HC Deb 20 June 1984 vol 62 cc329-33

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Mr. Maxton

Are there at present such agreements as are mentioned in the clause between the Secretary of State and local authorities? In particular, do such agreements apply to the A74, a road which is familiar to many hon. Members, for its repair and upkeep? If so, are they of a general nature — in other words, is there a general contract under which the Strathclyde region and the Dumfries and Galloway region act as agents for the Secretary of State to do whatever repairs are necessary —or are authorities contracted to do the work when the Secretary of State and his roads department decide that they shall be done?

That question applies to the A74 and other trunk roads for snow clearing and other activities of that nature. In other words, is there a general power for local authorities to act as agents for the Secretary of State on trunk roads, or are we speaking of specific contracts for specific work? If agreements of such a general nature exist between the Secretary of State and local authorities, what happens when a trunk road such as the A74 encompasses two authorities? What is done to ensure that there is co-operation between the two regional authorities for any work that is necessary on that trunk road?

I ask that because hon. Members who drive regularly along the A74 will be aware of the number of road works that always seem to be taking place. One would imagine that there would be some planning to ensure that the number of works being carried out at one time was kept to a limit. At times, I have gone through 10 sets of road works in a stretch of 40 miles on the A74.

Sir Hector Monro

The hon. Gentleman has been lucky.

Mr. Maxton

The hon. Gentleman says that I was lucky. I know what he means, because often, when driving on the A74, there seem to be innumerable road works.

What fees, if any, does the Scottish Office pay to local authorities for any management, consultancy and engineering skills that are used by those authorities? Is there a fee, over and above the cost of the contract, for the time taken by roads department engineers and staff who would otherwise be employed in ensuring that their local authorities' roads were maintained?

Mr. Allan Stewart

As the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) pointed out, the clause relates to agreements between the Secretary of State and local authorities for the delegation of his functions. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the clause simply codifies a number of existing arrangements. He asked about the nature of agreements between regional councils and the Secretary of State. I can confirm his understanding that all regional councils have agency agreements with the Secretary of State for trunk roads. They are general agreements, but the Scottish Development Department controls the maintenance expenditure allocation.

As for the involvement of more than one authority, obviously the authorities discuss these matters, but it is the SDD's job, on behalf of the Secretary of State, to co-ordinate these activities.

The hon. Member for Cathcart asked about fees. There is a standard scale of fees. I can confirm that it covers administration and engineering supervision.

6 pm

Mr. Johnston

The subsection refers to cattle grids. Although I know that the subject of cattle grids will be considered in much more detail later, as the clause deals with agreements between the trunk road authority and the regional council, perhaps we can consider the matter briefly now.

I have long been puzzled by the fact that there is apparently a regulation which says that one cannot put a cattle grid across a main or A-classification road. For example, the Minister may know that in the village of Mallaig there is a great problem with sheep, which move in and out of the village without let or hindrance. The local people proposed that some form of hindrance, such as a cattle grid, would be a solution to the problem. They were told that that would be impossible because one cannot put a cattle grid on a main road, although it is not much of a road as the Minister may know. His Parliamentary Private Secretary is certainly aware of that. The road is classified as a main road and so a cattle grid cannot be put across it. I wonder, in view of the clause, whether it might be possible to vary that absolute rule and allow cattle grids to be put in by agreement, in such special circumstances.

Sir Hector Monro

While the hon. Gentleman is waiting for a reply on the question of cattle grids, I shall add another point. Having seen the sheep at Mallaig, I can understand the hon. Gentleman's point. Perhaps the sheep are corning into the village in search of the rather good cabbages that grow there.

I noted that my hon. Friend took the responsibility for co-ordinating repairs on the A74, to which there has been reference. I should like to pursue that matter now, although I have tabled an amendment with roughly the same objective that will be dealt with later on.

It is not good enough for the Minister to say that co-ordination is adequate. In recent weeks, and perhaps even months, there have been an average of 10 to 12 lane stoppages on the relatively short stretch between the Strathclyde boundary and the foot of the M74. No work is going on in the opposite lane. New kerbs are being put in on the other side, although such repairs do not seem to be of very great importance.

The repairs are being carried out at the height of the tourist season, when there is much heavy traffic on that main arterial road between Scotland and England. It is annoying to find so many stretches under repair, with having restrictions of about 18 inches at either side of the road. There are also hold-ups while central reservation barriers are being installed.

I cannot believe that a superman cannot be put in charge of all those repairs, who would say that they cannot go on in extenso at present. They must be phased. It must be possible to deal with the repairs more effectively to help the through traffic that must use the road.

I have already drawn the matter to the attention of my hon. Friend the Minister and to his predecessor, as well as the Minister before that. I said that co-ordination seemed to be nil and asked whether we could have one supremo in charge, perhaps of the Strathclyde and Dumfries and Galloway sectors where there is no closure at present, to put forward a programme to ensure that tourists and regular industrial traffic are not inconvenienced to such an intolerable degree.

This is a serious point. I am regularly inconvenienced and I know that right hon. and hon. Members who use the road suffer frequently. We are very small cogs in the wheel, so to speak, but we must remember that others suffer besides ourselves and they must be inconvenienced more than we are, especially the heavy trunk liners that move between Scotland and England.

It is no use saying that the road is breaking up fast. I have eyes in my head, and I can see how much the road is breaking up. Frequently, it seems that the road repairs could wait another few months, while sections in need of repair are completed, rather than have long lengths of the road under repair at once. There is a three-mile operation at present. That could be split up into sections, as there are many places where drivers can change lanes. Surely it is inconvenient and unnecessary to carry out repairs to long stretches of the road? I do not believe that Ministers have been on that road frequently enough to see to what extent the public are being held up.

Mr. David Marshall

I support what has been said by the hon. Members for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro) and for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton), although I believe that they were arguing about the wrong thing. The repairs to the A74 are rather like painting the Forth road bridge—they are never finished. We should be asking for a new motorway rather than continuing to repair a road that is known to be inadequate for the volume of traffic using it and which has a terrible record of deaths and accidents. The Minister should seriously consider the matter. Successive Governments have refused to rebuild the road as a motorway from Carlisle to Glasgow. We shall never achieve anything merely by repairing it, and it will cost much more in the end.

Mr. Bill Walker

In the event of a bridge becoming part of the trunk road network—in other words, where a bridge, like the Tay bridge, is handed over to the regional authority—in what terms would agreement between the region and the Secretary of State be reached? If an amendment that is tabled for discussion later were to be passed, the effect would be that repairs to the bridge would be carried out by the Secretary of State and the cost would not be borne by the region. It is important to recognise that some bridges are motorways on stilts and that other bridges are merely bridges. When they are motorways on stilts, the Secretary of State has responsibility for repairing them. If a bridge, such as the Tay bridge, is built under special arrangements that still stand and if the tolls are removed, the region will probably take over the bridge. I am concerned that the costs should not be borne by the ratepayers in Blairgowrie and elsewhere.

Mr. Home Robertson

Much has been said about lack of co-ordination of maintenance on a particular road on the west coast of Scotland. I support what has been said about roads by all Members who have taken part in this debate. The problem covers the whole of Scotland. The Boundary Commission made a mess of my constituency, and I can no longer live there. I have to travel between the Borders and Lothian regions. The lack of co-operation between those two roads authorities and the Secretary of State, who has responsibility for trunk roads, means that, every time I go to my constituency, I experience some sort of delay, I am held up by unco-ordinated road works and road painting operations, the erection of signs and general fiddling about. That is so especially on the Al trunk road, which is totally inadequate and severely overloaded. It is a serious problem.

We have heard many examples of the problem from right hon. and hon. Members. It exists throughout Scotland. It seems to me that the clause gives new powers to the Secretary of State to co-ordinate activities in relation to roads. I express the hope that the Secretary of State and, when the time comes, the Scottish assembly will exercise those powers and co-ordinate these matters.

Mr. Allan Stewart

The hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Mr. Johnston) said that the clause applies to cattle grids. It does so because it codifies section 13 of the Highways (Provision of Cattle-Grids) Act 1950. There is no bar on cattle grids on roads such as the one he mentioned, but it is a matter of looking at each case on its merits. I understand that in that case it was concluded that a cattle grid was not justified.

Mr. Johnston

The Minister said that each case is looked at on its merits, which sounds splendid. Does he mean that the Scottish Office looks at a case on its definition of what the merits are, or that the region and the Scottish Office sit down together and discuss it? In other words, if the region wants to have a cattle grid, surely its case has strong merit.

Mr. Stewart

The Scottish Office takes into account whatever representations are made in any particular case.

My hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro) and the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson) referred to co-ordination in relation to the A74. There is a general point that one must make about maintenance of the A74. It is that Tarmacadam can be laid only in the summer months, which, of course, is during the tourist season. However, the Scottish Development Department keeps overall control and tries to minimise the inevitable inconvenience of the roads maintenance programme.

The hon. Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr Marshall) raised the more general question of the A74 and improvements to it. The idea that the whole road should become a motorway has often been advocated, as the hon. Gentleman said, but it would be an extremely costly undertaking, and is not justified by the volume of traffic.

Mr. Craigen

Has the Scottish Office quantified how much that would cost?

Mr. Stewart

I can give the hon. Gentleman an estimate of that figure, but I do not have it at present. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that we are planning to spend £35 million over seven years on a comprehensive programme to improve the A74, and we are proposing to extend the M74 southwards, by 10 miles, from Draffan to Millbank, at a cost of approximately £31 million. There is a proposal to extend the A74 northwards from Maryville to the former Glasgow city boundary, at an estimated cost of £25 million. I hope that shows that the Government are committed to improving the M74.

I can now answer the question asked by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton). My recollection is that the total cost of extending the M74 to the border would be about £200 million.

My hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) asked what would happen if the Tay road bridge became a trunk road. I emphasise that we have no plans to make the Tay road bridge a trunk road. It does not connect to trunk roads on either side. However, in the hypothetical situation that he mentioned, repairs would be borne by the Secretary of State.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Back to
Forward to