HC Deb 15 January 1985 vol 71 cc308-14

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

12.15 am
Mr. Marcus Fox (Shipley)

The petitions being out of the way and the aroma of scented erasers having disappeared, perhaps I can turn the attention of the House to a very pressing issue for my constituents — the Bingley to Shipley section of the Airedale route. I am delighted to see my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department of Transport on the Front Bench. She is in line for winning the record for responding to Adjournment debates. I hope that this will be a bonus for her, in that after she has listened to me she will not only be better informed but will take the right decision.

May I ask the Minister of State to imagine that she is a resident of Saltaire, a village in my constituency. Not only would she have the good fortune to live there and have me as her Member of Parliament but she would live in a unique environment, thanks to Sir Titus Salt, who in 1851 started to build his mill and a village for his employees. The mill is still producing worsted cloth. It is an historic landmark, a planned settlement of greater scale and complexity than anything which had been attempted before. He moved about 2,000 people away from the hideous 19th century conditions of Bradford — open sewers and disease—to what they thought was a new Jerusalem. And it should still be a new Jerusalem. It is situated three miles from the city of Bradford in a beautiful valley and open countryside. It was a marvel of its day. I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Home Office, is in the House. As my neighbour, he knows all about Saltaire. It attracted foreign dignatories not just from Europe but from further afield. Saltaire was copied in Britain. I mention Port Sunlight and Bournville as examples.

Today the village is largely intact: the great mill, the church, the institute hospital, the school and the almshouses but, above all, the terraced houses in their hundreds, loved by those who live in them, many of whom now own their houses. They are stone built and most of them are without gardens. They have only a small yard at the rear. Sir Titus deemed that the park and the surrounding countryside were the garden of his village.

In that context it is important to look at this area. It is no wonder that this is a conservation area that is visited by thousands every year. Our part of Yorkshire is not renowned for attracting tourists. The city of Bradford has managed extremely well by winning one or two awards. It is interesting that the two jewels in Bradford's crown are Saltaire and Haworth, which is part of the Bronte country. It is a haven of peace and tranquillity to so many of my constituents who have no other open space as part of their environment.

I should tell hon. Members about Roberts Park and its sporting facilities. There are 12 sports clubs, four league cricket teams, two hockey pitches, two indoor sports centres and three football grounds, not to mention tennis courts. The river and canal and all the amenities are an attraction for many. But in this narrow valley there is a continuous fight for space. It is indisputable that the physical form of this valley causes special problems. It contains a river, a canal, a railway, a road and this village as it exists. To talk about any other expansion is inconceivable. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister of State is aware that I am not exaggerating. She has visited the area and is on record as saying, "I see this as one of the most difficult road problems in Britain."

Imagine, therefore, with what joy my constituents greeted the Minister's decision in 1982 to say no to any route through Saltaire, following his inspector's report. That ended 12 years of blight.

That opinion was reinforced only last year with the opening of a new railway station in April at a cost of £189,000. I think that we even got some European money, but I do not press that too hard. It was wholly in keeping with the area. We even had gas lamps to ensure that it fitted into our conservation area.

All that was shattered one month later when the Department reopened the whole matter with the present proposals. Everything is now back in the melting pot.

May I remind my hon. Friend of the results of the last inquiry? I do not need to remind her of the circumstances. The previous inquiry had been abandoned because of disruption. In fact, it was a cause celebre. I remember it as a Member of Parliament. I seem to remember one or two people coming to my advice bureau demanding that I should support them in their disruption, but I told them that I would have no part of it. I said that they should go through the consultation processes, which, of course, we did.

Robert Chance took on an invidious job as the next inspector. He impressed everyone with his dedication. He walked every foot of the route and concluded, on page 273, paragraph 670: I can do no other than say no all the way from Dowley Gap to Baildon. He said that no new route was needed east of Bingley and that the existing choice was adequate from Cottingley Bar—that traffic should be kept on the A650 to Bradford and Leeds or take the B6269 for Bradford west and the motorways.

There is no doubting his conclusion that the Airedale route should end at Cottingley Bar rather than go through to Baildon. He also confirmed that the claim that new jobs would be created had not been proved and that no substantial benefit of that kind would occur. His words were: would aid neither economic recovery or development in the valley. Indeed, the Department accepted that the result would be a limited effect on industrial location and growth. In other words, the only purpose of the extension of the Airedale route would be to move traffic quicker—in other words, that any price is worth just that. Well, the car is not God to all of us. It may be to some people, but there is a price that is too high to be paid. There must be a balance between progress and the environment.

Traffic from Skipton down into Bradford crawls even slower in Bradford than it does on the route down. What is the point in having all the improvements if, at the other end in Bradford, the situation is just as bad?

The only argument left is that the weight of traffic demands such a measure. What does Mr. Chance's assessor have to say about that? An expert traffic assessor sat with Mr. Chance and they both agreed that the traffic levels did not warrant a new road between Dowley Gap and Baildon. In fact, the assessor said: If the new road on this section— east of Bingley— had been the county's responsibility, they would not have been able to justify such a large scheme against other transport priorities. Nothing has changed since. Even the Department has conceded that since the last inquiry there is no new evidence of a substantial or material increase in the volume of traffic passing between Bingley and Shipley or, indeed, along the Aire valley route, other than any projected increase already taken into account by the inquiry of 1980–82.

People say that perhaps to finish the traffic at Cottingley Bar is not the answer, but the assessor showed that it is only at Cottingley Bar that there is any suggestion of overloading. He said that even by current traffic levels there was little congestion by national standards.

I am not an absentee landlord or absentee Member of Parliament. I live in Bingley, so I am well aware of every part of this route. I speak with feeling. As I drive from Shipley towards Bingley and get to Cottingley Bar I have every reason to turn right, leaving the A650 to continue towards Bradford west and the motorway. That road could take any proposed increase in traffic. The assessor said that the Saltaire roundabout should be given traffic lights which could deal with a greater flow. He had no doubt that the diversion of traffic at that point would help tremendously.

Councillors in my part of the world are not popular at the moment. Officers of the West Yorkshire metropolitan county opposed the ending of the road at Cottingley Bar on the ground that it conflicted with its policies to move traffic from Manningham and Girlington. They were unable to produce evidence to show that building the road east of Bingley would remove a significant volume of traffic from those areas.

Only 18 per cent. of the traffic in Toiler lane and 20 per cent. in Manningham lane comes from the Aire valley. As one moves further into Bradford the proportion is even less. Yet that was the main reason for opposing the ending of the route at Cottingley Bar.

Where is all the pressure coming from? Is it from the Department of Transport or from the West Yorkshire metropolitan county? The latter will not be around for long, fortunately. Is it from the Bradford district council? Surely it cannot want a route that divides a village from its open space or another that would result in the demolition of much needed houses.

The brown and green routes are unthinkable. We hear about the wonderful proposal that there should be a tunnel under Saltaire. I do not know about the cost, but I know about the upheaval and desecration which cannot be contemplated. The pollution that it would create is a separate issue which I do not have time to develop tonight.

I do not know what our councils are playing at. At the last inquiry it was argued, in favour of the new road, that the increase in traffic would be 1 per cent. per annum from 1975 onwards. Yet through Manningham, where they claim that they are trying to avoid increased traffic, there has been a I per cent. increase since the inquiry.

Even their own publications do not help their case. We are not talking about a commuter belt in the most opulent part of Surrey or even opulent parts of Yorkshire or Cheshire. In the last census City Trends shows that car ownership has declined by 10 per cent. in the last 10 years. The area is bottom of the list of areas with households which do not have a car. Apparently 49.5 per cent. of households in the area do not have a car. Recent announcements claim that the mileage of private car owners decreased by one third.

There is only one solution, and it is not the amended yellow route. I am talking about inspector Chance's route 33. He had the right solution. Everyone accepts that it is a local traffic problem. The access and exit points would not he ideal for the bulk of the traffic.

What happens during school holidays? At peak times there are problems, but there are no problems at times when traffic is not excessive. I do not disagree with the Department's suggestion that round Cottingley Bar there may be flexibility. Recently Mr. Chance said that the Department of Trade and Industry did not suggest his route, and that the last thing he wanted was to leave traffic with the only option of going through the middle of Shipley. The traffic must have a choice of turning left, going straight on on the A650, or of turning right up Cottingley New road.

I could make many suggestions of ways to improve the traffic flow. Problems are caused only on three major junctions and one roundabout. Much could be done to improve that with a little foresight. The truth is that other road schemes should come first. At the last inquiry an assurance was given that the construction of the Bingley to Baildon section would not be permitted until the Shipley eastern bypass had been approved.

The Minister's Department would do well to consider the congestion in Bradford. A Bradford inner ring road should be constructed. We should also consider the dualling and upgrading of Valley road and Canal road, and the construction of the Shipley eastern bypass. Furthermore, we should proceed with the remainder of the Airedale trunk route terminating at Cottingley Bar.

There is a limit to what can be sacrificed to traffic. Our heritage and environment are priceless. The problem with the Bingley to Shipley section is that, given the lie of the land and concentration of housing, it is impossible to build a new road along the valley bottom without totally unacceptable long-lasting environmental and social damage.

I have received hundreds of letters from my constituents about the matter, among which is one from a constituent who lives at 261 Bingley road, Saltaire. He wrote: As a resident on the existing A650 earning a living driving lorries throughout Bradford and the Aire Valley, I can in no way find any justification for either the expense of the new road or what I regard as the desecration of a most beautiful and unique area.

12.32 am
The Minister of State, Department of Transport (Mrs. Lynda Chalker)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Mr. Fox) for the opportunity to discuss the Aire Valley trunk road. I have listened to his speech with great care. I am fully aware of the beauties of Saltaire, as I have visited it. I also know what a difficult valley it would be, especially its eastern end, in which to lay a road.

Our commitment to the Airedale route has not changed. I look forward to the day when we can make a start on the new road where it is needed. However, we need to improve conditions for many communities along the existing road, because for a long time local people have suffered. We want a safer road for all users and a better route for the traffic with improved access for industry.

I know that progress has been slow. I well understand some of the impatience expressed during the years. With the public inquiries in 1975 and 1980 and the inquiries into side roads and compulsory purchase orders, which have been held but on which decisions have not yet been announced, the matter has taken its natural course through our public inquiry procedures.

It is difficult with any valley road to locate it so that it offends no one. Space is limited, and the environment is truly sensitive. That is another reason for the slow progress. In 1982 a firm decision was taken on the road from Kildwick near Skipton to Keighley, and from Keighley to Bingley. I know how keen my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mr. Waller) is that those sections should be built, and I believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley agrees with that. I am glad to repeat the assurance that I gave on 6 May 1983 that the Aire valley road will not end in what is now a car park at Bingley. We must resolve what happens thereafter.

The key decision, as my hon. Friend said, will be the line of the road to the east of Bingley. May I explain the background to the public consultation that took place in 1984 about the section of the route that rightly concerns not only my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley but my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Home Office—the hon. Member for Pudsey (Mr. Shaw)—who has had to return to his Committee, and many of their constituents. I understand what it must be like for people in Saltaire and neighbouring areas to hear about various ideas and not to know whether they will be pursued. I am only too well aware that, in trying to obtain an acceptable solution, one runs the risk of the various options causing concern to residents in the area. We must end that as soon as we can. Since 1982, we have said that the new road will end at Cottingley Bar and that with the local authorities we shall reconsider ways of solving the traffic problems in Shipley and Manningham. My hon. Friend was right to say that before we can consider the Shipley eastern bypass, we must decide what will happen on the way there from the Aire Valley route.

What happened—it took some time—was that a joint working party was set up with West Yorkshire metropolitan county council and Bradford metropolitan district council to consider the problems. Surprise, surprise: they discovered that there were no easy solutions. They came up with some alternative routes for the section. I have made it clear all along that I am prepared to consider anything that is fresh and acceptable. That is why we went to a joint exhibition — not without some anxieties, I freely admit. We believed it right to give local people a further opportunity to offer their views on the schemes put forward by the councils.

Three routes were proposed. The yellow route. which ended at Cottingley Bar, was similar but not identical to that recommended by Inspector Chance following the 1980 inquiry. The working party believed that that was, on the whole, an improvement. It put forward two other routes that passed through the corridor to the north of Saltaire and Shipley, the green one ending at Baildon and the brown one ending at Shipley. They were not the Department's routes; they came from the working party that was seeking a solution. Most importantly, we wished to discover whether anyone had fresh ideas to deal with the problems of this most difficult section. It is important to stress that this consultation does not mean that the 1982 decision has been set aside. We are trying to find a way of dealing with the traffic once it gets to Cottingley Bar, and I know that my hon. Friend is aware of that.

We have had a strong public response in the form of completed questionnaires, letters to me personally, and petitions, as a result of our consultation. We have not yet finished collating all the details that have been sent, but we shall do so as quickly as possible. It is clear that many people have deep feelings and that there is much anxiety about the matter. Therefore, we must come to a decision as soon as possible. However, I wish to ensure that all representations are considered. I wish to consider the precise alignment recommended by Inspector Chance before we come to a conclusion on a preferred route beyond Cottingley Bar.

I remind my hon. Friend of our correspondence about Bradford and Bingley rugby football club, starting on 27 March last year. The club is worried about what happens at Cottingley Bar, because that is where its playing fields are. I have also three times extended the time for the responses to the suggestions. In October last year, west Yorkshire and Bradford councils came forward with a fresh option, the so-called modified green route.

Many representations have been made about this route, and I am well aware of the concern. I take this opportunity to thank the hundreds of people and organisations who have responded. I hope that my hon. Friend will pass on my thanks to every individual and in particular to the Aire valley preservation society, the Saltaire village society, the Coach road and Lower Baildon residents association and, more recently formed, the sports clubs against the road. All of these bodies have put their views clearly. They have put in a lot of effort, and we now have what we were seeking from consultation—an expression of views and a response from both local authorities and the public.

I shall now be required to exercise the judgment of Solomon, and I am not in a position to do so at this hour of the night. However, despite the weight of representation, I am determined that we shall announce a decision as soon as possible, and I hope to be able to talk to my hon. Friend and announce a decision as soon as possible. That is my aim and I shall do my best to keep to it.

Not only should we be ending the uncertainty we need to make progress on the other sections, and so much of that depends on the route east of Bingley. In particular, there is the section to the east of Crossflatts, where a decision on advance works to Bingley is outstanding. In November 1983 there was a public inquiry, but no announcement will be made on the preferred route east of Bingley, because that is the fair way to go.

Other Airedale decisions are outstanding. A public inquiry into side roads and compulsory purchase orders has to be sorted out. I shall not anticipate the outcome, but I am anxious to make a tangible beginning. I confirm again our commitment to improving conditions in Airedale, and also to making the right decisions because of the understandable sensitivity of a historic community in Saltaire and the area. I hope that my hon. Friend will accept how much I value the keen interest that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Pudsey have shown in the matter. I am concerned not only about the protection of the environment, but about all the particular interests. I have a great sheaf of letters of cases that hon. Members have raised with me.

I recognise that the advance works proposed and the works on the main route through Bingley will cause parking problems. Therefore, the concern expressed to my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley by the Bingley chamber of trade is understandable. Obviously, the Department will pay appropriate compensation to owners for loss of land, but Bradford council will have to provide the necessary replacement car parking if any is taken away. We shall continue to discuss the problem if the council and my hon. Friend find that valuable.

I have mentioned Bradford and Bingley rugby club. It is too early to decide whether it will be affected in any way, but I have noted its views, as I have noted those of Mrs. Sharp of Cottingley Bar, and so many of the others who have written to us. The next step will be to announce the preferred route decision. Only after that can we begin the detailed preparation of the chosen route with the aim of publishing proposals as soon as we can. I cannot say when that will be, but I must emphasise that, whichever route is chosen, people will have another opportunity to comment and, if they wish to, object or propose alternatives.

I assure my hon. Friend that the many and varied interests that he has so cogently put forward on behalf of his constituents will be taken fully into account in reaching both the decision immediately before us and those that will subsequently follow. I hope that that will help and that we shall come to a decision as soon as we possibly and fairly can.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at sixteen minutes to One o'clock.