HC Deb 27 March 1968 vol 761 cc1512-7
17. Mr. Ridsdale

asked the Minister of Transport how many representations and letters she has received to date against the Transport Bill.

Mr, Edward M. Taylor

asked the Minister of Transport how many communications have been received by her Department since 1st January, 1968, on the Transport Bill; and what percentage of this total gave support to the provisions of the Bill.

Mrs. Castle

In view of the expensive campaign against the Bill conducted by the Conservative Party and other groups, it is not surprising that I have received a large number of letters, many in a standard form, protesting against the Bill. They include some hundreds of copies of a largely incomprehensible coupon from a newspaper. I have, however, without any prompting, also received many letters supporting the Bill generally, although some of these have criticised specific provisions.

Mr. Ridsdale

How many of them have protested against the disastrous rise in costs? For example, does the right hon. Lady think it right for a small shipbuilder in East Anglia to pay a levy of £400 in going from East Anglia to Manchester when the boat is being exported? What is she doing about this matter?

Mrs. Castle

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman keeps a little more abreast of the news. Obviously he is referring to parts of the Bill which are no longer in it.

Mr. James Hamilton

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the most critical road hauliers are the inefficient ones and that among the industrialists in Scotland there is now general acceptance of the Bill as recently modified?

Mrs. Castle

I think that there is now a growing appreciation by the road haulage industry that many of the wild attacks which have been made on the Bill are totally insubstantiable. I am confident that as the Bill comes into operation these absurd, exaggerated fears will die away and that the benefits of the Bill will be appreciated, even by road hauliers.

Mr. Peter Walker

Following on the right hon. Lady's swallowing of her own words, could she tell us the cost of printing the standard reply to the many standard and non-standard letters?

Mrs. Castle

Far from there being a standard reply, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that very great care has been taken by my Department to circulate in reply, even to the coupons from the newspapers, the full details of the Bill, because the industry is doing itself harm by continuing to repeat complete misstatements of the position under the Bill.

28 and 29. Mr. Eadie

asked the Minister of Transport (1) how many professional associations in Scotland have submitted written observations to her on the provisions of the Transport Bill; and if she will list them;

(2) how many local government authorities in Scotland have submitted to her written observations on the provisions of the Transport Bill.

Mrs. Castle

I have received a number of letters on the Bill from professional associations and local authorities in Scotland, but they are not separately filed and I could not justify the cost of separating them out and listing them.

Mr. Eadie

Can my right hon. Friend inform the House whether trade unions in Scotland have been favourable to the Bill, since their members represent a very big part of the vote and of the interest in the Bill? Could she further tell the House whether this will give the local authorities the opportunity to provide a first-class service in the interests of the people of the respective areas?

Mrs. Castle

Yes. Certainly the trade unions in Scotland have welcomed the Bill, and the Scottish T.U.C. has gone out of its way to say how big an improvement this will make both in the level of public transport and in the conditions of their members. As for the local authorities, on the whole their comments have been favourable to the Bill, and the establishment of the Scottish Transport Group is one of the biggest steps we could take to see that public transport in Scotland is under the control of local communities.

Mr. Peter Walker

In view of the fact that the right hon. Lady considered, when she was proposing the abnormal loads and wear and tear taxes, that there was a real need to relieve Scotland of some of the £33 million involved, what relief does she consider Scotland will need from the extra £60 million of motor vehicle licences and fuel tax?

Mrs. Castle

The hon. Member is aware that special representations were made from Scotland about the abnormal load charges. It was this which was the fear of industry in Scotland which has to carry these abnormal loads rather long distances. It was for that reason that I agreed to consider the exemption of the development areas, having Scotland very much in mind. In view of the fact that the Chancellor was imposing certain financial burdens on the road haulage industry in his Budget, I represented to him that the abnormal loads charge should be dropped, and I am very glad to say he agreed.

30. Mr. G. Campbell

asked the Minister of Transport what representations she has received from interests in the Highlands and Islands relating to proposals in the Transport Bill; and what reply she has sent.

Mrs. Castle

I have had a number of representations from hon. and right hon. Members, local authorities, firms and individuals, mainly about the proposals in Parts V and VI of the Bill. In replying and my Department have explained how these proposals will operate in the Highlands and Islands; but of course as the hon. Member knows I am not now proceeding with Part IV of the Bill.

Mr. Campbell

Is the Minister aware that the Highland Development Board has recommended that the Islands be exempted from quantity licensing, and that local authorities in the Highlands are worried about the effects of the Government's proposals? Is she further aware that none of these public bodies is a member of the Road Haulage Association?

Mrs. Castle

I am aware that the local authorities of the Highlands and Islands have accepted and, indeed, welcome the majority of the Bill—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—as well they might, in view of the financial assistance that the Government are giving for the first time to rural transport and in view of the other grants included in the Bill to help public transport in areas of this kind. As regards quantity licensing, it has been explained time and again, particularly to areas like the Highlands and Islands, that, where there are no rail services available, the quantity licensing proposals will not affect the road transport provisions.

Mr. Maclennan

While recognising that there are many aspects of the Bill which will be particularly beneficial to the Highlands, including those which my right hon. Friend has just mentioned, may I ask whether she is aware that there is concern in the remoter parts of the Highlands which are not served by rail services that the profitability of companies which are based on these parts is dependent to some extent on back loads from the south, and that if their requests for quantity licences are opposed by British Railways, it might have an extremely serious effect on them?

Mrs. Castle

But I would assure my hon. Friend that where there are no rail services, quite clearly British Railways will not object, let alone be successful in objecting, to applications for road licences. It is a total misrepresentation of the purposes of the Bill to suggest, as some have, that quantity licensing will hit areas which have not got a good rail service. Obviously those areas will not be affected.

Mr. Peter Walker

Will the Minister take note of her hon. Friend's point that these firms depend on return loads for which, under her system, they will be unable to obtain quantity licences?

Mrs. Castle

It does not follow that there will be no licences for back loads. There are controls about back loads under the existing provisions. In fact, my provisions are a considerable liberalisation of the present quantity control. The problems of back loads will be considered on their merits by the independent licensing authorities.

31. Mr. G. Campbell

asked the Minister of Transport what representations she has received from industry in Scotland on proposals in the Transport Bill; and what reply she has sent.

Mrs. Castle

I have received representations from organisations and firms in Scotland about various aspects of the Transport Bill. In each case I have sent an appropriate reply.

Mr. Campbell

Does the Minister realise that, however generous the licensing authority may be—and she has just indicated that they will be generous in certain areas—industry in Scotland, quite apart from road hauliers, views with profound anxiety the delays of several weeks involved in the application procedures, because 100 miles is a normal distance in Scotland and not a long one?

Mrs. Castle

The delays of several weeks again are purely pieces of mythology. It depends entirely on whether the Railways Board issues an objection to an application at all. As Mr. Johnson, the Chairman of the Railways Board, has made clear, British Railways intend to be extremely co-operative and flexible in this matter and in many cases there will not be any objection.

Mr. Wolrige-Gordon

The Minister seems to view all representations on this matter through rose-coloured spectacles and takes to herself only those parts of them which support her case. Is she aware that industry in Scotland feels threatened by the impact of this legislation on the most important part of its industrial position in the country, namely, transport costs?

Mrs. Castle

I know that there have been anxieties, particularly about the abnormal load charge. Far from refusing to listen to representations, I have listened, and have said that they would have to be considered. I said that in areas like Scotland there was a case for the reconsideration of the abnormal loads charge. I agreed to reconsider it. It has now been dropped. I can only say that the fears about the effects of quantity licensing have been deliberately whipped up by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite.