21. Mr. Hookyasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a summary of the discussions held with the Countryside Commission on the proposed network of heavy lorry routes.
§ Mr. MarksIt is not proposed to publish any of the representations made on this subject. There would of course be no objection to any of the bodies consulted making its views public.
§ Mr. HooleyIs my hon. Friend aware that it is a matter of great public concern that this network of heavy lorry 648 routes would cut through national parks? Many bodies, apart from the Countryside Commission, would like to know exactly what the consequences of these proposals are and to have a full discussion on them.
§ Mr. MarksThe consequences will not be known until we have completed the consultations and issued a report. The Countryside Commission was consulted, and I understand that it is prepared to publish what it said. Until the consultations are finished, we shall not know how many lorry routes there will be in the country as a whole, and particularly in the national parks. Lorries are travelling through national parks now.
§ Mr. MaddenDoes my hon. Friend agree that it would be transport lunacy and the creation of potential road hazards to create heavy lorry routes on roads such as the A646, through the Calder Valley of West Yorkshire—a road that is close to the M62? Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that any heavy lorry routes will avoid roads of that sort?
§ Mr. MarksThe lorry routes are a matter for discussion between the local authorities and ourselves. I should be surprised if lorries travelling from Lancashire to Yorkshire used the road that my hon. Friend mentioned rather than the M62.