HC Deb 15 October 1968 vol 770 cc340-8

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Ioan L. Evans.]

10.11 p.m.

Mr. Kevin McNamara (Kingston upon Hull, North)

My purpose in seeking this brief debate tonight is to draw to the attention of the House and the Minister of Transport the very real problems of road accidents and the immediate communication needs of the City of Hull. Problems which must be solved not only for the important roll which they play in the development of our city and the realisation of the tremendous potential for economic expansion which exists on Humberside, but also because of the immediate importance of the part which the Port of Hull plays now in the economic life of our country as a great exporting centre, with its increasing importance as a passenger terminal for foreign visitors, and because of the roll-on, roll-off ferry service.

It is not only as a port, but an important commercial and industrial centre that Hull has a part to play in the nation's recovery, which is seriously affected by our grossly inadequate road communications, the congestion in the city, and the use of what are little better in some places than enlarged country lanes, the roads leading to the city from the north and west, with these miles of two-line traffic and bottlenecks through villages.

Selby toll bridge is an anachronism, one half scheduled as an historic monument which ought to be the concern of the Ancient Monuments division of the Ministry of Public Building and Works and not a subject of tonight's debate, but has to be used on a journey through the industrial West Riding, for a journey to Doncaster and Thorne or through Dunswell through Beverley. These journeys are full of delays and frustrations which shorten tempers but, more than that, cost money and time and, on occasion, regrettably, lives, and retard the development of the area.

This sense of isolation in Hull and the inadequacies of our road communications must have been brought very much home to the Minister—we did not need to be reminded of it in Hull—during the Recess. The following headlines appeared in the Hull Daily Mail on 8th August: "Selby Bridge Closed. 30-mile detour. Selby chaos triggers new road demands." On 27th August: "Hulls last road link with the West: Crash blocks Boothferry Bridge".

The Selby Bridge remained closed for three weeks during part of which time the smaller bridge at Cawood was also out of commission. Boothferry Bridge was blocked by an accident for less than half a day but for a short time, apart from the route to the north, Hull was completely isolated. It would be interesting to know if any estimate has been made of the cost of these two mishaps, particularly the Selby incident. How much did it cost in time and money, in wages, petrol, to make the 30-mile detour? What increase was there in the cost of our goods, particularly those for export?

It is ironic that, despite the economy cuts and when the Government rightly place emphasise on the need to improve and develop communications to our major ports, these mishaps should have occurred on the access road to the third port. Of course, it would be true to say that these problems have been there for along time. Perhaps we can hope for more attention to them now that the Minister of State himself was late when he came for the opening of the Humber Tidal Model in Hull last month when he was delayed by traffic coming to the City.

If the lesson has not gone home to the Minister I would extend this invitation to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, who is replying to the debate: make the road journey with me from Hull to Leeds or Doncaster by private car, or in the cab of a lorry, and he will appreciate the problem. If that invitation is not accepted and my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. James Johnson), who frequently uses that road, is fortunate to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, he will be able to explain to my hon. Friend exactly the difficulties he may encounter.

We know that work on the Elloughton bypass is due to start next year, that important road developments are taking place in Hull, and that last week the Minister fixed the route for the extension of the first section of the M18 motorway extension. Something is being done, but what my constituents and the industrialists who are thinking of expansion in the city would like is the knowledge, not only that the Ministry is aware of our problems, but is seized with the urgency of them. The Hull Corporation in the excellent evidence it submitted to the Hunt Committee, and the Yorkshire and Humberside Economic Planning Council, in its first report, all made road communications, to the Port of Hull the first priority, and we would like to think that the Ministry has done so, too.

If I may say so, in passing, that is why I have not mentioned the Humber Bridge, important though it is. I know that my Minister will shortly be receiving the report of the feasibility study and also, if we are to embark on a discussion on the Humber Bridge, we would need not half an hour but half a week in which to discuss its importance to the area. Also, I know that the road networks as they are planned take into consideration the construction of the bridge.

My constituents and the whole area would like to hear from the Minister tonight when we can expect a firm decision on the starting date for the Selby bypass. Discussions on this have been going on for 30 years, which is 30 years too long. It is about time that the agents for the Ministry were able to come to a decision, and the Minister should be knocking their heads together to help them to reach it.

We have had the line of route for the Thorne bypass designated. When can we have a firm date for the commencement of work? When can we expect something on the Beverley bypass? The congestion, even if one uses the bypass to avoid the town centre, is still very great at the traffic lights, and the Beverley Bar has always created a problem.

Finally, when can we hope for a completion date to be fixed for the road schemes in Hull, in order to ease the congestion that exists in the city and also to help the country. These matters are all important, not only for Hull but for the country as a whole. I hope that we shall not be disappointed. I cannot emphasise too much that the stranglehold on the city should be removed.

10.18 p.m.

Mr. James Johnson (Kingston upon Hull, West)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) for allowing me to speak for a few minutes and also to the Minister for giving a little time. I am delighted to say something, not least because my Parliamentary agent is chairman of planning for the Association of Municipal Corporations and also chairman for planning in Hull. If the Minister can give us a tangible factual answer this evening, this will please not merely Alderman Body but all those in Hull who are connected with planning in the widest sense of the development of the economic life of the city.

My hon. Friend has mentioned that we are the third port. We face Europe and we have a magnificent future, but we must be given these outlets to the west. We have bottlenecks to the west, and when travelling north by road, I often face the delays suffered by the Minister of State when he opened the Humber Estuary Model a short while ago. I speak feelingly on that subject.

I have in the past called attention to the scandalous lack of good communications suffered by [...] are an isolated community on the North bank of the Humber, and we have to travel at least 40 miles before reaching the A1 to begin our link up with the hinterland of the centre and the west.

We shall never develop Humberside unless we get these road communications and, of course, the Humber Bridge, to which my hon. Friend has already referred.

Entering the city from the West are two highways, Boothferry Road and Hessle Road. Those are the two ways in. I understand from my city council colleagues that we are to have two roads from the west continuing over the Hull river into East Hull and its dockland. Our difficulty is to get our stuff in and out of these fine docks mainly east of the river. I understand that Hessle Road is to be continued through Myton Gate and over the Hull river, but, even more important, a new road will be constructed north of the Fish Docks and over the Hull river by a new bridge.

If we can have some helpful answers to these points, I feel that this debate will have been well worth while.

10.20 p.m.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Bob Brown)

My hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) has set out very cogently and with his usual adroitness both the general need for the improvement of communications between Hull and the national road network and the particular problems which arise when even the existing admittedly inadequate routes are interrupted. He has been ably supported in the short time at his disposal by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. James Johnson).

The Government fully accept the importance of the contribution which Hull can make to the national economy and the need for a radical improvement of communications to enable it to realise its full potential. This is demonstrated by the inclusion in the trunk road preparation pool of a new route extending the M62 Lancashire Yorkshire Motorway from Ferrybridge on the A1 to Gilberdyke, on the A63 west of Hull, and of another route joining this M62 extension to the already programmed bypasses of Doncaster and Thorne. All this new network is to be constructed as motorway. This is a measure of the importance that the Government see in the port of Kingston upon Hull. In addition the route from Hull to the north is catered for in the preparation pool by a proposed bypass of Beverley and an associated diversion of a part of the existing route between Beverley and Hull.

The inclusion of all these schemes in the preparation pool was announced in February, 1967. My hon. Friend is anxious to have a firm starting date for them, so that all concerned with industry and commerce in the region may see their hopes of better communications take more definite form.

We are not yet ready to consider including these schemes in the firm programme, but that by no means implies that we do not share my hon. Friend's sense of urgency. Under the present two-stage system of preparation pool and firm programme the inclusion of a scheme in the firm programme is not considered until it has been prepared to the stage of plans to a scale of 1 in 2,500 and an accurate estimate of its cost has been made. This enables us to make a proper assessment of its priority and to assign it its due place in the programme.

This means that firm starting dates are not allocated until much later in the development of a scheme than under the old system in which schemes were programmed before being elaborated in any detail. It also means that, on major schemes of this kind, a vast amount of survey and design work is necessary before firm programming is considered. This work, on all the preparation pool schemes in the Humberside area, is progressing and will continue to progress with all possible speed.

On one part of the network, the Thorne bypass section of the route from Doncaster, my right hon. Friend has just announced the fixing of the route under the normal statutory processes. A bypass of Thorne has been included in the programme for some time, but its whole conception had to be altered to fit in with the new motorway pattern. I am certain that no hon. Member representing a Humberside constituency would complain about this reassessment of the situation. This has now been done and our present aim is to start work on this scheme at the beginning of 1970. I am sure that this will be welcomed by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North, by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. James Johnson) and by all the people on Humberside that they represent.

Mr. James Johnson

And my hon. Friend the Member for Goole (Mr. George Jeger).

Mr. Brown

I am certain that the hon. Member for Goole will also be delighted about this.

Meanwhile progress is also being made on the interim scheme to provide a temporary bridge over the canal on the trunk road through Thorne in order to relieve the congestion caused by the existing narrow swing bridge.

On the section between Thorne and Doncaster, which will link up with the M18 motorway, an origin and destination survey has been carried out and its results are now being analysed with a view to selecting an appropriate route.

The motorway extension will terminate at Gilberdyke. My hon. Friend is already aware that the section of the A63 between there and Hull will be improved by the Elloughton bypass on which work should start in 1969. This will leave less than five miles which are not dual carriageway and of these the greater part is accounted for by Caves bypass, which is a good standard three-lane highway.

In Beverley a one-way system has been introduced and a route avoiding the town centre signposted, in order to improve conditions while the bypass is awaited.

I turn now to the particular problem of Selby. Following the decision to extend the M62 on the Ferrybridge-Gilberdyke alignment, which will supersede the A63 as the major Leeds-Hull route, we have been looking separately at the problem in Selby in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. General agreement has now been reached that a bypass to the north of the town would be a viable proposition and consideration is now being given to the inclusion of a scheme in the next extension of the trunk road preparation pool.

I should now like to mention the road system within Hull, with particular reference to access to the docks. Amongst the main causes of delays to traffic in Hull are the periodic openings of North Bridge and Drypool Bridge. A southern orbital road to be constructed in three stages will provide a new route from Hessle Road to Hedon Road, with a link at Myton Place to a southerly extension of Ferensway and with a new bridge over the River Hull. The first two stages are in the firm programme at an estimated cost totalling £1,400,000 and the third stage, including the bridge, is in the principal road preparation list at a cost of £2,850,000. These schemes, subject to approval of their detail, will be eligible for a 75 per cent. grant from Ministry funds.

The preparation list also includes the first carriageway of a ring road to be constructed on the line of the low-level railway, which has been abandoned by British Rail. This will provide a northern bypass of the city centre for traffic bound for the eastern docks.

And we are contributing half the cost of a land-use/transportation study which is currently being carried out as a guide to what the future road pattern in the city should be.

Mr. James Johnson

Can the Minister say anything about the road which is parallel to the Humber north of the fish and Albert Docks which I understand is to begin at Dairycoates and go along the Hull river to the cargo docks on the east bank?

Mr. Brown

I will look into that.

For more immediate relief of congestion in the city centre a one-way traffic system has been introduced and this, together with a system of traffic light control and a parking meter installation, has kept the traffic moving fairly freely. Two multi-storey car parks have been provided and more are intended in order to assist off street parking. A further measure to assist the city centre traffic flow is the undertaking of three complementary road schemes, two of which have already received grant, to divert west bound traffic from Carr Lane on to Waterhouse Lane, Osborne Street and Little Ferensway, thus easing the traffic conflict at the Anlaby Road/Ferensway/Carr Lane Junction.

I have not so far mentioned the Humber Bridge. There is at this moment nothing new I can say about this, but I welcome this opportunity to repeat again the assurance we have often given that the bridge will be given a place in the road programme to fit in as an integral part of any large-scale development on Humberside. The Government will make decisions on that when they have considered the results of the current planning studies, to which my hon. Friend referred.

In conclusion, therefore, the earnest of the Government's concern to terminate once and for all the isolation of Hull is to be found in their announcement of a new motorway system of over 40 miles to give it first-class communications to west, south-west and south, together with the very substantial improvement of the northward route via Beverley; and this is supplemented by the Government's willingness to make a major contribution towards the transformation of the city's internal road network.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at half-past Ten o'clock.