HC Deb 21 April 1972 vol 835 cc1016-26

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

4.6 p.m.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. Carol Mather.

Mr. Carol Mather (Esher)

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Can you tell me whether the debate continues until half-past Four, or whether it will continue for half an hour from now?

Mr. Speaker

The debate will continue for 30 minutes from the time when I called the hon. Member—about 29½ minutes from now.

Mr. Mather

The matter that I wish to raise this afternoon is that of multiple crashes on motorways. I want to consider how they have occurred, and what we can do about them, because the number of crashes has escalated considerably during the last few months. In all questions of this kind there are two ways in which one can tackle the problem. There is, first, the short-term, immediate action that one can take. Secondly, there is the long-term aspect of planning to avoid these terrible disasters.

There is no doubt that the number of these accidents has escalated during the last year. In fact, the largest three disasters so far have occurred during the last six months. The first was on 13th December, 1971, on the M6 at Warrington, when 94 vehicles were involved, 11 people were killed, and 10 were injured. The second was on 29th November, 1971, on the M1 at Luton, when 70 vehicles were involved, nine people were killed, and 50 injured. The third was on 16th March, 1972, on the M1 near Ridgmont, when 200 vehicles were involved, nine people were killed, and 51 injured.

The extraordinary thing about these accidents is that most of them have been caused by fog, and it is clear that the type of fog by which they have been caused is not the overall blanket of fog over the country, but sudden patches of fog in certain geographical positions, what one can call fog walls. One comes into these fog walls quite suddenly. They have sharp edges. One seldom gets any warning of them. When in them, one can see less than 50 yards ahead. Anyone who has driven into these conditions knows the feeling. The driver becomes disoriented and cannot judge his speed or distance. Indeed, he dare not take his eyes off the road to look at his speedometer to see what speed he is doing.

One comes across these conditions where motorways cross rivers, streams or marshy areas, usually in shallow valleys. There are certain well-known places where these conditions occur. For instance, there have been five disasters where the Woodthorpe Stream crosses the M1 near Bolsover, there have been three where the River Don crosses the A1 near Doncaster, another three where the River Erewash crosses the M1 at Nottingham, a further three where the River Aire crosses the M1 at Pontefract, four on the M6 near the Manchester Ship Canal, in the Warrington area, and a further four where the River Douglas crosses the M6near Wigan.

These disaster points are now becoming well known. Each further accident is virtually a carbon copy of the previous one. But information on conditions of this kind is scanty. On 27th March, I ask my hon. Friend how many accidents on motorways in the last five years had been attributable to fog walls, and his answer was that the accident statistics do not distinguish between fog walls and other kinds of fog.

Fortunately, there is a group, the M25 Action Group, which has been doing some work on the matter. Mr. R. O. Richards, a member of that group, has done a unique study of the circumstances in which fog wall conditions develop across the country. In fact, the figures which I gave were his. He has made a study countrywide on motorways and a special study in the Mole Valley through which the M25 is shortly to run.

It has been estimated that, since the beginning of 1967, the total number of fog disaster days on motorways has been 26, and of these 21, or 80 per cent., were cause by fog walls. Moreover, 65 per cent. occurred at recognisable disaster points. The total number of multiple fog accidents since 1967 in which people have been killed is 50, of which 46, or 92 per cent., took place in fog wall conditions.

The M1 on its section between Nottingham and Sheffield passes through several fog wall points. Six accidents have taken place there in recent years as a result of fog wall conditions. The country further to the east is different. It is not the undulating type of country in which such conditions occur but is flatter, and in this sort of country such conditions do not develop. If more had been known about these conditions before the motorway was planned, it could have been built further to the east, and many of the accidents probably avoided.

I can illustrate the difference between general fog conditions and the conditions which I am trying to describe by reference to circumstances in the Thames Valley. In 1965, there were two days of dense fog when visibility was only about 10 yards. There were many crashes, but for the most part they were bumper-to-bumper crashes, damage to wings and the like, but no one was killed. One has only to compare that with the fog wall accident which took place at Ridgmont, with nine people killed. If yardsticks published by the road research laboratory are used, the cost of that accident at Ridgmont on 16th March can be estimated at £250,000. The M1 was blocked for 15 hours on end.

The blame has been put largely on motorists, and I recognise that motorists must take a fair share of the blame. A police report quoted in the A.A. publication, Drive is an example of this. It states that a police officer said: As we approached the accident in fog with blue light going and both of us hanging out of the car windows trying to slow traffic down cars overtook us at 60 m.p.h. on both sides. We could hear them crunching into the wreckage ahead. It is true that there is an appalling amount of recklessness on the part of drivers in these conditions, but I do not know whether all this blame is entirely fair. The Ridgmont incident did not take place at night but in broad day-night—at 8.20 a.m.—and many vehicles involved in the crash had their sun visors down. Fog warning lights would not have operated in that case. It is extremely difficult when driving in broad daylight suddenly to go into a fog wall—one is simply asking for disaster then.

Many short-term solutions have been suggested, such as stiffer tests or, possibly, driving tests for motorway conditions; publication of a fog code, which I believe my hon. Friend is considering, to give drivers more guidance on these conditions. The obligatory use of headlights is another suggestion, and another is four-way flashers on individual vehicles which can be switched on when driving through fog. The use of high intensity rear lights is also suggested.

Of two permanent suggestions, one is overhead lights along sections of motor way where these conditions occur, and these would be very expensive, and the other is warning lights mounted on gantries such as one gets on the later stages of the M4 where it comes into London. But, as I have said, most of these fog wall accidents have taken place in day light hours, so that overhead lights would not have helped very much.

Another solution that I should like to put to my hon. Friend is the need very carefully to consider these conditions when planning future motorway routes. I take the M25 London South Orbital Motorway as an example. It runs through the southern part of my constituency. The Leatherhead-Cobham stretch, which is just north of Leatherhead, passes through the Mole Valley for one and quarter miles at Stoke d'Abernon. An inquiry was held last summer into this motorway route, and at the inquiry the Department admitted under cross-examination that no study of fog conditions had been made. Yet, at the same time, there is strong evidence against this route on grounds of fog.

This particular stretch of one and a quarter miles is one of the locations in the country where fog walls occur. Mr. Richards produce at the inquiry at great mass of evidence of these conditions, and this evidence was specially commended by the inspector. In this area during one period of 12 months there were no fewer than seven occasions when fog wall conditions prevailed on this crossing point. In every case, they occurred during the morning rush hours—daylight hours.

If one gets to higher ground conditions are different. This particular motorway route was located in the Mole Valley very recently. There had been a route further south, but it was thought at the time that this route was slightly shorter and had slightly easier gradients. But I hope that in planning this route, the engineers have not made a very big mistake.

There is a case, of course, on grounds of amenity, which is a separate question. But, arising out of amenity, during the public inquiry in the summer the Department representatives said that the motorway would be inconspicuous at the elevations and along the route it travelled. But it passes through an area of unique amenity value, with a Saxon church, a Tudor manor house, and the Yehudi Menuhin School of Music. The whole area makes up a place of pilgrimage for people in this country and for many foreign tourists. If one is to believe reports that the Department's working party is to recommend grantries and overhead lights, they of course, would completely suburbanise this rural environment.

I has been suggested that if we had known about this problem and had been able to plan ahead, about three-quarters of the motorway deaths could have been avoided. I urge my hon. Friend to look into this question with great care. I am sure that in this case prevention can be better than cure, and in many other cases yet to come.

4.21 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Eldon Griffiths)

My hon. Friend the Member for Esher (Mr. Mather) has always spoken up clearly and eloquently on behalf of the interests of his constituents. I very much agree with him in the message which I understand him to be offering, namely, that prevention is better than cure in these matters.

I am not in the least surprised that in that context he made reference to the current proposals for the route to be taken by the M25 from east of Leatherhead to Wisley along the valley of the Mole. My hon. Friend will understand that as we are in the period between the public inquiry and the decision still to be taken by my right hon. Friend, I am severely limited in what I may say about that subject. I am, however, aware of the detailed evidence on the incidence of fog in the Mole Valley which was collected on behalf of the M25 Action Group and presented at the inquiry. I and some of my colleagues have had a personal letter from Sir Ronald Harris. I have given it personal attention. I should like my hon. Friend to know that we have looked into the fog statistics that have been collected in the area with very great care. I should also say that I do not accept for one moment the somewhat exaggerated language about the Mole Valley becoming another Death Valley. But it would not be a breach of confidence to say that the inspector who held the inquiry made it clear in his report that we should be unwise to disregard the warnings that were given about fog incidence. I assure my hon. Friend that these warnings will not be disregarded. We take them very seriously. More than that, in the circumstances, it would be wrong for me to say today.

I should, however, say something about the many factors, including fog, that are taken into account in planning routes for motorways such as that. First, we have to be satisfied as to the purposes to be served by a new motorway. For what traffic on our present road network is it intended to cater? Where does it want to get to and where from? What is the likely volume of traffic over a span of years ahead, well into the 1990's? What benefits will the availability of the new motorway bring to the environment of otherwise permanently congested residential, shopping and industrial areas, and including that of historic towns which lie adjacent to it?

Only when all this information has been assembled and assessed can we decide on the feasibility of possible routes. It is against this comprehensive background that evidence of likely fog conditions along possible alternative routes needs to be examined. I can assure my hon. Friend that this is being done in respect of the Mole Valley.

I cannot accept that fog alone is necessarily or likely to be the only or overriding factor. The science of meteorology is not yet an exact science. The knowledge and understanding of conditions which causes fog in the vicinity of rivers, hill fogs and still less so-called fog walls, does not exist to the extent that it is possible to identify precisely fog-prone localities other than from direct observations. Here I pay tribute to the devoted work done by Mr. Richards in the Mole Valley for the year from 31st May, 1970.

Nevertheless, I am advised that observations over any period less than about five years would most likely be insufficient to provide information of real value in determining the least fog-prone route available. I have looked into the Meteorological Office records, but they are clearly insufficient for this purpose because they come from a limited number of stations and only 24 in the British Isles provide hourly reports. There are less frequent reports four or five times daily from a greater number of stations and these were used by the Road Research Laboratory in a study of thick fog and its effect on traffic flow and accidents. I shall be happy to send a copy of that publication to my hon. Friend.

The general conclusion was that such thick fog is relatively infrequent, patchy, rarely widespread and of short duration but the data abouts its effect on accidents are still too scanty to admit of serious analysis. Nevertheless, we have fed the information in existence through the computer and on the basis of the results we shall be considering a number of special safety measures on stretches particularly liable to fog accidents. The Meteorological Office has now installed an additional 47 stations on existing motorways to measure incidence of fog.

Further information is coming forward and we shall be studying it with great care. Without a vast increase in the number of recording points and observations over a long period it is impossible to provide accurate information for every area where a new motorway may be built. The fog-free motorway in British conditions is, I regret to say, a physical impossibility.

What are the Government doing to prevent these tragic accidents? We are operating on this in three respects—first, on the road; second, on the vehicle; and third and most important, on the driver. On the motorway we are introducing as fast as we can a new and highly sophisticated automatic motorway signalling system. This is designed to help not merely in fog but at all times of danger. My hon. Friend may know that at the end of last month the first phase of the new national motorway signalling system was switched on. At present it operates over 85 miles of the M.6 and M.62 motorways providing drivers with advice about conditions ahead. By the end of this year the signalling system will be extended over 320 miles and it will be extremely helpful during the winter in fog conditions.

I said that we are also operating on the vehicles. All obligatory red rear lamps now have to comply with the highest British Standard specification and drivers can, if they wish, fit special rear fog lamps. My right hon. Friend is now seeking powers to require day time use of lights in poor visibility and, as my hon. Friend knows, heavy goods vehicles are being required to bear special reflective rear markings which have proved valuable. Finally, we are seeking to operate on drivers. This is a matter mainly of publicity through the Highway Code and the Driving Manual, seeking to teach drivers the elementary rules for driving safely in fog and at all other times. We have in mind a fog code, and I expect that my right hon. Friend will, at an appropriate time, publish it and make it widely known throughout the country.

We have other measures very much in mind. For example, we may install more reflective studs on the road surface of the more fog-prone stretches of the motorway. I doubt whether they would be an environmental instrusion. They might be of great help to the driver trying to find his position on the road in fog conditions. On a bigger issue, we are studying, and will continue to study, the possible value of lighting stretches of motorway. I accept my hon. Friend's point that lights can prove to be a suburbanising intrusion on the landscape of a lovely area. I assure him that we shall bear this point in mind in considering the route about which he complains. Lighting is now being installed on the M62 over the Pennines, and this will give us a good deal of information about its effectiveness and intrusiveness.

We have also been looking to the future. The Road Research Laboratory has done a great deal of pioneer work on aids to drivers in fog conditions. It has made good progress with a new device to enable a vehicle's speed on the speedometer to be seen ahead of the driver through the windscreen so that he does not have to keep taking his eye from the foggy road ahead and looking at the instruments on his panel. A prototype of this new device is already being tested. A new system of radio-transmitted verbal warnings is under study. This is at an early stage, but it offers exciting prospects should it prove feasible.

Another device—and an important one is a station-keeping indicator which will tell drivers by a visible, optical focusing arrangement when they are getting too close in fog to the vehicle ahead. The device, too, shows promise. My Department will consider all the ideas submitted by the public. We have it very much in mind to consider the pros and cons of mandatory separation districts or of making the new advisory speed limits mandatory.

Mr. Mather

We are talking about preventing accidents and death, but I hope that my hon. Friend will take very seriously the question of the environment and the effect of lights, in particular, on it. I was surprised to hear what my hon. Friend said about the Pennine route.

Mr. Eldon Griffiths

There is always a balance. There is no doubt that lighting on a motorway running through a beautiful area can be an intrusion to those who live there. But, equally, there is no doubt that to the large number of people who must travel along that road, lighting can be an agent in saving their lives. It is a difficult balance of one right with another right, and we shall consider it.

While the Government can operate by trying to make the roads safer and by putting in lighting and crash barriers and other devices, and while they can, with industry, operate on the motor car by improving the instrumentation and safety features of the car, in the end the degree of safety on the roads, particularly in fog conditions, is largely the responsibility of the driving public. My hon. Friend the Member for Esher drew attention to an incident in which he saw people speeding past in an irresponsible fashion while fog wall conditions existed. I share my hon. Friend's sense of dismay at that.

I conclude by reiterating my undertaking that we shall consider very carefully the fog factors in the design and routing of the motorway in question. But I hope that my hon. Friend will join me in urging all those who drive on our roads in fog conditions to drive within their limits and not too close to the car ahead. If they are unable to meet the reasonable conditions of safety, the best that they can do is to stay at home.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-six minutes to Five o clock.