HC Deb 10 March 1971 vol 813 cc439-52
—(1) The Secretary of State shall have power to provide on land adjoining, or in the vicinity of, a trunk road, not being a special road, a picnic site for motorists and others likely to use the road with space for parking vehicles and a means of access to and from a highway.
5 (2) The Secretary of State shall have power to erect buildings and execute works on a trunk road picnic area for the purpose of providing all or any of the following, that is to say—
10 (a) parking places for vehicles,
(b) a means of access to and from the area from or to a highway,
(c) public sanitary conveniences, and
(d) facilities for the provision and consumption of meals and refreshments,
and power to equip buildings erected by him under this subsection with such furniture and apparatus as may be necessary for the purpose of providing such conveniences or facilities.
15 (3) The Secretary of State shall have power to manage a trunk road picnic area, but shall not have power to provide meals or refreshments on such an area.
(4) The Secretary of State shall have power to make arrangements with some other person, not being a council,—
(a) for such conveniences or facilities as are referred to in subsection (2) above to be provided by that other person; or
20 (b) for meals or refreshments to be provided on the trunk road picnic area by that other person;
and the powers of the Secretary of State under this subsection include power to lease the trunk road picnic area or any part thereof to that other person.
25 (5) The Secretary of State shall have power to provide public sanitary conveniences in proper and convenient situations on or under land forming part of a trunk road, not being a special road, or adjoining, or in the vicinity of, such a road and power to manage such conveniences.
30 (6) The Secretary of State shall pay compensation to any person who has sustained damage by reason of the execution by him under subsection (5) above of any works on or under a trunk road.
(7) The council of a county, county borough or county district may contribute towards any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State under this section.
35 (8) Nothing in section 88 of the Public Health Act 1936 (restriction on erection of public sanitary conveniences in, or accessible from, streets) shall affect the powers of the 35 Secretary of State under this section.
(9) In this section 'sanitary conveniences' includes lavatories.—[Mr. Graham Page.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

tion to some extent the fact that there have been certain difficulties of communication. The right hon. Gentleman is right about the general principle, but I thought it right to select new Clause 9 in this case.

On the earlier point, I agree that this is a rather complicated grouping. I hope that the Minister will explain the grouping to some extent. The House must be fairly tolerant in these matters; and, if a right hon. or hon. Gentleman wants leave to speak again, I hope that the House will grant it, because I think that is the only way in which we can get through a great mass of Amendments like this. Separate Divisions can be allowed on specific Amendments. Perhaps the Minister will explain the rationale for the grouping.

The Minister for Local Government and Development (Mr. Graham Page)

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

I am obliged for your Ruling, Mr. Speaker. With new Clause 1 we are also discussing the following Amendments: the sub-Amendments to new Clause 1(a), in line 17, leave out 'not being a' and insert 'or'; (b), in line 19, after 'person', insert 'or council'; (c), in line 21, after 'person', insert 'or council'; (d), in line 29, leave out 'subsection (5) above' and insert 'this section'.

New Clause 2—"Provision for exercise by local authority of functions of Secretary of State with respect to management or provision of picnic sites, etc."

New Clause 7—"Provision of public conveniences for users of county roads".

Amendments Nos. 7, 14 and 60.

Amendment No. 61, in page 40, line 26, at end insert: (2B) A local highway authority may acquire land which is required for the purpose of providing public sanitary conveniences in the exercise of their powers under section (Provision of public conveniences for users of county roads) of this Act.

Amendments Nos. 62 and 64.

Amendment No. 65, in page 46, line 35, at end insert: in the exercise of the powers of section 37(2B) of this Act acquire compulsorily land lying more than 220 yards from the middle of the highway or proposed highway on land adjoining, or in the vicinity of, which public sanitary conveniences are to be provided.

Amendments Nos. 66, 67, 71, 72, 82 and 88.

This grouping of new Clauses and Amendments deals entirely with picnic areas and public conveniences provided on trunk roads and principal roads. The grouping deals with three new Clauses and Amendments to new Clause 1. Therefore, there are four slightly different subjects—new Clause 1, the Amendments to new Clause 1, new Clause 2, and new Clause 7. Beyond that I think that all the Amendments are consequential on new Clause 1 and new Clause 2. In dealing with the Amendments to new Clause 1 I shall have to refer to new Clause 2. It is, therefore, convenient to deal with these in one debate.

New Clause 1 seeks to enable the Secretary of State to provide picnic areas, including sanitary conveniences, facilities for the provision and consumption of meals and refreshments, parking places for vehicles, and access to and from a highway on land adjoining, or in the vicinity of, a trunk road, and to provide public sanitary conveniences on or under land adjoining or in the vicinity of or forming part of trunk roads.

Already local authorities have power under the Countryside Act, 1968, to provide picnic areas and sanitary conveniences. We are seeking to allow the Secretary of State to make the same provision as local authorities are permitted to do adjacent to or away from trunk roads or any other roads.

It has become necessary in modern conditions to make provision for this sort of facility adjacent to trunk roads. In the case of motorways, there is provision for service areas, for refreshment areas, and for the normal facilities that a motorist requires when travelling any distance. In future many trunk roads will be built to motorway standard, and travel on them will be similar to travel on motorways.

Therefore, it seems proper that we should allow the highway authority in this case, which is the Secretary of State, to make provision for refreshments and toilet facilities in the same way as he can do so in the case of motorways. New Clause 1 makes that provision. I do not think that the House will wish me to go through it in detail beyond merely saying that the new Clause empowers the Secretary of State to provide in connection with trunk roads refreshment and toilet facilities, and to provide those by his own agency, except in the case of refreshments and meals. These are excluded, but the Secretary of State would be empowered to arrange for the provision of them, not by central Government facilities, nor by local Government facilities, but by contracting them out to private enterprise to provide those facilities.

New Clause 2 provides that the Secretary of State can delegate his powers under new Clause 1 to provide refreshment and toilet facilities in connection with trunk roads to the local highway authority. This may answer the point which is sought to be raised by the sub-Amendments to new Clause 1. I apprehend that these sub-Amendments seek to permit either the Secretary of State or the local highway authority to provide refreshment facilities in connection with trunk roads. We have excluded this from the new Clause and merely empower the Secretary of State to arrange a contract for those facilities to be provided but not to provide them himself or to permit the local authority to provide them.

Mr. Mulley

I understand that the hon. Gentleman wants to go through the whole list, but this is exactly the difficulty which is caused by this massive grouping of Amendments. We are being given answers to the Amendments before they have been moved. It is not the best and the most productive way of conducting our affairs that we should get a Ministerial answer to an Amendment before it is moved.

Mr. Page

I was endeavouring to anticipate the purpose of the sub-Amendments. I may well be wrong, so I will keep to the purpose of the new Clauses.

They deal first with trunk roads. It is a power given to the Secretary of State to provide these facilities in connection with trunk roads. It is a power given to the Secretary of State to provide these facilities through the central Government and central Government finance if he so wishes, except that it does not empower him to supply refreshments and meals but only to contract that part out to an independent contractor. New Clause 2 provides that the Secretary of State can delegate the powers to local councils.

As I understand it, new Clause 7 relates these facilities to principal roads. Local authorities already have the power to make this provision, but we see no harm in spelling this out in this way in new Clause 7. Therefore, we are prepared to accept the new Clause, and we are grateful to the Opposition for tabling it.

I think that is, with all the consequential Amendments listed as open for debate on these new Clauses, will give a satisfactory code for the provision of picnic sites and toilet facilities alongside or adjacent to trunk roads.

4.30 p.m.

Mr. Mulley

I am sure that the House will welcome new Clause 1. It is widely recognised that the provision of the facilities mentioned therein, particularly picnic sites and public conveniences, on trunk roads will be greatly welcomed by road users. Some local authorities, but not county councils, have certain powers for the provision of public conveniences on some roads under the Public Health Acts.

One hopes that steps will be taken to try, so far as reasonably possible, to ensure that these facilities are kept tidy. We all like to use places set apart for picnicking or for resting on a long journey, but it is not an uncommon experience to drive up to one of these places and find it in such a mess that one is obliged to find a less convenient and, perhaps, not altogether satisfactory place off a side road which is not specifically earmarked for the purpose. There is at times a great accumulation of filth in areas which are set apart.

I hope, therefore, that in making these arrangements and in delegating his powers the Secretary of State will see not only to the provision of suitable facilities but to the provision of adequate funds for their being maintained and kept tidy.

The only reservation I have about it is that the new Clause is confined to trunk roads. It seems to me—I understand that the County Councils Association agrees—that similar powers at least as regards the provision of public conveniences should be extended to principal roads generally. I understand that the Minister was not quite accurate when he said that local authorities already have powers such as those sought to be provided under our new Clause 7. County borough and county district councils have such powers but not, I understand, county councils, and the county councils are more often the highway authority in areas where the provision of such facilities is badly needed.

I am grateful, therefore, for the Minister's acceptance of new Clause 7. It is a novel procedure to have a Minister accepting an Amendment or new Clause before it has been moved, but I find it none the less welcome for that. I am sure that the County Councils Association will be grateful that he is willing in certain respects to extend the imaginative proposals in his own new Clause to principal roads generally.

There will be a financial problem. I do not think that it would be right in a Bill of this kind to try to provide over a long period for the controversial division of the cost of such facilities as between central and local government, but I am certain that it will be right to make such provision and that county councils and local authorities generally will want some help from the Minister towards the initial cost of establishing these facilities. It seems right that the normal procedure in relation to roads, with the division as to 75 per cent. from central funds and 25 per cent. from local funds, should be extended to the provision of facilities on roads as it is to the roads themselves. No doubt, that is a matter on which the Minister may wish to comment, and about which discussions will take place.

The only blemish which I find in new Clause 1 concerns compensation for damage, and it is to this point that my sub-Amendment (d) is directed. I do not understand why the payment of compensation to people who have sustained damage as a result of the execution of works by the Secretary of State should be limited to the consequence of works under subsection (5). It seems reasonable that if damage is sustained as a result of works carried out under subsection (2)—for example, the provision of buildings for meals and refreshments—compensation should be payable in the same way. Such an occasion may be rare, but I do not see why subsection (6) should be so restrictive in the matter of compensation. It is out of keeping with the rest of the Bill, and I am glad to see that in a number of respects there are Government Amendments down to widen the power of individuals to claim compensation for damage suffered.

Mr. Graham Page

I forgot to mention that in my opening speech. We are happy to accept the right hon. Gentleman's sub-Amendment (d).

Mr. Mulley

We seem to be doing very well. That fortifies me in coming to my other complaint, and I hope to have an equally forthcoming answer.

I can understand that, generally speaking, it might not be appropriate for the Secretary of State or for local authorities themselves to be responsible for organising the catering at these picnic sites, and that in the ordinary way they should arrange the facilities but not themselves make the provision. I do not suggest—the Minister misunderstood a little here—that the Secretary of State should in any circumstances undertake that function.

Nevertheless, it seemed to me wrong in principle, and—I hope that I am not misjudging the Minister and his hon. Friends—I thought that some doctrinal prejudice might have come along to spoil what is otherwise an admirable Bill. For all time, the Minister specifically excludes consideration of a council as a person who could provide refreshments on a picnic site, and we regard it as wrong that that should be a permanent exclusion.

There may well be circumstances in which it would be economically unattractive for private enterprise to provide facilities which might be badly needed; for example, on roads in the Highlands of Scotland or other remote places. In such circumstances, it might well be desirable for the local authority itself to make arrangements to provide refreshments.

Moreover, we must proceed on the basis that highways legislation usually lasts for 30 or 40 years before there is another complete revision. It would, therefore, be wrong to maintain the principle which is enunciated in several places, notably in subsection (4) of Clause No. 1— the Secretary of State shall have power to make arrangements with some other person, not being a council … Local authorities are not excluded under new Clause 2 from the unremunerative part of the operation, but if there might be a little bit of money involved the right hon. Gentleman is taking the big legislative stick, to prevent them from selling refreshments. This is rather doctrinaire. I had hoped that the Government were learning a little as time went on about their relationships with local authorities. Whilst I understand that where picnic areas are designated each case should be judged on its merits, I do not see why, before beginning to judge those merits, the Government should rule out the possibility of any local authority's providing meals or refreshments.

As I have already had my new Clause 7 accepted before moving it, as well as my sub-Amendment (d), I hope that I can get a hat trick and that the hon. Gentleman will say that my sub-Amendment (a) may be accepted. That would make me feel that we are continuing a very satisfactory consideration of the Bill.

We warmly welcome the imagination of the concept in new Clause 1 and its subsidiary Clauses and Amendments. The only blemish is the prejudice against local authorities shown in excluding them from those who can provide refreshments, with the authority of the Secretary of State, which they would need. I hope that there will be second thoughts about that.

Mr. Michael Jopling (Westmorland)

I, too, welcome the new Clause very much. Having land adjacent to a trunk road in the North of England, I have suffered from the indescribable habits of certain sections of the public, who seem to use the countryside as a public lavatory, picnicking place, place to exercise their dogs and so on. I hope that the Clause will do a good deal to help those who have suffered as I have.

But I hope that my hon. Friend can be helpful over certain points. First, planning authorities insist that those developing petrol filling stations and service areas on trunk roads should provide adequate lavatory and car parking facilities. I must declare an interest, in that I am interested in a business which provides service facilities on the Great North Road in Yorkshire. When planning permission was sought many years ago we were told that we must provide adequate lavatories and so on. It is right that private developers should be put to considerable expense and trouble to provide these facilities. I hope that local authorities will not start saying that it is for the State to provide them, and that private developers need not have them at garages and service stations in the future. It is very important that filling stations and other service facilities should have adequate lavatory and car parking arrangements.

Many years ago I sat on an area planning committee in the North of England. I remember many applications for service facilities on trunk roads being turned down on the direction of the Ministry of Transport, as it was, because such development would create an addi- tional road hazard. If many more parking areas for picnic sites and public conveniences are to be provided throughout the country on trunk roads, as the new Clause provides, it follows that additional road hazards will be created on many trunk roads. My hon. Friend cannot possibly deny this, as his own Department has rightly said in the past that where traffic enters and leaves trunk roads there is considerable danger. There have been many serious accidents and deaths in recent years on the stretch of the Great North Road in the North of England that I know so well, where traffic leaves and joins the trunk road. It would be a good idea, if my hon. Friend is thinking of developing such facilities on trunk roads, to try to have them in conjunction with existing facilities where this can be agreed. I am thinking particularly of existing filling stations on trunk roads where it is possible to provide additional facilities such as a picnic site adjacent to them. That would avoid creating additional access and egress points. I hope that my hon. Friend will consider doing that wherever possible.

4.45 p.m.

I should also like him to consider the way in which the sites will be managed. I very much agree with what the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley) said about the rubbish that so often seems to accumulate on parking and picnic sites. It is important that they should be kept attractive, so that people will use them and they will be treated with respect.

With regard to new Clause 2 and the provision of refreshments and meals in picnic areas, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that if a picnic site is provided on a trunk road one of the first people to descend upon it will be the man who owns a mobile snack bar? I am prepared to guarantee that within a few weeks of the areas being opened the local chap with a mobile snack bar will ply his trade there. I see no good reason for necessarily objecting, but it must be realised that to a degree this will be unfair on people who have set up more sophisticated, more formal refreshment areas in the district. Also many prospective catering developers may have been turned down for road safety reasons or planning considerations. My hon. Friend must accept that where picnic areas are created the mobile snack bar will provide meals in a completely uncontrolled way, which will mean that the provision of catering facilities on trunk roads will become more out of control than it is.

I hope that my hon. Friend will give a little thought to these points and will tell us what he thinks about them at a later stage.

Mr. Graham Page

With the leave of the House, may I answer the questions put to me?

The right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley) asked about the contribution from the central Government to the cost. The provision of picnic areas, toilet and refreshment facilities, and so on, on the trunk roads will be 100 per cent. borne by the central Government.

The right hon. Gentleman's new Clause 7 concerns toilet facilities on principal roads or adjoining principal roads. These will be provided by the local authority as public health authority. They would normally come under the total expense of the local authority. I take the point that local authorities might ask for some assistance over this matter. Let us meet that when it comes. On the face of it, however, they are doing this work as public health authorities and 100 per cent. of the expense has to come from local authority funds.

Mr. Mulley

The local authorities will be disappointed by the hon. Gentleman's reply. His Department is an empire-building concept, but I am sure that he is not going to take over the responsibilities of the Department of Health and Social Security today. He is not acting on behalf of the public health authorities or on behalf of the Secretary of State for Social Services. I cannot see in principle any difference between providing public conveniences on trunk roads and providing them on principal roads. There are public health, transport and traffic aspects. I hope that he will not rule out the possibility of grant arrangements for facilities for travellers on a par with those provided in the construction and maintenance of the highway itself. I would not like to be the vehicle of a new Clause which I thought would be appreciated by and helpful to local authorities if it is to involve this kind of rate stringency and additional cost to them. I hope the hon. Gentleman will not close his mind to this argument and give a definitive ruling today.

Mr. Page

New Clause 7 appeared on the Order Paper only a short time ago and I have not had an opportunity fully to consider the expense aspect of it. I am not being dogmatic. I am merely stating what the law is at present—that this is a public health service for which the local authority is wholly responsible. Starting from there, perhaps we will consider whether any contribution can be made by the central Government. But I ask the hon. Gentleman not to hold me to an undertaking.

Mr. Mulley

But we are changing the law. That is the purpose of the Bill.

Mr. Page

I fully appreciate that.

I come now to sub-Amendments (a), (b) and (c). It would not be the policy of the Government to permit local authorities to enter into trading in these circumstances. We argued this out in the case of motorways, where the trading is hired out to indpendent contractors. I think that we must stick to that in connection with trunk roads. The right hon. Gentleman has gained quite a lot today. I do not think that he will be too dissatisfied if I say that I canont give way to him on that point.

My hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland (Mr. Jopling) raised a number of valuable points. He asked local authorities not to look to the central Government for the expense always in providing these services. I will explain the history of new Clause 1, which gives the Secretary of State powers to provide picnic areas and public conveniences for users of trunk roads. The provision of public conveniences is a public health matter. As such, the responsibility is on the local authorities under the Public Health Act, 1936. The lack of such conveniences on trunk roads has led, as my hon. Friend said, to an increasing problem of the fouling of lay-bys and the surrounding countryside.

In 1965, a pilot scheme was initiated whereby the local authorities were to provide toilets at 35 selected sites on trunk roads, and the then Minister of Transport agreed to contribute one-third of the whole cost. The results of the pilot scheme have demonstrated the need for public sanitary conveniences on trunk roads, but it was obvious that the local authorities were not fully prepared to carry out these services. This was on the fairly reasonable argument that the users of the trunk roads were mainly through traffic and not necessarily local citizens. They argued that their public health duties were in connection with their own citizens. On that basis, we have reached the decision that the central Government should take a hand and provide the toilet facilities and picnic area facilities at the expense of the taxpayers rather than at the expense of local government revenue.

Secondly, my hon. Friend raised the road safety aspect. I take note of his proposal that we should put these picnic areas and toilet facilities close to existing facilities, such as filling stations. There is no provision in the Bill for the Secretary of State or the local authorities to provide filling stations, and we would not go as far as that. But there is no reason why, from the point of view of safety in access and egress, we should not put these facilities near existing facilities.

My hon. Friend's third point concerned the management of the sites. It is the intention of the Secretary of State to enter into a contract with the local authorities under which there will be conditions as to how the sites are run and managed. It may well be that we shall have to put conditions in these arrangements with local authorities that they see to the proper management and supervision of the sites and to the attendance of public conveniences.

My hon. Friend mentioned mobile snack bars trading on picnic sites. Here again, there will be conditions, under the delegation from the Secretary of State to the local authorities, as to the provision of refreshments, meals, and so on, at the sites. It may well be that the local authorities would wish to license mobile snack bars to provide refreshments at picnic sites. I hope that we can keep this under some control without necessarily being too restrictive on roadside traders. I am sure that we all enjoy the roadside strawberries or flowers which we can stop to buy on our journeys along trunk roads, and I would not like to be restrictive of that. But it may well be that we can make proper arrangements for the mobile snack bar trader to provide the snacks which will be so beneficial to the public using the picnic areas.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Does the right hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley) wish to move Amendment (a) for the purposes of a Division?

Mr. Mulley

No, Sir.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Then we come to Amendment (d).

Amendment (d) made to the proposed Clause: In line 29, leave out 'subsection (5) above' and insert 'this section'.[Mr. Mulley.]

Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.

Forward to