§ Q2. Mr. Roseasked the Prime Minister whether he will appoint a Minister for road safety with sole responsibility for co-ordinating the measures for cutting down the numbers of road accidents.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. Under my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, one of his Joint Parliamentary Secretaries, my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Bob Brown), already has special responsibility for road safety.
§ Mr. RoseWhile congratulating the Government on the road safety legislation which has saved many lives, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will remember and bear in mind that for every person murdered in this country, 40 people are killed on the roads? Will he bear in mind also that the World Health Organisation has said that in advanced countries one in 50 children born today will be killed on the roads? Will he therefore give urgent priority to the idea of appointing a Minister whose only responsibility will be to save lives in this respect?
§ The Prime MinisterI am sure that no one will be complacent about the present toll of lives on the roads, but it is a fact, as my hon. Friend says, that there has been a big improvement. If the rate of growth of road casualties in the period 1960–64 had continued, we could have expected an increase of about 8 per cent. or 9 per cent. between 1964 and 1969.
§ Mr. lain MacleodThe Prime Minister need not bring that into politics.
§ The Prime MinisterRight hon. Gentlemen opposite have brought a lot of people's deaths into their propaganda. 1449 At the expected rate, there would have been 30,000 more casualties. In fact, in 1969, instead of 30,000 more, there were 30,000 fewer casualties, that is, 60,000 casualties less against the trend[Interruption.]—I have a right to quote these figures to the right hon. Gentleman, because a great part of this was due to the courage of my right hon. Friend the then Minister of Transport for introducing the breathalyser. That has saved thousands of lives, and it is right that it should be said.
§ Mr. William HamiltonOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Many hon. Members on this side of the House distinctly heard the right hon. Member for Enfield, West (Mr. Iain Macleod) call the Prime Minister a swine. I submit that that is unparliamentary language, and that you should ask the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw the remark.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Noise does not help a point of order at all. I did not hear the right hon. Gentleman use that word, but, if he did call the Prime Minister a swine, he will withdraw it.
§ Mr. Iain MacleodI always say frankly what I did say. I used that word. I thought it unforgivable to bring children's deaths into a political argument and to make capital out of it. If the word be out of order, Mr. Speaker, you know my deference to you and to the Chair and of course I withdraw it.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe right hon. Gentleman has withdrawn it.
§ Mr. Bessell rose—
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Bessell.
§ Mr. RoseFurther to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As I asked the Question originally, would you accept that the saving of children's lives is an issue, and a very important one, for many young mothers in this country, and should not bring anger to those who supported the alcoholic lobby against my right hon. Friend?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is not a point of order at all.
§ Mr. BessellWhile recognising the great improvement in the number of road 1450 casualties, for which the Prime Minister is quite correct in taking credit on behalf of his right hon. Friend, may I ask whether, in view of this continuing slaughter on the roads, he agrees that the kind of propaganda policy adopted during holiday periods might be extended throughout the year to impress on people the need for care?
§ The Prime MinisterI began my reply by saying that there was no ground for complacency by anyone in this matter, and all the time we must be vigilant in seeing whether some of these restrictions which have helped to reduce road casualties should be tightened up, and in what fair way they can be tightened up.
My impression of publicity at holiday times is that, valuable though it is, and highlighted though the holiday figures inevitably and right are, they are no higher on the average than the day-to-day toll during the rest of the year. For that reason I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman, and what he said about holiday times needs to be said all the year round.