§
Amendments made: No. 55, in page 14, line 16, leave out 'they all' and insert
`the requisite number of the frontagers so'.
§ No. 56, in page 14, line 16, leave out 'their behalf' and insert 'behalf of the frontagers'.—[Mr. Craigen.]
§ Mr. Michael ForsythI beg to move amendment No. 57, in page 14, line 23, at beginning insert
`Without prejudice to section [Power to contribute to, or carry out, work on private roads] of this Act.'
The First Deputy ChairmanWith this it will be convenient to take the following: Amendment No. 58, in page 14, line 27, leave out subsection (7).
New Clause 5—Power to contribute to, or carry out, work on private roads—
- '—(1) A local roads authority may, if they think fit, pay the whole or any part of any expenditure incurred by a person in making up or maintaining a private road; and may, without prejudice to section 14 of this Act, at their own expense carry out any repair which they consider necessary in relation to a private road after giving such notice as is reasonable in the circumstances.
- (2) For the avoidance of doubt—
- (a) a local roads authority do not incur responsibility for making up or maintenance of the private road by reason only of their acting under subsection (1) above;
- (b) the carrying out of work by a local roads authority under subsection (1) above does not create any implication that
339 the private road, on completion of the work, is of a standard satisfactory to the authority for the purposes of section 15(1)(b) of this Act.'.
§ Mr. ForsythThe amendments will be widely welcomed by those who have experienced the problems that arise for private roads. They are not what one might expect them to be. They are roads with a public right of passage, but their maintenance is not the responsibility of the roads authority. Local authorities and the Highland regional council have been arguing for a change along the lines of these amendments.
The amendments give local authorities discretionary power to carry out repairs to private roads at their own expense. Local authorities would find it of considerable benefit to the public using the roads and to the frontagers who have the legal responsibility for their maintenance.
Under clause 14, authorities have power to carry out emergency work at their own expense. It often makes better economic sense for repairs to be carried out before an emergency arises. Clause 13(7) enables roads authorities to meet all or part of the cost of making up a private road. That introduces the risk of an authority having to assume future responsibility for the maintenance of that road. The amendments and new clause will give authorities useful flexibility in dealing with problems caused by private roads by making it clear that by exercising discretion they will not be left open to future maintenance liabilities.
§ Mr. CraigenThe hon. Gentleman's amendments respond to some of the problems being experienced by the Highland regional council in particular. My curiosity is aroused by the fact that, with his known Adam Smith Institute background, the hon. Gentleman proposes obliging local authorities to incur expenditure.
§ Mr. ForsythI had anticipated the hon. Gentleman making that point. The amendments by no means put an obligation on local authorities; they give them a discretionary power. I went out of my way to define a private road as one over which there is a public right of passage. As we have not yet taken the step of fitting meters to cars so that the private frontagers can get a return from those members of the public who use their roads, it seems reasonable that the local authorities should be given the power to carry out repairs if they so wish and to judge whether the public benefit is such that a contribution to the private road owners is justified.
§ Mr. MaxtonI am not yet sure whether I shall support the amendments tabled by the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth), mainly because I always find it extremely difficult to do so. Indeed, on the odd occasions when he might be right about something, it is still difficult to support him. It is odd that the hon. Gentleman, who normally wishes to put private finance into public concerns, is here trying to put public money into private concerns.
Can the hon. Gentleman tell the Committee whether his amendments will resolve a problem which was reported yesterday in the Glasgow Herald, arising from an incident on the island of Arran? Arran Estates, which owns a bridge over a stream, which serves five or six houses in Lochranza, was instructed that the bridge was dangerous and was asked to do something about it. However, the 340 repairs would have cost between £2,500 and £3,000 and the owners were not prepared to carry them out, since they would have had no pecuniary return from the bridge. Instead they demolished it completely, thus leaving the people who live on the other side of the bridge with no means of road transport and, as it is a tidal stream, with no means of crossing the stream at certain times of the day.
If the amendments mean that such problems would not arise and that a local authority could repair the bridge before it became dangerous, I would support them. In that case the bridge was provided and owned privately, not by those who benefited from it. It may be a unique problem, but I should be grateful if the hon. Gentleman or the Minister would tell me whether that case and others like it will be covered by the amendments.
§ Mr. ForsythI am not familiar with the problem to which the hon. Member for Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) referred. However, there are two similar cases in my constituency. One involves the village of Ashfield, where a private developer did not finish off the road properly after selling properties to many of my constituents. The regional authority is anxious to repair the road, but because the road would first have to be made up to full highway standard—at present it is used only for access — there is an impasse. Strangely enough, the access road to the village runs over a narrow bridge above a railway line — the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) is probably familiar with the case—which is also in need of repair. The amendments have been tabled to give local authorities the power, if it will benefit the public, to contribute towards the costs of private owners.
§ Mr. Donald Stewart (Western Isles)When the Minister replies, will he deal with the provision that existed in section 29 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1894, which gave highway authorities a discretionary power to make up some roads, without the risk of incurring liability? If that provision is not reinserted in the Bill it will cause great difficulty to the adopted roads programme of the Western Isles council. Will the Minister allow that discretion to continue?
§ Mr. Home RobertsonI understand the problem to which the amendments are addressed, and for once the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth) is trying to be helpful. He apparently wishes to ensure that access roads are maintained and kept open. However, I am not completely persuaded that this is the best way to do that. One thing that worries me is that the private proprietor of a road or bridge might accept public money from the local roads authority to upgrade and maintain his road, and then deny public access to it. If that is still possible, it is very unsatisfactory.
I have always understood that local roads authorities had discretionary power — this deals with the point raised by the right hon. Member for Western Isles (Mr. Stewart) — to make up roads if they believed it necessary. However, it is difficult for them to do so because many authorities are reluctant to take on new commitments, especially under the financial constraints being imposed by the Government. There are many private roads in various nooks and crannies of Scotland which most of the population probably believe are public roads. They are generally considered as public access roads and 341 many private owners rightly countenance that. In my constituency, there are serious problems with private roads.
§ Mr. Michael ForsythUnder clause 14, local authorities have powers, in emergencies, to repair private roads, and under clause 13(1) they must serve notices on the owners. However, that might cause problems under clause 15, which relates to authorities adopting roads. That gets us back to the problem that the road must be made up to a proper highway standard, with all the costs that that involves, which is rather like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. In many cases my amendments would help to resolve problems that have continued for years.
§ Mr. Home RobertsonI am grateful for that explanation, but I remain worried about the amendments, for the reason that I gave. In some cases public money might be used to upgrade a road to which public access is subsequently denied.
It would be more appropriate for the local authority to take over any road which is commonly regarded as a public road. In my constituency there is a continuing problem with a network of private roads in a relatively new housing estate in the village of Gifford. The people who bought houses on that estate want the highways authority, Lothian regional council, to take over the roads, but it is not prepared to do so unless they are made up to a high standard. A bizarre situation has developed, because the highways authority has imposed a weight restriction on a bridge nearby, which has had the effect of diverting a significant amount of traffic, including heavy traffic, on to the private roads, but still the highways authority refuses to upgrade the roads, even though it has diverted public traffic on to them. In circumstances like that, I should have thought that there was a cast-iron case for the roads authority to take over the road.
There may be borderline cases, and I suspect that it is those for which the hon. Member is trying to cater in his amendment. If that is the case, that is fine, subject to a reasonable guarantee that the public will have access to roads which have benefited from public subsidy.
§ Mr. Allan StewartMy hon. Friend the Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth) has done the Committee a service by putting forward these amendments. They deal with the problem in his constituency to which he has referred, and with a problem that is relatively common throughout the highlands and islands. The new clause will give an authority a discretionary power to carry out repairs to a private road at its own expense in non-emergency situations without the current expenditure liability of adopting the road, the point referred to by the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson). My hon. Friend the Member for Stirling has pointed out that there is a provision in the Bill to deal with emergencies.
The right hon. Member for the Western Isles (Mr. Stewart) rightly said that some authorities, of which the Highland regional council is an example, acting under section 29 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1894, deal with this kind of problem on some private roads. That Act will fall with the Bill, so that to continue the provision my hon. Friend's amendment or something similar will be necessary.
My hon. Friend has identified a real problem. The new clause and the amendments that he has tabled are, I 342 understand, supported by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and by the Highland regional council in particular. The amendments would give authorities a desirable discretion, without any obligation being put upon them to incur expenditure. Therefore, I am happy to commend my hon. Friend's amendments to the House.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendments made: No. 58, in page 14, line 27, leave out subsection (7).—[Mr. Michael Forsyth.]
§
No. 59, in page 14, line 33, at end insert—
'(9) In subsection (4) above, "the requisite number" has the same meaning in relation to the private road and the land fronting or abutting the road as it has in section 1(6) of this Act in relation to the road and land mentioned in that section. '. — [Mr. Craigen]
§ Clause 13, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.