ROADS, NEWHAVEN (Hansard, 25 July 1966)

§ Colonel Sir Tufton Beamish (Lewes)

To say that Newhaven is not alone in having a severe traffic problem today would be to inflict a glimpse of the obvious upon the House, something even bordering rather on the trite. There can be few industrial towns without a serious traffic problem of one kind or another, but the consequences of overcrowded roads can vary between serious local inconvenience, restrictions on the prosperity of the area and actual damage to the national economy.

It is my submission that Newhaven is suffering in all these three respects. I raise this question with considerable feelings of sympathy for the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, who have an incredibly difficult task, of which I do not envy them, trying to decide priorities between road schemes in different parts of the country. I do not think that there is a Minister of Transport —I am sure that there has not been one since the war—who could not have spent two or three times the allocation of money and still have left considerable areas of the country with a feeling of grievance that they had been unreasonably left out.

There is a very great need for stringent economies in Government expenditure. After the Prime Minister's statement last week no one can disagree with that. But we have been told by the right hon.

1399 Lady that no cuts are contemplated in the road programme. In that event I hope that I am pressing on an open door. It is a sensible decision that has been made about the road programme, because to some extent cutting the road programme is bound to be a self-defeating operation. Money spent on well-thought-out schemes of road improvement is bound to pay handsome dividends in future in terms of productivity and efficiency.

I am sorry that the hon. Member for Gateshead, West (Mr. Randall) is not present. Although he represents a northern constituency he lives in Newhaven and has always taken a great interest in the town. He is not able to be here but I know that he shares my views about this question. He is doing a job of work in Europe as an executive member of the United Nations High Commission for Aid to Refugees, another subject in which he and I share a considerable interest. My reason for raising this question is to try to get from the Minister a firm undertaking to include the scheme for the Newhaven relief road in the next classified road programme.

The decision not to include the project in the 1969–70 road programme, announced last autumn came as a very great disappointment to everyone in Newhaven and East Sussex, and to both local authorities concerned. The Parliamentary Secretary will remember that it is almost a year since I took a delegation to see him from the East Sussex County Council and the Newhaven Urban District Council. He received us in a most friendly and sympathetic way and told us that we had a good case and that it was obvious that there was an urgent need for the relief road. He would not, however, make any promise to include the scheme in the rolling programme, which was what we were pressing him to do.

There is every advantage in ending the present uncertainty now and making a clear statement about the phasing of the three stages of the work. The plan is now in three stages as a result of a request by the Minister. It can, therefore, be tackled in three different parts. It hardly seems necessary for me to argue the need for a relief road, because not only is this self-evident, but it is common ground between the Parliamentary Secre- 1400 tary and myself. But I wish to take the opportunity of the debate to put on record some of the facts. Newhaven straddles the estuary of the Sussex Ouse, and the river divides the residential and shopping area to the west from the industrial area to the east. The link between the two is the A.259, a much-neglected road which is only 24 ft. wide at its widest where it goes through Newhaven. It winds its way through the town—I am now thinking of it going from east to west—crosses the Ouse by the swingbridge, and then in 200 or 300 yards crosses the railway line by level crossing. In between the swingbridge and the level crossing the road disgorges a considerable amount of traffic to the south of the busy port and the railway.

The swingbridge is antiquated. It creaks and groans its way open and shut under the combined effort of eight men turning a winch—this on the main south coast road. What foreign visitors who arrive in Newhaven think when they see this bridge being winched open and shut, I hate to imagine. They must think that they have arrived in a museum, and not a bustling, modern, competitive country, which is what we are.

Then there is a level crossing, which opens and closes 90 times a day. There is no synchronisation between the two. There cannot be by reason of the function they perform. For frequent periods during the day traffic is blocked for five to 15 minutes, and sometimes quite a lot longer, and it grinds to a frustrated halt in the centre of Newhaven. Sometimes it may take the best part of an hour to get through this quite small town.

I have received dozens of letters from constituents. The most recent was from the director of a well-known firm in Newhaven who, a few weeks ago, took 50 minutes to get 500 yards through Newhaven during a very important day for him, when he was on his way to a conference in connection with an export order. The sense of frustration that this causes in Newhaven cannot be exaggerated.

Newhaven has not just a single traffic problem but a traffic problem to the power of three. Road, rail and river traffic all combine to form a sort of triple bottleneck. The weight of road traffic for passengers and goods is already heavy and it is multiplying. This is 1401 quite apart from the growing volume of coastal road traffic using the A.259 and passing through Newhaven simply because it is the main coast road.

Three modern ships operate in conjunction with S.N.C.F. from the British Railways car ferry terminal. Their traffic load has risen by between five and six times in three years. I am glad that it has; it is something for which I have been pressing for a very long time. In 1963 11,000 cars were carried, and last year the number of cars carried was more than 60,000, together with 800 loaded lorries. I am sure that this year's figures are considerably higher, and that the figures will go on rising year by year if present trends continue, as I am sure that they will.

Last August, more than 15,000 vehicles crossed the swing bridge during an average day, many of them proceeding on their way, others concerned with the port or rail head. There are some quite serious effects of the traffic jams besides the frustration and inconvenience. The A.259 is an important link in the south coast road network. It is the main south coast road, running from Chichester through busy seaside towns, Bognor Regis, Worthing, Brighton and Hove, along the coast to Newhaven and Seaford, which is also in my constituency, to Easthourne, then on through Bexhill, St. Leonards and Hastings, Winchelsea and Rye to Folkestone, where it joins the A.20 to Dover. It is therefore, an important road.

The population of the area is another factor which is already aggravating the situation and will continue to do so, because in Telscombe Cliffs, Peacehaven, Newhaven and Seaford together the existing population is approximately 35,000 but we now know that by 1980 or 1981 it is likely to double to about 70,000, which is a very large increase. Therefore, apart from the other factors which I have mentioned, this also will greatly aggravate the situation as the years go by.

Another factor is that according to the best estimates from the experts who have studied these things, the extent of the traffic which is likely to use the road will probably increase, even more than the general traffic growth throughout the country, by as much as four times during the next decade.

1402 Newhaven is a busy and expanding port. It is also a link in the chain of Britain's export drive. It has excellent natural harbour facilities. They are so good that when the Channel is really rough, Newhaven is sometimes the only Channel port that is able to remain open for shipping.

Newhaven also has a flourishing, expanding modern industrial area east of the river. Another industrial estate is being actively planned beside the North Quay, just above the swingbridge. This estate could well be functioning by 1968 or 1969. When it functions, the road traffic burden will be increased still further.

There are joint proposals by British Railways and the National Ports Council to develop new berths along the East and West Quays in the southern part of the harbour. These are being actively proceeded with. As a result of the scheme, the shipping tonnage which is taken by road is expected to increase by 40,000 tons next year and, perhaps, by a further 50,000 tons in 1968. Putting these two figures together, in case I have not made myself absolutely clear, I am saying that in two or three years' time it is probable that shipping will be taking from the roads 90,000 tons of exports more than was taken last year. This, again, will aggravate the problem considerably. It is an important part of the picture which I am briefly painting.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary knows that the Newhaven town map is under consideration by his right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government, having been through all its preliminary stages, and that this allows for a total of 125 acres of industrial land in Newhaven. Newhaven, in fact, is planned as the main industrial area for the whole of that stretch of the South Coast.

Newhaven has excellent railway and port facilities, but all the schemes for the future and all the plans which I have mentioned will not be viable while the dilapidated swingbridge is still there, while there is such a busy level crossing and while the narrow road is the only way of getting through Newhaven. As a result of all these things, road traffic, rail traffic and river traffic come to a standstill in the heart of Newhaven.

1403 Everyone knows that it is no good putting new wine into old bottles. If ever there was an old bottle, that swing-bridge is such a bottleneck. I wish that somebody could blow it up. It was built in 1864, more than a century ago. No doubt then it was a wondrous thing, when the horse was setting the pace and the motor car was unknown. Today, the bridge is ridiculous and dangerous. The sooner it can be replaced, the better for all concerned.

I should just like to remind the House that the eyes of this country are turned towards Europe, and that the Channel ports provide important links with Europe, which is our most important export market, roughly equal to the whole of the Commonwealth export market. I would also just like to mention, very briefly, that whether or not the Channel tunnel is ever built it does not seem to me to affect this issue one way or the other.

I should like to conclude by simply asking the Parliamentary Secretary to be kind enough to comment on the points I have raised with him. I know he has been in touch very recently with East Sussex County Council and asked it to make a comprehensive study of the relief road scheme with a view if possible to reducing its cost. It is, I know, being very actively pursued. The hon. Gentleman has also asked the Council to try to devise a scheme which can be carried out in three stages. This the Council has succeeded in doing, as the Parliamentary Secretary knows. There is one other minor problem, which is the question of what sort of bridge is to be provided, but it does not affect the issue whether the relief road is constructed or not. What kind of bridge is built will result from a survey already planned and the result will be at hand in ample time before the work is commenced.

So today I put to the hon. Gentleman one quite straightforward point, to announce a decision which includes Newhaven's relief road in the next extension of the classified road programme. I very much hope that the Minister will today be able to reward Newhaven's patience and restraint by giving me this undertaking.

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

This Adjournment debate promoted by the hon. and gallant Member for Lewes (Sir T. Beamish) is no surprise to me. The hon. and gallant Member has frequently emphasised the need to relieve traffic congestion in Newhaven, and the need for major road improvement there, and he has informed me of the delays caused to traffic by this level crossing and swingbridge on the A259. As he said in his speech, about 12 months ago I received a deputation on this issue from the hon. and gallant Member which included representatives of the East Sussex County Council and Newhaven Urban District Council.

On that occasion we discussed the scheme for a relief road to provide a new bridge over the Sussex River Ouse and the adjacent railway. This scheme would cost about £22 million, and Parliamentary powers would probably be needed before a new bridge could be built there. Therefore, on that occasion I had to explain that though we did not, of course, dispute the need for a relief of conditions in Newhaven—and we very much want to see an improved road system built as soon as it can be done—taking into account the fairly substantial cost of this scheme we naturally had some difficulty in fitting it into the available funds. As always, however, this scheme had to compete with many other urgent schemes throughout the country, including Sussex, when the last extension of the classified road programme was decided in detail, and on that occasion, as the hon. and gallant Member said, it did not prove possible to include the Newhaven relief road scheme, as then planned, in the programme mainly on account of its heavy cost.

As the hon. and gallant Member was speaking, my hon. Friend who is sitting beside me here, the Member for Luton (Mr. Howie), passed me a little note with the message on it, "Remember the eastern by-pass at Luton." It is rather characteristic of the situation in which I am so often placed in the House that there are so many Members—most of whom are not present tonight—who, nevertheless, have their favourite local road schemes for the solution of their problems, many of them of substantial 1405 cost, which I recognise are of urgent importance and which we have certainly to bear in mind, and which enter into this annual calculation in the roll forward of the trunk road and classified road programme according to the limited funds available.

Hon. Members should recognise that, in spite of the financial difficulties and economic crises, the funds available are greater. In the present financial year, for new construction and major improvement, the funds from the State amount to £180 million compared with £146 million last year, but still not permitting these schemes which are mentioned to me constantly, the importance of which I recognise, to be included in the programme.

Therefore, since that time, we have had discussions with the County Surveyor of the East Sussex County Council, as the responsible highway authority, through our divisional road engineer, to see whether the cost of this scheme, estimated to be£2½ million, could be reduced in any way or whether the scheme could be so designed to be carried out in stages.

We understand that the county council wishes to provide an inner ring road in Newhaven in conjunction with the relief road. That inner ring road is designed to act as a distributor for local traffic to free High Street of through traffic as far as possible. Therefore, in the Ministry at the moment we are faced with two major projects in Newhaven: first of all the relief road, with its river and rail bridges, and, secondly, the ring road which would lead to a material improvement in the traffic flow round the town.

These discussions are now centring on the possibility of constructing whole or part of a ring road between the swing-bridge over the River Ouse and the junction of the Eastbourne-Brighton road, the A259, with the Lewes-Newhaven road, the A275. That would be used as a one-way gyratory system and would bring about a considerable improvement in the traffic flow through Bridge Street and High Street in Newhaven.

Such a scheme is being considered for inclusion in the next extension of the classified road programme which my 1406 right hon. Friend expects to announce later in the year. I cannot anticipate the decision tonight, of course, but I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that the proposals will be considered very carefully—both the larger proposals and the modified proposals—in competition with all the other schemes of which we have to take account.

We do not pretend that the ring road by itself will solve everything. There are still the problems arising from the congestion caused by the swingbridge, which have been emphasised by the hon. and gallant Member, and the railway level crossing. But, in our opinion, the ring road is even more vital to the life of the people of Newhaven, the majority of whom live on the west side of the river.

Bearing in mind the considerable cost of the relief road scheme and also the probable need for Parliamentary powers before the new bridge can be built, it would be misleading the people of Newhaven to hold out any bright hopes of the relief road itself being programmed in the near future. But I assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that the discussions about the inner ring road are not in any way intended to prejudice the claims of the more ambitious scheme. We wish to consider what can be done more immediately, but without prejudice to what has to be done in the long term. If we are to face the realities of programming, it is prudent if the planning of the inner ring road can now be pressed ahead.

The A259 has been widened recently to provide dual carriageways from a point to the east of its junction with New Road to a point just west of its junction with the entrance to the car ferry terminal. At the same time as the widening was carried out, the British Railways Board replaced the level crossing gates by lifting barriers. Although the level crossing is still closed to road traffic as frequently as before, the duration of each closure is now shortened, and therefore congestion has been reduced. This is a very good example of co-operation between a highway authority and the British Railways Board, and is certainly something to be applauded.

Great stress has been laid on the traffic generated by the car ferry service operating from the port. In June to September, 1965, for example, there was an average 1407 flow of about 540 passenger car units per day to and from the ferries, and it is expected that the volume will rise to 940 passenger car units in 1970, and 1,100 passenger car units in 1974.

Bearing in mind that the average daily traffic flow on the A.259 from Newhaven was more than 16,000 passenger car units per day only two years ago, it can be clearly seen that the traffic generated by the ferry service represents a relatively small proportion of the total traffic passing through the town.

We appreciate that Newhaven is developing as an industrial centre for the region, and that it is also growing in importance as a port serving Europe. We are also well aware that the A.259 is a heavily-used coastal route during the summer. I assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that all these factors have been borne in mind in our consideration of the relief road scheme.

It is unfortunate that the economic circumstances of the country prevent us from giving the "go-ahead" as soon as we would wish to highway authorities 1408 like the East Sussex County Council, to proceed with their urgently needed scheme, as we recognise this one to be. But the hard fact, as I have to reiterate so frequently from this Box, is that the total cost of schemes throughout the country which highway authorities are urgently anxious to carry out far out-weighs the funds at our disposal for these purposes. We therefore have to exercise a very strict system of priorities in the choice of schemes.

We do not dispute in any way the need for the relief road for Newhaven, and therefore I assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that we fully appreciate all the reasons advanced for the scheme. I repeat that it will be included in the roads programme as soon as the level of funds permits and its relative priority indicates. At the same time, we will endeavour to make the greatest possible progress in our discussions on the inner ring road.