On the question of winter conditions, this road over Dava Moor has had for years, every 50 yards or so, permanently, 8 ft. posts painted red and black, on each side of the road, and if the Parliamentary Secretary has not guessed what these are for I will tell him. It is because of the snow conditions in the winter. These posts are necessary so that the driver of any vehicle can see where the road is, because in conditions of snow very often one cannot see the edges of this road and know where the hard surface is. It is foreseen by the merchants concerned that it will be difficult in winter conditions, to bring supplies, particularly of fuel, such as coal, from the station at Aviemore 14 miles away to Grantown-on-Spey.

I should like to speak, also, about the development aspects. The decision was announced by the Minister less than a week before he made the statement in this House, on 31st March, that in future any such decisions for closing passenger services would be considered first by the economic planning boards or councils. So that this decision will not fall into the category of those being considered by an economic board or council.

The winter sports development which I mentioned, and which has occurred during the last eight years, is centred upon Grantown-on-Spey. The headquarters of the Winter Sports Development Board had been there, and Grantown-on-Spey has been a pioneer in this 868 field. The snow, of which there is a great deal in the winter, enables skiing to take place up to the end of April, and this year into this month of May.

On a day such as we have had here in London today, the Joint Parliamentary Secretary will, I think, be interested to know that there will still be snow in the Cairngorms, and that I shall be seeing how much tomorrow morning when I pass them on my way north. The snow, which has been an asset, and has brought so much in the way of employment and prosperity through the development of winter sports, can also, in such a high area, be a hazard to winter travel.

From the development point of view, it would seem shortsighted to remove this most reliable means of transport in winter conditions when, at the same time, both sides of the House and the country as a whole are in favour of developing winter sports and using these resources to the best possible extent. A great deal is being said at present by the Government side of the House about the development of the Highlands—but what is being done? Here is an example in the reverse direction. This is something which will detract from development in the Highlands.

The burden which will fall upon the roads, which are not adequate, is a matter, I know, for the Secretary of State for Scotland. Two Ministers are involved, and there is a danger of the effect of a decision to close these railway lines not being fully realised by the other Minister who has responsibility for the roads. I hope that the Joint Parliamentary Secretary will ensure that the Scottish Office is apprised of the effects upon the roads of these decisions.

As to the adequacy of the alternative transport proposed, I have said that it is doubtful whether it can be brought into effect. It is also doubtful whether it will last once it has been brought into effect. But it cannot be regarded as adequate if bus services do not include shelters, proper luggage facilities, porterage, and connections with trains, since the service has to cater for winter holidaymakers as well as other travellers.

I do not know whether the Joint Parliamentary Secretary has himself been as far north as this. The Minister of Transport is himself a Scot, but his constituency is 200 miles south of this area.

869 I hope that perhaps the two Ministers responsible, who are both Scots, may visit the area—perhaps in January next, when they will find a flourishing and expanding development of winter sports, but, at the same time, extremely difficult road conditions.

In the meantime, I hope that the Joint Parliamentary Secretary will state that no hasty action will be taken upon a decision which may be later be found to be unwise, for development and other reasons.

§ The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Stephen Swingler)

It is my responsibility to reply to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Moray and Nairn (Mr. G. Campbell) because we in the Ministry of Transport are responsible for rail communications throughout Great Britain. As the hon. Gentleman has said, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has responsibility for other forms of communication in Scotland, but there is the closest consultation between us on these matters.

The hon. Gentleman can rest assured that his points will be reported to him.

As he has also said, my right hon. Friend—who is at the moment on his way to Darlington to open tomorrow a most important by-pass scheme—is a very notable and prominent Scot. It happens that I am a half-Scot, on the maternal side, so there is no lack of sympathy in the Ministry of Transport for the problems of communications and transport in Scotland.

It is often represented that the people in the remoter parts of the country get a raw deal, especially in the provision of transport facilities. I hope to show tonight that, even if this were the case in the not-so-distant past, we are planning for it to be very different in the future. The previous Government produced no plan of any kind for North-East Scotland. This was the major reason—as the hon. Gentleman will know—for their failure to deal adequately with the problems of the area in general, and, in particular, with its transport problems.

Her Majesty's Government have established a Regional Economic Planning Council for Scotland, supported by a Regional Economic Planning Board. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State 870 for Scotland is the Chairman of the Council, and its terms of reference are: first, to assist in the formulation of plans for the development of the Scottish economy, having regard to the best use of Scotland's resources; secondly, to advise on the steps necessary to implement the plans on the basis of information and assessments provided by the Scottish Economic Planning Board; and, thirdly, to advise on the regional implications of national economic policies.

An important element in the economic work of the Board and Council will undoubtedly be the provision of transport. Both we and the British Railways Board are represented on the Economic Planning Board, which is now working on a study of north-east Scotland, which will be put before the Economic Planning Council later this year. This study will reveal the possibilities for development in the area, of which a part is represented by the hon. Member, and enable the Council to consider the transport implications and transport provision which is to be made.

In addition to this work, the Council and the Board will be consulted about the economic and physical implications of any withdrawals of passenger services which may in future be proposed by the Railways Board. As the hon. Gentleman mentioned, this was announced by my right hon. Friend at the earliest opportunity after the establishment of the apparatus, on 31st March. Of course, all these planning arrangements, which we have needed for a long time past, are entirely new. They are a start towards getting a proper assessment of the transport needs, among others, in areas like that represented by the hon. Gentleman. I hope that he recognises that this represents a great step forward.

The hon. Gentleman has raised especially the problem of the proposed closure of the Aviemore-Forres railway line. I want to be clear about one thing, to be perfectly frank with the hon. Gentleman and the House. The closure of this line is a prime example of the sort of mess which things got into when his right hon. Friends—the Government which he supported—were in control. I admit straight away that it is a difficult case: it bristles with difficulties.

871 It was a case about which the previous Government dithered, dallied and delayed for a considerable time, because this proposal was first published on 25th November, 1963. Yet no decision on it had been taken by the time we assumed office. They were apparently unable to apply their own Act and criteria to this case. We had to come to grips with the problem. Indeed, we had to put a large number of matters on a proper footing.

The basic facts about this line are that it was losing about £114,000 a year. It was hardly used. Something had to be done, and fairly quickly. We had the obligation to formulate a new and more positive policy for dealing with railway closures, starting from scratch in this case, to obtain full and detailed advice on it from all the interests concerned, including my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Highland Transport Board. From the day we took office, it took until 24th March, five months, for us to come to a conclusion about this line.

Even on peak Saturdays last summer only 125 people at the most, some of them local residents, were alighting at Grantown, the main tourist centre. More and more tourists, especially the winter skiers mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, are using their own transport. We had to consider the kind of subsidy involved in the maintenance of the line in relation to the benefits to be gained. My right hon. Friend came to the conclusion, and laid down conditions, that new bus services should be organised. The new bus services between Inverness and Grantown are actually quicker than the trains.

The additional and revised bus services are a condition of the closure being effected. If, for any reason—for example, operators being unwilling or unable to provide them, or the traffic commissioners not licensing them—they are not provided, the closure cannot take place, unless or until my right hon. Friend varies the conditions. Let that be perfectly plain. The conditions are laid down and they must be satisfied according to these terms.

Moreover, the Railways Board must keep itself informed in future of any proposed alterations in bus services and tell us about them. If the proposals relate to a service provided as a condition of 872 consent, the Board is expected to arrange for its replacement, unless my right hon. Friend thought it right, in the circumstances of the time, to vary the conditions. It is clear that the power is retained in the hands of my right hon. Friend in regard to the conditions covering the closure.

My right hon. Friend must have this flexibility. We certainly cannot, and do not, claim that the decision that has been taken now about the substitution of services will be right for all time but, as time goes on, the work of the Regional Planning Council will enable us to see more clearly what the right pattern of transport for the area will be for the future.

I have explained that the Regional Planning Council is not examining closures consented to before it came into being, but if its work shows that, in future, the service ought to be restored, it would be physically possible to do so. That is because we have arranged that the Board should tell my right hon. Friend if it wants to lift the track, so that, if it does apply to do so, my right hon. Friend can have regard to the Council's work before giving a decision. This means that the essential structure of the line can be kept, even if the Railways Board decides to close the freight service, until it is clear that the alternative services are satisfactory and that future planning will not require the rail service at all.

I therefore assure the hon. Member that, at least from last October, the Government intend to take every possible step to see that the development of regions like North-East Scotland proceeds on proper economically sound lines, with full account being taken of the social needs of the area, including the transport needs. In taking a decision, on the grounds I have stated, to consent to the closure of the line, my right hon. Friend has ensured that safeguards are provided that will mean that the Regional Planning Council for Scotland and the Regional Planning Board in their surveys of the future economic and transport needs can ensure the restoration of this service if that is regarded as desirable for the future.