HC Deb 10 June 1971 vol 818 cc1369-73

Lords Amendment No. 5: In page 12, line 41, after first "area" insert "a lorry area."

The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Michael Heseltine)

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

Mr. Speaker

With this Amendment, it will be convenient to consider Lords Amendments Nos. 9, 18, 53, and 63.

I must say formally that privilege is involved in Amendments Nos. 5 and 18.

Mr. Heseltine

I am sure that the House will realise that Amendment No. 5 is a consequential one which does not go to the heart of the debate on this group of Amendments. I am also sure that the House will recognise as the main Amend- ment Lords Amendment No. 18 which is a significant and exciting development in the powers available to highway authorities in that it gives highway authorities power to provide areas on or near to highways for the overnight parking of heavy goods vehicles and for the transfer of loads, with appropriate accesses, vehicle servicing, goods storage and handling facilities. The same powers enable highway authorities to provide accommodation, refreshment and toilet facilities. Highway authorities will be able to enter into arrangements—including leasing—with private persons to provide such facilities. We do not think that it would be appropriate for the authorities themselves to operate the various facilities for the accommodation and refreshment of persons, for goods handling or for vehicle servicing. Nevertheless, they will have powers to act in a decisive way to ensure that these services come into existence.

The Clause enables the Secretary of State to enter into agreements with local authorities for the exercise of his powers to provide facilities on lorry areas provided by him and for the exercise of powers for the control of parking on such lorry areas and to make advances to highway authorities in connection with the provision of lorry areas. It also provides that a local authority may contribute towards any expenses incurred under the Clause by the Secretary of State. These powers will be given to all highway authorities, including the Secretary of State, so that lorry areas may be provided near any road, and that includes a motorway.

The primary purpose of the Clause is to provide for the establishment of a network of strategically placed areas, with good access to the main roads of the country, which road haulage operators could use to break and tranship bulk loads from larger to smaller lorries, or vice versa. This could facilitate the use of larger vehicles for long-distance haulage and small lorries for transport in urban areas.

Secondly, the proposed sites will serve for overnight parking of lorries. It is a source of continual anxiety to constituents who find heavy lorries parked in residential streets overnight. Therefore, provision of sites will help to reduce this nuisance at night as well, of course, as during the day.

The third benefit which could be derived from these new services is that the concentration of unattended goods vehicles in a limited number of sites will enable more effective measures to be taken against hijacking and pilfering.

This is an exciting addition to the powers available to highway authorities. It is very much a power of the moment. People have become aware of the problems—the people not least aware are the hauliers themselves—attendant on the efficient transportation of goods in road haulage vehicles, and to provide facilities within urban areas is in keeping with the spirit of the things which the Department of the Environment is trying to do.

This leads me to the Amendment to the Lords Amendment 18. This is a consequential Amendment. Its purpose is to restore to the Clause the provision that highway authorities may not operate service station facilities. It was originally included, but, as a result of procedural difficulty, it became excluded. The Amendment is designed to ensure that it is included in the list of facilities which highway authorities may not operate, but which they can provide.

I hope the House will accept these proposals.

Mr. Speaker

At a later stage I will formally put the Amendment to the Amendment. At the moment the Question is, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

Mr. Frederick Mulley (Sheffield, Park)

I agree that this is an important and exciting new development. We are all concerned with the need to provide better parking and other facilities for road transport. The Under-Secretary has already stressed that the parking of lorries in residential streets, through lack of proper facilities, is a source of great nuisance to residents. In addition, it makes the theft and the hijacking of loads easier, because, not being able to get secure parking facilities, drivers are often obliged to leave them in places where they are a temptation to those who wish to steal.

It is worth stressing that there has been pressure not only from the road haulage firms, but from the road haulage unions about making better provision for drivers both for meals and for overnight accommodation. I am not sure whether overnight accommodation will be covered by the Amendment. The word "accommodation" is used. I imagine that this is envisaged, and it is to be welcomed.

I am not sure how the cost will be divided. Obviously it is right that the road haulage firms should make a contribution, and possibly also local authorities; but it would be agreed by local authorities that it is important that central Government should make a substantial contribution. As the proposed new Clause does not deal with this matter in great detail, I do not know what is envisaged about the sharing of the cost. While the provision of such a park in a particular local authority area is of some amenity value of a negative kind to the people living there, often the loads, the drivers, the people in transit, will not have any connection with the local authority which might be called upon to meet a substantial part of the cost.

I am sorry that the doctrinal position is being taken in the new clause. I refer, for example, in subsection (3), to some other person, not being a council being allowed to operate these facilities.

When the original Bill was before us, we made the point about providing facilities in picnic areas. It may be inappropriate for a local authority to provide refreshment or service facilities, but I see no reason why it should be prohibited by Statute from so doing. I can think of certain circumstances in which, from the point of view of efficiency and of providing service, it might be necesstary for that to be done by a local authority, because there may be difficulty in finding a private firm or person willing to do it in a pioneering or initial stage.

I do not like the idea of writing into the Clause, for some reason which I have not yet understood, that a local council can provide bricks and mortar, and can be put to considerable expense in providing facilities, but that the idea that it should be allowed to sell cups of tea is heresy in the mind of the Government. I shall not seek to divide the House on this, because we went into the matter in Committee, and again on Report, but I cannot let it pass without saying that I regard this as a blot on what, in every other respect, is a Clause very much to be welcomed.

Question put and agreed to. [Special Entry.]