ROADS (BURTON-ON-TRENT BRIDGE) (Hansard, 22 February 1967)

§ Mr. C. J. Jennings (Burton)

I am grateful for this opportunity of bringing to the notice of the House the urgent necessity for the building of a second bridge across the River Trent at Burton-on-Trent.

In the middle of the twelfth century, the first bridge across the Trent was built on the site of the present bridge. That appeared to be adequate until the middle of the last century, when, in 1864, a new bridge was built. This appeared to be adequate until the advent of the motor car; and so, in the '20s, the existing bridge was widened. That appeared to suffice until the late '50s, since when the traffic situation has developed and worsened to such a point when a new bridge is vital. The rate of traffic over the bridge has increased so much that urgent action is necessary.

If I said no more than that, the Joint Parliamentary Secretary would agree that I had stated the crux of the problem. The rate of increase in traffic using the bridge has completely overwhelmed the capacity of the bridge to handle modern traffic. That, basically, is the argument, but it may be convenient if I give further reasons to explain why action is urgent, and I will give these reasons under three headings; statistics, geography and social needs.

I do not want to bore the House by giving a whole range of statistics. I have come armed with a great many figures, which I will hand to the Parliamentary Secretary later, if he is not already in possession of them. I will give three simple illustrations to show how, statistically, the bridge is insufficient for the traffic it must carry. On 10th December, 1965, when the main road between Derby and Burton, the A.38, was flooded, traffic to and from Derby was diverted through Repton. This meant that the whole of that traffic on the A.38 had to cross the bridge at Burton.

From a census taken at that time, that diversion represented an increase of 19 per cent. over even the peak flow of 1677 traffic across the bridge. I will never forget that day. There was complete chaos. For many hours the whole town was at a standstill as a result of the absolute congestion of traffic. I speak with heartfelt feelings on this subject, because I was in the middle of the town sitting in my motor car. In one hour I moved about a dozen yards. Finally, when I got to the bridge, it look at least half an hour to cross it. The whole town centre was jammed and conditions were abnormal, to say the least.

Considering that there is at present taking place an annual rate of growth in traffic of about 9 per cent., what was abnormal on that day in Burton will be the normal traffic pattern by the end of 1968. In other words, we will reproduce the conditions of that day by the normal increase which is taking place in traffic flow.

Secondly, in the peak period about 2,500 vehicles cross the bridge every hour. A disturbing factor is that 1,000 pedestrians cross the flow of traffic every hour. My third example is that the traffic on the bridge in one peak period last August represented a greater flow than at three specific points on the M6 on the same day. Without going into further statistics, these three illustrations will prove how necessary an additional bridge is in this area.

The idea of having a new bridge was mooted some time ago. Indeed, we have the approval of the Ministry's divisional road engineer, in which he agreed in principle not only to the bridge but to a proposed site. If the principle is established and if the go-ahead from the Ministry were given, there might be considerable argument about the siting of the bridge, but I will not go into that today.

Having got the approval of the divisional road engineer, the town council, in an orthodox manner, submitted proposals on two separate occasions to the Ministry—for the 1968–69 programme and for the 1969–70 programme—but in each case no action was taken.

Today I am not asking for pious hopes or specious platitudes from the Parliamentary Secretary, but a firm promise of action in the near future. He now has the opportunity, in view of the 1678 announcement made by the Minister of Transport yesterday—in relation to firm schemes being announced in what she called a "preparation pool"—to put this Burton scheme, either at once or later in the year, into this "preparation pool" so that it may be included in the second-phase of the pool, which will enable the bridge to be started by 1970.

Burton has gone about this matter in a completely orthodox and courteous manner. It is obvious, however, that this approach has not paid dividends. That is why I am now beginning a campaign in the House, although I hope that I will receive such a promising reply from the Minister that I will not need to take the campaign any further in future.

The geographical reasons are also straightforward. Burton is situated in the middle of England. It is not often enough emphasised that the bridge at Burton represents the traffic throughway between the M1 and the M6, and, of course, this aggravates the problem. Burton is literally the main road to London from that part of the Midlands and traffic through Burton comes from a very wide area indeed.

The type of traffic using the bridge is changing and is becoming heavier. For example, Burton is world renowned for its beer. This commodity is today transported not so much by rail as by big tankers, a large volume of which crosses the Trent Bridge at Burton. I appreciate that we are to have a new bypass from Lichfield to Derby, but if the Minister examines the situation he will see that this will not help Burton's bridge traffic because the traffic using the new by-pass will be going in another direction.

Swadlincote has become very famous in recent weeks. It has almost become a new capital of England. It is the constituency of the Foreign Secretary, my parliamentary neighbour. Many of his constituents come into my constituency to work. The chaos that results from driving conditions on the bridge militates against the comfortable and easy travelling of many of the Foreign Secretary's constituents. I hope that the plight of Swadlincote people will, in spite of its prominence recently, be remembered by the Parliamentary Secretary and his Minister. 1679 The cost of the new scheme would at present be about £800,000, but the longer we wait the greater will be the cost.

The social reasons boil down to how the people of Burton are affected by the present situation. The main factor is the delay caused to thousands of people at peak periods. Between 8.15 and 9 o'clock in the morning and a quarter to five and 6 o'clock in the evening the public transport system is thrown completely off its schedules. People leaving work at 5 o'clock never know when they can catch a bus and, when they have caught one, they do not know when they will reach home. If the Parliamentary Secretary lived across the river at Burton and, being scheduled to catch a certain train allowed himself half an hour or longer, according to the bus timetable, he would never catch that train. Catching trains in Burton, particularly in the morning, is an absolute nightmare.

Very important, too, is the effect on the traders in the town. Very few people will shop in the last hour if they travel by car. They get out of the town before then. Further, it only needs one accident at either end of the bridge—and we have had accidents a number of times—or some dislocation of the traffic lights system for there to be complete chaos for miles. I have known chaos for three miles outside Burton, and for the whole town to come to a standstill.

The Minister should now see the reason for this debate. I am staking a claim in this House for a place in the capital roads programme. I am asking the hon. Gentleman either to put us in the scheme announced yesterday, or the supplement to it that comes at the end of the year, or, alternatively—but I prefer the first idea—to put us into the 1970–71 capital roads programme.

We have tried formal, orthodox ways, and I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will give me a very satisfactory reply. I have never lived here by threats, because the threats of the back-bench Member now and then are not worth too much, but we can and will be effective. I promise the hon. Gentleman that unless we get something forthcoming now from the Ministry, I am prepared to drop the formal orthodox methods we have so far used and wage a major virulent cam- 1680 paign in the House. I am, however, grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for coming here this morning to answer me.

§ The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. John Morris)

I thank the hon. Member for Burton (Mr. Jennings) for his exposition of the pressures on the existing crossing of the Trent at Burton, and of the need for relief to be provided by means of an additional bridge. I am well aware of the kind of problem he has posed. There was a similar situation in my own constituency, which has only recently been corrected. I am therefore very familiar with this kind of traffic problem, and very sympathetic to the hon. Member and to Burton-on-Trent. I hope that when I have finished speaking the hon. Gentleman will be reasonably content.

We are well aware of the traffic congestion on the existing bridge. Not only is it, as the hon. Gentleman indicated, the only route between Burton and places east of the Trent, but it also carries an important volume of through traffic between those places, served mainly by the A50 and A444 roads, and the Potteries and the North-West. This is the backcloth to the present discussion.

The natural growth of these classes of traffic has been accelerated by the attractions of the A50 as a connection to the M6 motorway. While its use as a link between the M6 and the M1 by traffic to and from the south is likely to diminish when the present Midland motorway link is completed, as it is expected to be in 1971, its importance as a route to the M6 for traffic from Leicester and beyond will remain.

Despite the pressures which have thus built up into a need, which we fully recognise, for some relief to be provided to the existing bridge, my right hon. Friend has not so far found it possible to include a scheme for a second bridge in her forward programme of classified road construction. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there are a very great number of desirable road improvements throughout the country, and even the very substantial programme that has now been announced for the years up to 1971 is far from sufficient to deal with them all. 1681 The relative merits of competing candidates for a place in the forward programme have to be assessed nationally, and it inevitably happens that schemes, the need for which is accepted not only by local opinion but by the Ministry, have to be rejected in favour of even more urgent improvements. However, we are now in the final stages—and I hope that this information brings some comfort to the hon. Gentleman—of preparing the final instalment of a list, which my right hon. Friend expects to be able to announce within a month or two, of classified road schemes which, while not immediately included in the firm programme, could be planned and prepared by the highway authorities concerned with a view to their inclusion in the programme during the first part of the 'seventies.

The list will be based on proposals put forward by local highway authorities, and included in these proposals is a proposal from the Burton-on-Trent County Borough Council for a new bridge to cross the Trent between Stapenhill Road and Lichfield Street. The cost of the scheme, including some improvement of 1682 Park Street, was estimated at £872,000. This scheme would complete an inner ring road system in Burton, and would considerably alleviate the town's traffic problems. While I cannot, of course, anticipate the announcement that my right hon. Friend will be making, I can say now that the prospects of its including this scheme proposed by the Burton Borough Council are good.

I trust that this considered statement will be of some comfort to the hon. Gentleman. I am well aware of his courtesy during the almost eight years I have been in this House, and that of the County Borough Council in the way it has made its case. I hope that he and the Council can await the publication of the list within what I hope will be a month or so.