ROAD TRAFFIC BILL.

HL Deb 19 July 1934 vol 93 cc819-51

Order of the Day for the House to be again put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF ONSLOW in the Chair.]

Clause 23 [Amendment as to use of vehicles on special occasions]

THE EABL OF PLYMOUTH

The first Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 21, line 6, leave out ("a") and insert ("the ").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 24 [Arrangements between members of societies for carnage in motor vehicles]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

The next Amendment is also drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 22, line 27, leave out ("had been") and insert ("were").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 24, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 25 [Amendment as to public sittings of Traffic, Commissioners]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

There is another drafting Amendment here.

Amendment moved— Page 22, line 40, leave out ("of greater frequency than six") and insert ("operated on more than six days").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 25, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 26 agreed to.

LORD AMULREE moved, after Clause 26, to insert the following new clause:

Interpretation of certain provisions of s. 90 of the principal Act.

". For removing doubts it is hereby declared that the powers conferred on a local authority by subsections (2) and (3) of Section ninety of the principal Act (which relate to the appointment of a parking place as a station for public service vehicles and confer amongst other powers a power to make certain charges) are in addition to and not in substitution for the powers conferred on a local authority by Section sixty-eight of the Public Health Act 1925 (which relates to the provision of parking places and confers amongst other powers a power to make regulations as to certain charges) and that the local authority shall have power to make reasonable charges for the use of a parking place as a station for public service vehicles in addition to the charges for accommodation referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of Section 90 of the principal Act."

The noble Lord said: The object of this Amendment is to remove doubts which have arisen as to the application of certain sections of the Public Health Act, 1925, and the Road Traffic Act, 1930, in regard to the use of a station adapted by a local authority for the purpose of receiving public service vehicles. Section 68 of the Public Health Act, 1925, provides that: Whore for the purpose of relieving or preventing congestion of traffic it appears to the local authority to be necessary to provide within their district suitable parking places for vehicles, the local authority may provide such parking places …. and that they may acquire land suitable for that purpose, and utilise any lands which may lawfully be appropriated for the purpose, subject to certain restrictions.

Subsection (6) says: A local authority may make regulations as to the use of parking places …. and other matters, including the charges to be paid to the local authority in connection with the use of any parking place not being part of a street. Subsection (7) says that in the case of any vehicle using a parking place the driver may not ply for hire. The definition of a "parking place" is: a place where vehicles, or vehicles of any particular class or description, may wait. It is obvious therefore that under the Public Health Act, 1925, the powers of the local authority to provide parking places apply to places where vehicles may wait but may not ply for hire, and further that they may make charges for the use of the parking place where the parking place is on private land or owned by the local authority, and not in a street.

That was altered by Section 90 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930. The Act of 1925 referred to vehicles generally. The Act of 1930 introduced a classification of vehicles, and Section 90 deals with public service vehicles. It enables the local authority to make provision for appointing parking places as stations for such vehicle, and also declares that public service vehicles may, in the discretion of the local authority, ply for hire in such a parking place. It goes on to provide that they may, with the consent of the Minister, adapt the parking place for use as a station for public service vehicles and in particular provide and maintain waiting rooms, ticket offices and lavatories and other similar accommodation, in connection therewith. Further they may make reasonable charges for the use of any accommodation so provided.

The question that arises is this. Where a local authority has provided private land or adapted private land as a parking place, as a station for the use of these public service vehicles, can they make any charge for such adaptation? It is obvious that they have no power in Section 90 to make such a charge, because a charge is only authorised by that section for the use of waiting rooms, ticket offices, and similar accommodation. It has been contended that there is power under the previous Act, the Public Health Act of 1925, to make a charge. On the other hand it is contended that the only charge that can be made is for the use of a parking place as a place to wait and not as a station for picking up passengers. In these circumstances, where local authorities have gone to the expense of providing a station, and these public service vehicles are making use of this station, it is only reasonable that the local authority should make a charge.

The matter is not without authority. The Cardiff Corporation Bill was before Parliament this Session, and the question arose there. It was contended that the existing provisions were sufficiently clear and that there was no necessity to insert any special provision giving the Corporation power to make a charge, but after argument the Committee found there was sufficient doubt, on the subject and they inserted a provision authorising a charge to be made. It is the same point which is raised by this Amendment, which I am moving on behalf of the Association of Municipal Corporations. The noble Earl in charge of the Bill has put down an Amendment to my Amendment providing that a reasonable charge may be made for a parking place "not being part of a street." My noble friend Lord Mount Temple suggests certain Amendments too, but I think he agrees that there should not be power to make a charge where a station is in a public street, and I understand he is satisfied with the Amendment put forward by the noble Earl. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 26, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Amulree.)

LORD MOUNT TEMPLE

As I think the Minister in charge of the Bill and the noble Lord, Lord Amulree, and myself are in substantial agreement, I shall be extremely brief. It is a matter of some importance which has been raised by my noble friend. In the beginning of his Amendment he says that the Act of 1930 shall be in addition and not in substitution for the Act of 1925, and I think it is very important that this should be made clear. As to the other point, it is this: Shall or shall not the local authorities have power to make a charge for the use of a parking place when that parking place is on a public highway? It seems to me quite obvious that that power should not be given. I understand the noble Earl in charge of the Bill agrees with that, and that the point will be made clear. There is a substantial business reason why they should not take money for private vehicles in a public parking place. If they take money the local authority would be liable for anything that is stolen from the cars, and therefore they would assume a very great responsibility. As to the last point—namely, that public service vehicles should be compelled to pay a small fee for the use of these parking places—that may be all right, but I think it might leave the local authority again open to a civil action if anything was stolen from the public service vehicles while these vehicles were changing passengers at the station. That, after all, is a matter for the local authorities, and I do not press it.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved in the proposed new clause, after "parking place," to insert "not being part of a street." The noble Earl said: The noble Lord explained very clearly the object of this Amendment, and it requires very few words from me to make clear our attitude in regard to it. The Amendment I am moving now is in line 13, after "parking place," to insert "not being part of a street." The noble Lord (Lord Mount Temple) has said that one of the points at issue in connection with this particular Amendment is whether or not a local authority should be allowed to make a charge for the use of stations which form part of a public highway, and we are in entire agreement that it is undesirable that they should be allowed to do so. My Amendment is moved with that object. In view of the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Mount Temple, has not moved his Amendment I need say very little. The purpose of the Amendment he put down was to prohibit a local authority from making a charge in respect of the use of a coach station by a coach which merely comes into the station for the purpose of setting down and picking up passengers, and which does not remain in the station for any longer period than is necessary for that purpose.

I am advised that this power is inherent in the statutory provisions as they stand, and the declaratory clause is necessitated solely by the action of Parliament in inserting a special provision in this sense in the Cardiff Corporation Bill, which leaves some risk of its being interpreted that the powers under the existing law extend only to the making of a charge where a station is used as a parking place and not merely as a point for the picking up and setting down of passengers. If the Amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Mount Temple, had been passed the effect would have been the reverse of what is proposed by Lord Amulree, and instead of making clear the powers of local authorities to charge for the use of stations as such, it would have destroyed those powers and left them merely the power to charge for parking places. I hope the Committee will accept the Amendment of my noble friend Lord Amulree, together with my small Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment moved— Line 13, after ("parking place") insert ("not being part of a street").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment to the proposed Amendment agreed to.

On Question, original Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 27 agreed to.

Clause 28:

Licences of drivers of heavy goods vehicles.

(12) In this section the expression "licence" means a licence to drive a heavy goods vehicle granted under this section, and the expression "heavy goods vehicle" means a vehicle of any of the following classes which is constructed or adapted for hauling or carrying goods or burden of any description, that is to say, a heavy locomotive, a light locomotive, a motor tractor, a heavy motor-car and a motor-car so constructed that a trailer may by partial superimposition be attached thereto in such a manner as to cause a substantial part of the weight of the trailer to be borne thereby.

THE EAEL OF PLYMOUTH

I have a drafting Amendment to this clause.

Amendment moved— Page 25, line 35, leave out from the first ("Act") to ("for") in line 36.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD DE CLIFFORD moved, in subsection (12), to omit all words after "heavy motor car and a" and to insert "heavy articulated vehicle which consists of a motor car and trailer so constructed that the trailer is by partial superimposition attached to the motor car in such a manner as to cause a substantial part of the weight of the trailer to be borne by the motor car, the total weight of the articulated vehicle so constructed being greater than four tons unladen." The noble Lord said: On behalf of my noble friend Earl Howe I beg to move this Amendment. The purpose of the Amendment is to draw a distinction between the heavy articulated vehicle and the light articulated vehicle, and to limit the application of the clause requiring a special licence to the drivers of the heavy vehicles. As the clause stands, the last four lines in sub section (12) would make the requirements for a special driver's licence apply to all classes of articulated vehicles. There are many such vehicles in ordinary use with weight considerably less than two and a-half tons, and they are capable of being driven as easily and as safely as any other design of vehicle of the same weight on four or six wheels.

This point was raised in Standing Committee in another place on June 5, when an Amendment was moved extending the clause to articulated vehicles, and the Minister made objection to the form of Amendment exempting a light articulated vehicle. The Amendment has now been redrafted to try to meet that objection. The Amendment now proposed makes it clear that the special driver's licence will be required when the complete articulated vehicle weighs over four tons, but a vehicle of less than that weight will rank in the light vehicle class. It must be remembered that under the clause as it stands a goods vehicle weighing under two and a-half tons unladen and drawing a trailer may be driven by a driver without the special licence which is proposed by this clause. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 26, line 3, leave out from the first ("a") to the end of line 6, and insert the said new words.—[Lord de Clifford.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

As a matter of fact as far as I know there has been no challenge of the proposal that the driver of a heavy motor car—that is a vehicle of over two and a-half tons unladen—should require the special vocational licence. Under the present Amendment the special licence will still be required if the drawing part of the vehicle is over two and a-half tons. The Amendment is clearly designed to meet the case of the relatively light drawing vehicle with a trailer exceeding one and a-half tons unladen weight although the total unladen weight is not to exceed four tons. The reason which led the Minister to require the driver of the light articulated vehicle to hold the vocational licence is that light drawing vehicles are used today to draw heavy loads, such as a 1,000 gallon tank, which weighs over three tons when filled; and the driving of such a combination, with a light drawing vehicle and a heavy load behind, calls for a very special degree of skill. I understand that this point is going to be raised by the British Road Federation, of which the noble Earl, Lord Howe, is Chairman, with the Minister at an interview to-morrow, but it might perhaps shorten discussion on this and other similar Amendments to-day if I made a quite short general statement with regard to the position.

I would like to say that it is not intended that the present classification of vehicles for taxation and speed purposes is to be stereotyped for all time, and the Minister will be led in future, as his predecessors have been in the past, to give the fullest consideration to reasoned proposals of the industry for further modification of the Schedules, or, indeed, for their recasting on different lines. I understand that the Minister has received an indication that the organisations representing the industry are themselves considering the desirability and the possibility of adopting bases of classification quite different from the present bases, but I am informed that these proposals are at present in quite a preliminary stage. The Minister, therefore, cannot here and now adopt piecemeal Amendments of the existing classification which may well run counter to the proposals put before him by the industry in the near future. In any case we are really dealing with a very complicated and a somewhat new problem in connection with this type of vehicle, and I would suggest to your Lordships that for that reason it is the more necessary that we should proceed cautiously in this matter and not legislate, or even by regulation prejudge the case with regard to which we are not completely informed at the present moment. I therefore hope that the noble Lord will not press the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF KINNOULL moved to add to subsection (12): "and a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods (not being a vehicle classified as a motor car under paragraph (e) of subsection (1) of Section two of the principal Act) and the weight of which unladen exceeds one ton ten hundredweights." The noble Earl said: The object of this Amendment is to extend these licences to lorries of unladen weight of one and a half tons and over instead of two and a half tons. It is designed purely in the interests of safety. A lorry built three years ago is practically obsolete to-day in its performance. Present day lorries of well under two and a half tons can draw a heavy load of four tons at a very high speed, and it is felt by the drivers of these vehicles themselves and by the Transport and General Workers Union that this Amendment is necessary in the interests of safety. I therefore venture to hope that the Government will accept it.

Amendment moved— Page 26, line 6, at end insert the said words.—(The Earl of Kinnoull.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am a little surprised that the noble Earl opposite should say that this Amendment is designed purely in the interests of safety. Let me in a few words explain the position as it is at present. In the case of vehicles over two and a half tons the age limit is already twenty-one years, and drivers of these vehicles will require the new type of vocational licence. I am now dealing with the noble Earl's two Amendments which really are in fact connected. A person of seventeen years of age or more may drive a commercial goods vehicle of unladen weight less than two and a half tons. Of the 9,612 drivers involved in fatal road accidents in 1933, only 153 were drivers under twenty-one years in charge of motor vans and lorries. These are the figures in the Fatal Accidents Return. The present proposal has been discussed in some detail between representatives of the Transport and General Workers Union and the Ministry, and I understand that the Union have suggested that past statistics are not a sure guide in view of the increasing tendency to build vehicles of high load capacity which come within the limit of two and a half tons unladen weight.

On the basis of the 1933 census, the total number of vehicles whose drivers will be subject to the new vocational licence as provided in the Bill is approximately 60,000. On the same census basis the additional number of drivers who would be affected by the proposed Amendment of the noble Earl are the drivers of some 110,000 vehicles. A large number of vehicles coming within this additional group are genuinely light vehicles. Furthermore, the youthful and irresponsible driver is more frequently to be found in the case of the driver of the tradesman's delivery van of under 30 cwt. who would not be affected by this Amendment. The youthful and rash type of driver is found in this class of vehicle rather than in the heavier type of vehicle In these circumstances I cannot see my way to accept the Amendment.

LORD STRABOLGI

The noble Earl referred to drivers of tradesmen's vans. He has put his finger, if I may say so, on the danger that my noble friend Lord Kinnoull was trying to remove. When the errand boy carried a basket and then went on a bicycle he was not so dangerous. Now the errand boy drives a fast, powerful motor vehicle and, though my noble friend's Amendment would not meet the whole of the case, it would at any rate prevent irresponsible youths from driving these modern fast heavy vehicles of a ton and a half and over. I cannot understand why, when we have a campaign waged by the Ministry of Transport itself at the present moment, a proposal put forward for greater safety on the roads from this side is rejected by the noble Earl.

On Question. Amendment negatived.

LORD STRABOLGI moved to add to the clause: () Subsection (1) of Section seventeen of the principal Act (which relates to requirements as to employment of drivers and attendants) shall apply to heavy motor cars as it applies to heavy locomotives and light locomotives, and the provisions of the said section shall have effect accordingly.

The noble Lord said: The noble Earl, in his statement a few minutes ago on the question of future adjustments of special licences, said we should proceed cautiously, and it is in that spirit that I put down this Amendment. I owe the noble Earl an apology for not having put it down earlier. I had it ready but, through a misunderstanding, it did not reach the Table in time. I am sorry if I have inconvenienced the noble Earl or his advisers by the Amendment not having been printed sooner.

The present law is that locomotives—heavy locomotives and light locomotives—on the roads must have a second man as look-out and for the general assistance of the driver and for general safety. But a heavy motor vehicle of two and a-half tons and over, although subject to other restrictions, is not required to have a second man on board. I would remind your Lordships that heavy locomotives have a speed as a rule of only a few miles an hour. I believe the fastest speed is only about eight miles an hour. Yet such a locomotive has to carry a second man. But these increasingly powerful speedy large heavy motor vehicles can go all over the country with only one man, who has no assistance in case of emergency, no look-out, no one to see that the cargo has not fallen off or to deal with any of the exigencies of the journey. The object of my Amendment is to ensure that a second man shall be on board. He need not necessarily be a driver. All that is asked for is for an extra man in the interests of safety to assist in the matters which I have mentioned. I am moving this Amendment on behalf of the National Union of Railwaymen which has 10,000 members who are drivers of these big motor lorries on the road.

I will only trouble your Lordships with two figures to show the tremendous increase in fatalities and accidents on the roads caused by these heavy commercial vehicles, but they are very striking figures. In the last five years the deaths on the roads—what the new Minister of Transport has referred to as "mass murder"—caused by heavy commercial vehicles, the ones I am talking about, have increased by 23 per cent. Cases of injury have increased by 65 per cent, during the same period. Those are very remarkable figures, and I think it must be admitted that such a provision as I now propose would add something at any rate to the safety of these vehicles and prevent some of these accidents. In the case of motor vehicles drawing trailers a second man is required, but there is no such requirement in the case of a motor vehicle over two and a-half tons which is not drawing a trailer. The matter has been discussed before but we have been told that there have been negotiations. I hope that in view of those negotiations it may be possible to accept this Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 26, line 6, at end insert tho said new subsection.—(Lord Strabolgi.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

It is for the reason that negotiations are still proceeding that I cannot accept this Amendment. It is really impossible for the Minister to accept piecemeal Amendments of this kind when the whole matter is under immediate consideration and may be dealt with comprehensively in the comparatively near future. Furthermore, I honestly cannot see that the noble Lord opposite has produced any real reason why this Amendment should be accepted. He really has not made out his case. The position is that under Section 17 (1) of the principal Act road locomotives are required to carry two persons, who shall be employed in driving or attending the locomotive whilst being driven on any highway, and in addition an attendant for each trailer. Under Section 17 (2) an attendant is required in addition to the driver to be carried in cases where a heavy motor vehicle is drawing a trailer. I was interested to hear that the noble Lord does not think it necessary that the attendant should be able to drive, because I think it was argued in another place by one of his friends that the second man should be able to relieve the driver when he had driven for a reasonable period of time. The Amendment he has moved does not provide for that. It merely requires an attendant and not another driver. I hope, however, that in view of the fact that negotiations are proceeding and that it is possible that the matter will be dealt with comprehensively at a later stage, the noble Lord will not press his Amendment.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 28, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 29 [Transitional provisions as to certain drivers' licences]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

There is a drafting Amendment to this clause. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 26, line 7, leave out ("Section twenty-eight of this Act") and insert ("the last foregoing section ").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 29, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 30 agreed to.

LORD MERRIVALE moved, after Clause 30, to insert the following new clause:

Trials for manslaughter and dangerous driving.

". Upon the trial of a person who is indicted for manslaughter in connection with the driving of a motor vehicle by him, it shall be lawful for the jury, if they are satisfied that he is guilty of an offence under Section eleven of the principal Act (which relates to reckless or dangerous driving) to find him guilty of that offence, whether or not the requirements of Section twenty-one of the principal Act (which relates to notice of prosecutions) have been satisfied as respects that offence."

The noble and learned Lord said: When the Bill was in Committee two days ago I ventured to explain that I had given Notice of two Amendments of which this was the major Amendment and the noble Earl was good enough to say, as I understood, that he would accept both. The minor Amendment was accepted and introduced into the Bill that day. It is sufficient in the circumstances for me to say now that the object of this clause is to simplify the proceedings where a casualty upon the road has been attended by loss of life and there is doubt whether the person who is involved in it, and is guilty of an offence, is guilty of manslaughter or only guilty of the minor offence of driving to the public danger. This Amendment will simplify the matter and will enable the case to be dealt with on the spot without complications which must have been introduced otherwise having regard to a recent decision in the Court of Criminal Appeal. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 30 insert the said new-clause.—(Lord Merrivale.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 31 agreed to.

Clause 32 [Light signals (presumption of compliance with statutory requirements)]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

There is a drafting Amendment to this clause. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 28, line 29, after ("deemed") insert ("to be of the prescribed size, colour, and type, or of another character authorised by the Minister under Section forty-eight of the principal Act and").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 32, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 33 agreed to.

LORD DE CLIFFORD moved, after Clause 33, to insert the following new clause:

Publication of the Highway Code.

". Notwithstanding the law of copyright or any like privilege or custom the Highway Code may be published by any person without the grant of a licence for that purpose or the payment of any fee."

The noble Lord said: I move this Amendment in order to try to get the Highway Code taken out of Crown copyright. One of the greatest factors making for safety would be, I submit to your Lordship, that the Highway Code should be known by every single person who uses the roads. I understand that the Code is being redrafted. My submission is that the widest possible publicity should be given to the Code and I think that if it is withdrawn from Crown copyright, and one might almost say taken out of the red tape of a Government Department, some publishers would issue it in an attractive form. It is in order that wider publicity to all the statements contained in this document shall be given that I move this Amendment.

Amendment moved— After Clause 33, insert the said newclause.—(Lord de Clifford.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I hope the noble Lord will not press this Amendment. I only want to say as a preliminary that it is after all the general duty of the citizen to be acquainted with every Act of Parliament which may concern him. The Legislature has never yet given a general permission to private citizens to publish Acts of Parliament, and the reason for that is that there is undoubtedly a risk of inaccurate reproduction of Statutes by people who are not at all responsible. I think the same principle ought to apply in the case of Statutory Rules and Orders. Although the Highway Code does not technically form part of the body of Statutory Rules and Orders it is a Code published by the authority of Parliament and has certain legal effect. I want to assure the House that it will be the policy of the Minister to allow any responsible person to reproduce the Highway Code, and to take steps to give him that permission without delay, but I do think there is some objection to giving a general consent to the reproduction of such a code as that, which might easily enable garbled versions of it to be reproduced with the object of advertisement and for suchlike purposes. I think that that is a risk against which we ought to guard. I hope that with the assurance which I have been able to give the noble Lord will be content and that he will withdraw his Amendment.

LORD DE CLIFFORD

In the circumstances I shall be only too pleased to withdraw the Amendment, and I hope that great notice will be taken of two words in the noble Earl's speech. When an application is made for permission to publish the Highway Code I hope the attention of the Department will be directed to the words "without delay."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD ELTON moved to insert after Clause 33: .— (1) It shall not be lawful to sell, offer for sale or supply a motor vehicle or trailer for use on the road, if the use thereof on a road would be unlawful under Section 3 (1) of the principal Act. (2) If a motor vehicle or trailer is sold, offered for sale or supplied in contravention of this suction, any person who so sells, offers for sale or supplies the same or causes or permits the same to be so sold, offered for sale or supplied, shall he guilty of an offence under the (principal Act. The expression ' person ' in this subsection shall include a body corporate. (3) Nothing in this section shall apply to the bonâ fide sale, offer for sale or supply of any motor vehicle or trailer for export from Great Britain.

The noble Lord said: I know your Lordships will all regret, and certainly nobody will regret more than I, that you are not to have the advantage of hearing this (as I think) fairly important Amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Horder, who speaks with such very great and deserved authority on all matters affecting tie public health. Unfortunately Lord Horder is not able to be present, and in his absence I can only attempt to explain as briefly and as clearly as possible this Amendment, with which I venture to think as soon as your Lordships have read it most if not all of you will find yourselves in sympathy. The object of the Amendment is to reduce the dangerous public nuisance of the excessively noisy exhaust of the motor car or motor cycle. The facts of the present position are simple but I venture to think rather startling. It is already illegal to use on the roads a motor vehicle with an inefficient silencer, but it is not illegal to supply such a vehicle. Consequently the purpose of this Amendment is to make it henceforth illegal to supply what it is already illegal to use.

The principal Act, the, Road Traffic Act, 1930, empowered the Minister of Transport to draw up regulations for the construction and equipment of motor vehicles. One of those regulations—I think it is Regulation 16 of 1931, but I spare your Lordships its technical language—did in effect provide that motor vehicles should be equipped with efficient silencers. That is a very reasonable regulation, as I think your Lordships will agree, and I spare your Lordships any argument as to the threat to the public temper, nerves, and health of the constant roar of the unsilenccd exhaust very often through the whole of the twenty-four hours of the day. Unfortunately this reasonable regulation has in fact become a dead letter. It is openly, constantly and deliberately flouted, and under the anomaly of the existing law must be flouted. The user of a vehicle with an illegal silencer may be brought into court, and theoretically on the first conviction be may be fined (I think) £20, and on the second conviction £50 with the alternative of three months imprisonment. But what happens? He has only to satisfy the court that he has bought in all good faith the standard production of a well-known firm publicly, regularly and without restriction exhibited for sale, and although I believe that defence is not good in law, very few magistrates are likely to impose a deterrent sentence on one who is obviously so innocent a defendant. Meanwhile the manufacturers remain entirely immune from the operation of the law.

May I upon that point—and I have only a few more points to put and shall be very brief—refer to a letter which appeared in The Times of September 9, 1933, written by a manufacturer and one of the principal suppliers of silencers to motor car manufacturers? I am not quoting his exact words, but he said in effect that he received daily proof of the fact that there was a consistent demand among purchasers of sports cars for unnecessary noise, and that in effect the silenced sports car was unsaleable. If I may interpolate, I need perhaps hardly remind your Lordships that with the public which purchases sports cars and sports motor bicycles it is a very great attraction that the noise of the exhaust of the sports car, which is made for use on the road, should as closely as possible resemble the noise of the exhaust of the racing car, which is made for use on the racing track.

The letter went on to say that in order to meet that constant demand for noise the firm of the writer was manufacturing what he called "partial silencers"— which in the context obviously meant silencers which were not silencers at all—to the tune of thousands a year, and that in spite of the fact that there is, so the writer said, no mechanical difficulty in making efficient silencers and in spite of the fact that efficient silencers are no more expensive to make. He finally ended up by deploring the fact that this should be the case, but suggested that manufacturers could not be blamed for meeting what no doubt was an illegal but nevertheless was a very consistent demand. I do not know what your Lordships think about the logic of that last contention, or whether it would be a satisfactory defence to a prosecution under the Dangerous Drugs Act to say that there was a consistent public demand for cocaine.

In face of these facts I suggest that this Amendment is a simple and obvious solution of the problem. It proposes to make it illegal to supply that which it is illegal to use, and it is not very easy to see what are the arguments against such a proposal. I say that after having read with considerable care the arguments advanced in another place by the Minister of Transport, which were, firstly, that it would be unenforcible, and secondly, that some of the offending manufacturers, who are of course only a small minority, would dislike the passage of this Amendment so much that they would not in future be likely to co-operate with the Minister in reducing this nuisance by agreement. I think there is some inconsistency there. It is no doubt true that a small minority of manufacturers would dislike the passing of this Amendment, but I think the reason they would dislike it is that they believe, and rightly believe, that it would be in fact enforcible.

The reasons the Minister gave for thinking that it would be unenforcible very largely rested on the fact that it could not be enforced unless powers of inspection were given. The Police at present have no special powers of inspection to enable them to prosecute the user of an illegal silencer, and one cannot help thinking, as a layman, that it ought to be fairly easy to secure the inspection of an article which is regularly and publicly exposed for sale. Even if it is necessary, to secure prosecutions, to give powers of inspection to the Police, is not that rather an argument for giving such powers of inspection than for continuing to allow it to be legal to supply that which it is illegal to use? We have heard it said in the course of debate that it is undesirable to enact that which you cannot enforce. That is an argument with which I entirely agree, and I cannot help thinking that if it is not to be illegal to supply these things which are illegal to use, then perhaps it is to be regretted that it has been made illegal to use them.

Amendment moved— After Clause 33, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Elton.)

THE EARL OF KINNOULL

I am in sympathy with the point made by the noble Lord, and I hope the Government will accept the Amendment. The noise on the roads is often intolerable. I think one reason for interfering with silencers is that you may get a little more speed out of the car, and the second is that you appear to be going faster. In regard to the inspection by police of cars, I do not know exactly what the law is at the moment, but certainly police officers can pull you up in the street and examine your car. I hope the Government will accept the Amendment.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

My Lords, this is really a very complicated matter, and I do not think the solution is quite as easy as is suggested. I think the Government have already shown great sympathy with the sentiments which have prompted the movers to put this Amendment on the Paper, and they view with great concern what is admittedly the unsatisfactory position which obtains at present with regard to the enforcement of the law in these cases. Perhaps I might explain a little further. The Minister, in accordance with assurances given by his predecessor in another place, has taken steps to appoint, jointly with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, a special Committee to investigate the question of noise arising in the use of motor vehicles and he is pressing for an early report by that Committee, which will have at its disposal the facilities of the National Physical Laboratory. The present difficulty of enforcement is largely due to the lack of practical means of quantitative measurement of noise, and the special Committee are being asked to give particular consideration to this point. The Minister is glad to acknowledge the readiness of the motor manufacturing industry to co-operate in this work. So soon as definite and adequate "performance specifications" can be laid down, the Minister, under the powers which he already possesses, will not hesitate to include them in the regulations as to the construction and use of motor vehicles.

But the point is that the new clause would not in fact give the authorities greater powers than exist to-day. It is to-day possible for observation to be kept on the production of any motor works as it is put out on the road, and to take legal proceedings for excessive noise if in fact evidence of excessive noise, likely to be accepted by the courts, is forthcoming. That is one of the difficulties. It is difficult to get convictions under these provisions. It may be added that in fact excessive noise is often due to misuse, deliberate or otherwise, of the engine, rather than to the construction of the engine itself. The late Minister emphasised in another place the fact that improvement in this, important matter was more likely to be achieved by cooperation with the industry rather than by threats, and I might draw attention to a passage in a letter sent by the present Minister to the Oxford Anti-Noise Conference a few days ago: Not least of your troubles is the silencer which belies its name. We shall not get rid of this nuisance by adding a few more lines to the Statute Book. More exact knowledge of what really causes noise and how it can be quantitatively measured, may make it less difficult to enforce the law against unreasonable offenders. To this end we have invoked the best scientific assistance at the Government's disposal. I have asked for a report at the earliest possible date and I have every hope that the public spirited loaders of the motor manufacturing industry will co-operate with us in a determined effort to find a remedy. In those circumstances, and after the assurances I have given, I hope the noble Lord will not press his Amendment.

LORD STRABOLGI

I hope the noble Lord will press his Amendment, and I hope it will be supported by your Lordships. The whole trend of the motor industry to-day is to silence the car. Tyres are made silent and engines are made silent, and yet there are a small class who demand a noisy car and who are catered for. The noble Earl says: "Oh, we must co-operate with the industry." Surely this Amendment would strengthen the hands of people who are trying to lessen the noise of cars and are not working for the benefit of those who have no consideration for anyone's feelings. I really cannot understand the attitude of the Minister. I should have thought that this clause, or something like, it, would have strengthened the hands of the Minister and the great majority of the trade.

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD

My Lords, I suspect that the rather hostile tone of the speech made by my noble friend below me does not really represent the full attitude of his Department. I believe they are more friendly than his words indicate, and I am at least glad that this subject is to be examined at Bushey. It may take a good long time to settle the methods of quantitative measurement of noise. Meanwhile it will be a great encouragement if the Ministry conduct prosecutions against people who leave their cars roaring in the street, for twenty minutes at a time, at two o'clock in the morning. It is a very serious thing that late at night these noises should go on quite uninterruptedly, and even if it is difficult to secure convictions it is not a bad thing that the Department should take action, even if they know that they are not going to secure a conviction.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

I cannot help hoping that the respectful address of my noble friend will have considerable weight with the Government. He does, represent, and other noble Lords have represented, a feeling which is very strong and is growing. I am sure the public will not continue to put up with all this noise. I recognise, of course, that the Government have addressed themselves to this subject on a point which I hope will lead to action, and they have appointed a Committee. I understand from my noble friend Lord Plymouth that if the Committee report favourably they have power as matters stand not only to act against the users of noisy cars but against the makers of them. That is what is essential in the Amendment. The Amendment, I think, is a very well constructed one, and its effect is that it shall be illegal to sell what it is illegal to use. If my noble friend says the Committee will really come to a conclusion rapidly, and that if they report the matter can be done then the Government have power as the law now stands to do what my noble friend who has moved the Amendment asks them to do, that would be a great comfort to many of us.

As matters stand we feel that this is an opportunity which ought not to be allowed to pass, if the expression of opinion of your Lordships' House is likely to have effect on public opinion, both to stimulate those who object to this evil and also to restrain the offender. It is not, I think, quite sufficient to say that it is difficult to enforce clauses of this kind. Parliament also acts as a vehicle for making quite clear what is the view of the public on such matters. It, as it were, formulates public feeling, and your Lordships are now asked to act in that respect. I think it might be of great value to the Government and the Ministry of Transport to have behind them a solemn Amendment passed upon great authority to restrain noise. I have said on "great authority." My noble friend who moved the Amendment did it, I thought, admirably, but he also speaks in the name of an authority even greater than himself, and when a very distinguished physician has told the public and told your Lordships' House that this evil is really antagonistic to the public health, then the time has arrived when something ought to be done. If my noble friend can assure us a little more I for one shall be very happy.

LORD JESSEL

I am very glad that Lord Crawford has raised this question of noise and of leaving exhausts on in the streets. Frequent complaints are made in London about this matter. I know that Lord Crawford suffers from it because he is a neighbour of mine, and when these exhausts are left on they make night hideous. I really do not understand why the Government cannot take action as the law stands now. I do not think you need go to a Depart- mental Committee to know what is noise and what is not noise. We all know pretty well what the noise from exhausts is, and also from the motor cycles which go down the roads at a thousand miles an hour—the most dangerous of all the motor vehicles on the roads. What has been said about sports cars is also quite true. The drivers delight in making a noise. I do not know whether it is to charm their female friends, or what it is, but they make a tremendous noise. This noise is getting an intolerable nuisance, and I am really rather disappointed by the reply of the noble Earl, because he says it is difficult to get a conviction, and yet evidently the Ministry seem rather terrified about a minority of motor manufacturers. I hope that, after the strong expression of opinion on both sides of the House on this matter, the Government may, after all, accept this Amendment.

THE MARQUESS OF DUFFERIN AND AVA

May I ask whether, in fact, it is necessary to make this an offence and therefore have to go through the procedure of getting a conviction? Would it not be quite easy for the Minister simply to put in a clause to say that every motor manufacturer has to have each new model approved by the Minister as being silent? Would not that cover the ground completely and make it very easy for the Minister to do what we all desire?

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I need hardly say that I fully appreciate the feelings of the noble Lords who have spoken, and I should like to assure your Lordships that the Minister is gravely concerned, and is determined to pursue the subject as quickly and as energetically as possible. But I would appeal to your Lordships not to press this Amendment at this stage. This matter has been referred to a scientific Committee, and this is to a very considerable extent a scientific matter. The Minister has asked this Committee to report at the earliest possible moment, and as soon as definite recommendations can be obtained from it he will not hesitate to make use of the powers which he already possesses to include these provisions among the regulations with regard to construction and use of motor vehicles. This Committee is composed of scientists of eminence, and I think it would perhaps be wiser to refrain from taking action of this kind until we have had their report. The Minister has exactly the same objects in view as your Lordships have.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

I really cannot appreciate the view that this is a scientific matter. It requires no knowledge of science to be aware of this din which deafens one day and night in the streets of London. That there should be research into the matter may be advantageous, but I think that the whole population are aware of this evil, and I think if a lead were given by your Lordships' House to-night by the passage of this Amendment, the general public would feel that the Government are taking this matter properly in hand, because scientific Committees may report in two or three years time, and in the meanwhile we shall find that this evil has got beyond bearing. I think it is injuring the health of the people of this country, and certainly the health of children.

THE EAEL OF PLYMOUTH

I quite agree that in many cases it is perfectly easy to tell when an excessive noise is being made, and under the law as it stands at present there are powers of proceeding against people who use these noisy motor cars. I have referred to the difficulties which exist in obtaining convictions, but this is a matter which is, of course, primarily one for the Police. With regard to what the noble Lord opposite says, from one point of view this is not a scientific matter, but from another point of view it is. It is difficult to lay down what is to be considered an excessive noise, and these investigations which are being made are being made primarily with a view to discovering, if possible, a means of estimating quantitatively the noise being made. In reply to what the noble Marquess said, as to whether the Minister would have power under the law as it at present stands to take action against the manufacturers of motor cars, I am advised that he would not be in a position to do that. The Police could not take action directly against them, but they could wait outside the works where these cars are made, and stop the cars at once and impound them, and proceed against them in that way. I do hope that your Lordships will not press this Amendment at this stage.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LOKD ELTON moved, after Clause 33, to insert the following new clause: .—(1) It shall not be lawful to alter any motor vehicle or trailer in such a manner that the use thereof on a road would by reason of such alteration be unlawful under Section 3 (1) of the principal Act. (2) If a motor vehicle or trailer is altered in contravention of this section, any person who so alters it or causes or permits it to be so altered, shall be guilty of an offence under the principal Act. The expression 'person' in this subsection shall include a body corporate. (3) It shall be a good defence to any person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had reasonable cause to believe that the motor vehicle or trailer as altered would not be used on any road in Great Britain.

The noble Lord said: This is consequential.

Amendment moved— After Clause 33, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Elton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 34 agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved, after Clause 34, to insert the following now clause:

Amendments as to licences of drivers and conductors of hackney carriages, and of certain stage carriages, in the Metropolis.

". Section eight of the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act, 1869, as amended, extended, or applied by, or by any order made under, any subsequent enactment (including Section fifty-one of the London Passenger Transport Act, 1933), shall have effect, as respects licences granted under the said Section eight after the date appointed for the coming into operation of this section,, with the substitution of three years for one year as the period during which a licence granted under the said section is, if not revoked or suspended, to be in force:

Provided that, with a view to spreading the work of granting such licences, where an application for the grant of such a licence is made within four years from the passing of this Act, the authority by whom the power of granting the licence is exercisable may direct that any licence granted on the application shall, if not revoked or suspended, continue in force during such period, being a period of not less than one nor more than three1 years from the date on which the licence is expressed to take effect, as the authority may at the time of the granting of the licence determine."

The noble Earl said This Amendment requires some little explanation. Hitherto the special (vocational) licence granted to drivers and conductors of public service vehicles of all kinds (omnibuses and coaches, trams, trolley vehicles and taxi-cabs) has had a currency of one year only. In the interests alike of the licensees and of the licensing authority, provision is made in the Bill for the extension of this period of one year to three years in the case of drivers of "public service vehicles" strictly so called, that is to say, omnibuses and coaches. It has been represented that there are equally good grounds for an extension in the case of drivers of tramcars, trolley vehicles and taxicabs, who are licensed by the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police; and this new clause provides accordingly. The second half of the clause is in the nature of transitional provision and deals only with the period of change-over from the present system to the new system.

Amendment moved— After Clause 34, insert the said new clause.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 35 agreed to.

Clause 36 [Application to Scotland]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to insert: () For subsection (5) of Section two the following subsection shall be substituted:— '(5) Any reference in subsection (6) of Section ten of the principal Act to an offence under the said section or to an infringement of the provisions thereof, and any reference in subsection (8) of Section one hundred and nineteen of the principal Act to an offence against that Act or against Section ten thereof, shall be deemed to include a reference to driving a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a speed limit imposed by or under any enactment.'

The noble Earl said: This Amendment is consequential.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 3, at end insert the said new paragraph.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

My next Amendment is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 16, at end insert ("and any reference to a borough, an urban council or a rural council in a county shall be construed accordingly").—(The, Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to insert: (6) For Section twenty-one the following section shall be substituted:—

1. '(1) A county council shall have the like powers with regard to the lighting of any road in the landward area of the county not included in a special lighting district as they have with regard to roads so included, and the expenditure incurred by a county council in the exercise of the powers conferred by this section shall be defrayed out of a rate to be levied in equal proportions on owners and occupiers throughout the landward area of the county exclusive of any special lighting district.
2. (2) In this section the expression "special lighting district" means a special lighting district formed in pursuance of Section forty-four of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894.
3. (3) Section forty-nine of the Lanarkshire County Council Order, 1925, is hereby repealed.'"

The noble Earl said: This Amendment is necessary for the purpose of adaptation to Scottish legal procedure.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 34, at end insert the said new paragraph.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

The next Amendment is a similar Amendment to the last.

Amendment moved— Page 30, line 38, at end insert ("(7) Section thirty-one shall not apply").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 36, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 37 [Short title, citation, construction, commencement and extent]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 31, line 6, after ("Act") insert ("and The Road Traffic Amendment Act, 1931").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

This next also is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 31, line 7, leave out ("and") and insert ("to ").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to insert: (2) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, any reference to any other enactment shall be construed as a refer- once to that enactment as amended by any subsequent enactment, including this Act. The noble Earl said: This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 31, line 7, at end insert the said new subsection.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question Amendment agreed to.

Clause 37, as amended, agreed to.

First Schedule [Limits of speed]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

My first Amendment is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 11, leave out ("all the wheels are fitted with pneumatic tyres and the vehicle ").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

This also is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 13, after ("trailer") insert ("and if the first condition as to tyres is satisfied ").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

The next is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 17, leave out from ("and") to ("30") in line lit and insert ("if the first condition as to tyres is satisfied").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

Another drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 21, leave out from ("vehicle") to ("and") in line 23 and insert ("as respects which the first condition as to tyres is satisfied").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved, in sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 2, to leave out all words after "When not drawing a trailer" and insert:

"(a) Motor cars and motor cycles if the first condition as to tyres is satisfied; and motor cars not exceeding one ton in weight unladen and motor cycles if the second condition as to tyres is satisfied	30
(b) Motor ears exceeding one ton in weight unladen if the second condition as to tyres is satisfied	20

(c) Heavy motor cars, if the first condition as to tyres is satisfied and the vehicle—
(i) is constructed or adapted for the conveyance of horses and their attendants and used solely for that purpose; or
(ii) does not exceed five tons in weight unladen and is not fitted with a body and is not carrying any load other than that required for the purposes of testing	30
(d) Other heavy motor cars, if the first or the second condition as to tyres is satisfied	20"

The noble Earl said: This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 31, leave out from the the beginning of the line to the end of line 18 on page 33 and insert the said new paragraphs."—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

LORD DE CLIFFORD

I think an Amendment which my noble friend Lord Howe has down to the original Bill becomes an Amendment to this Amendment. Lord Howe's Amendment is designed to increase the speed limit of pneumatic tyred motor cars from twenty miles an hour to thirty miles an hour leaving the speed of solid-tyred vehicles at twenty miles an hour. Under the Bill the latter's speed is an increase from the speed under the Act of 1930 which for solid-tyred vehicles now stands at sixteen miles an hour. The effect of the Amendment is to provide the same speed of thirty miles an hour for heavy motor cars used as goods vehicles as when they are used as omnibuses and horse-boxes. There are many motor vehicles on the road to-day with the same chassis used as omnibuses and horse-boxes and also as goods vehicles, and it would seem to be a rather anomalous position. When equipped, the weight of a standard omnibus or coach chassis will often be just under ten tons or, with six-wheeled double deck omnibuses twelve tons, yet the same chassis carrying a goods vehicle is only allowed to proceed at twenty miles an hour while the omnibuses can proceed at thirty miles an hour. Another point in this respect is that the alteration of speed of heavy cars in comparison with lighter vehicles is producing a dangerous state of affairs in the matter of overloading. The- load haulier is being forced by the restriction of twenty miles an hour and the heavy tax on heavy cars to use a lighter vehicle paying a lower tax and is overloading it to a dangerous degree. I would ask the Government to consider whether the road hauliers are using safe and suitable vehicles for the loads they have to carry and which can be carried at thirty miles an hour. I hope the position will be considered carefully. I beg to move.

THE EAEL OF PLYMOUTH

I informed the Committee earlier that the Minister did not look upon the present classification of vehicles for taxation and speed purposes as stereotyped for all time, and I also assured the Committee that the Minister would be ready in future to give the fullest consideration to reasoned proposals of the industry for further modification of the Schedule, or indeed for their recasting on different lines, but, as I said then, he is not prepared at this stage to accept piecemeal Amendments in this Schedule. In those circumstances I hope that the noble Lord will accept the Amendment which I have put down on the Paper and which I have just moved.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

The next Amendment in my name is drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 33, line 20 (leave out from ("if") to ("or") in line 22 and insert ("the first condition as to tyres is satisfied").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

All the remaining Amendments in my name to the First Schedule are drafting. I beg to move.

Amendments moved—

Page 33, line 27, leave out from the beginning of the line to ("20") in line 29 and insert ("the second condition as to tyres is satisfied")

Page 33, line 30, leave out from ("if") to ("12") in line 33 and insert ("the trailer is not so attached to the drawing vehicle as aforesaid and the second condition as to tyros is satisfied")

Page 33, line 34, leave out ("In any other case") and insert ("If neither the first nor the second condition as to tyres is satisfied")

Page 33, line 40, leave out from the beginning of the line to ("12") in line 42 and insert ("the first or the second conditon as to tyres is satisfied")

Page 34, line 4, leave out from ("if") to ("20") in line 6 and insert ("the first or the second condition as to tyres is satisfied")

Page 34, line 7, after ("a") insert ("single ")

Page 34, line 8, leave out from the beginning of the line to the end of line 13 and insert:

("(i) if the first condition as to tyres is satisfied	20
(ii) if the second condition as to tyres is satisfied	12")

Page 34, line 14, at end insert: ("For the purposes of this Schedule—

1. (a) satisfaction of the first condition as to tyres means that all the wheels of the vehicle in question and. where the vehicle is drawing a trailer or trailers, of the trailer or trailers, are fitted with pneumatic tyres;
2. (b) satisfaction of the second condition as to tyres means that the first condition as to tyres is not satisfied but that each of the wheels aforesaid is fitted with one or other of the following types of tyre, namely pneumatic, soft or elastic.")—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

First Schedule, as amended, agreed to.

Second Schedule agreed to.

Third Schedule [Consequential and, minor amendments]:

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to insert in the references to the principal Act: Section twenty-seven. In subsection (4), the references to the erection and maintenance of weighbridges or other machines shall be deemed to include references to the provision and operation of weighbridges or other machines. In subsection (5), the references to the erection of weighbridges or other machines shall be deemed to include references to the provision of weighbridges or other machines.

The noble Earl said: This is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 10, at end insert the said paragraphs.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to insert: Section forty-eight. In subsection (2), after the word 'erection' there shall be inserted the words 'or retention.' In subsection (3), after the words 'no traffic signs' there shall be inserted the words '(other than traffic signs placed by a council or local authority in pursuance of an obligation imposed by or under this Act or the Road Traffic Act, 1934).' Section forty-nine. After the words 'to be followed by traffic' there shall be inserted the words 'and being of the prescribed size, colour, and type, or of another character authorised by the Minister under the last preceding section'; and the words 'in accordance with the provisions of the last preceding section' shall be omitted.

The noble Earl said: This is not entirely a drafting Amendment. It is intended to meet a particular case which has given rise to some difficulties, that of the traffic sign for which the Minister's authorisation was given only after the erection of the sign. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 21, at end insert the said paragraphs.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH moved to add to the reference to Section 57 of the principal Act: In subsection (3), after the word 'erection' there shall be inserted the words 'provision, maintenance, or operation.'

The noble Earl said: This is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 26, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

The next Amendment to this Schedule in my name is drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved—

Page 38, line 10, at end insert— ("Section one hundred and nineteen. In subsection (3), after the word ' erection ' in both places where it occurs there shall be inserted the words ' or provision'.").—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD ELTON moved to add to the Schedule: London Passenger Transport Act, 1933. At end of paragraph 1, Twelfth Schedule, add: One by the Minister after consultation with such persons as he may think fit to represent the interests of pedestrians; One by the Minister after consultation with such persons as he may think fit to represent the interests of cyclists.

The noble Lord said: This is a very brief and modest Amendment, and I think if the Minister objects to it he will object to it only on the ground that it travels perhaps a little wide of the Bill by seeking to amend the London Passenger Transport Act of 1933, although I am advised, for what it is worth, that it does not travel too wide. The point is this. There is a London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee and this Amendment seeks to add to the approximately forty representatives on that body one representative of pedestrians and one representative of cyclists. Of the forty existing representatives more than half represent local authorities. There are also on the Committee representatives of the London Passenger Transport Board, of the railway companies, of mechanically-propelled road vehicles, of horse-drawn vehicles, and of taxicabs as well as of labour employed in the industry. I think, therefore, there is some ground for claiming that those whose stake in the roads is their own lives should also have representation. There is one useful analogy, the Road and Rail Traffic Act, under which there is a Transport Advisory Council on which pedestrians and cyclists are represented. That Transport Advisory Council has within its purview matters which affect pedestrians and cyclists far less than do the matters which come under the purview of the London and Homo Counties Traffic Advisory Committee under the Act of 1933. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 39, after line 11 insert the said words.—(Lord Elton.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

It is difficult to say that anything in your Lordships' House is out of order, but I should think this Amendment gets as near that as possible. It certainly was ruled out of order in another place. To begin with the London Traffic Advisory Committee, to which this Amendment refers, has really no functions at all in relation to this Bill. It is, as a matter of fact, mentioned in Clause 1, but that is almost incidentally. I hope that the noble Lord will not press his Amendment. This was only considered a comparatively short time ago—perhaps twelve months ago. It was very care- fully debated, and Parliament, after full consideration, eventually decided upon the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee as it appears in the Schedule of that Act. I can hardly feel that we should be justified, after so short an interval, in amending that Act.

The point is this. There are 23 representatives of the local authorities and three representatives of the Police on the London Traffic Advisory Committee, and they are all concerned with the interests of pedestrians and cyclists as well as with those of all other users of the roads. It is perfectly true that separate representation is given to road users such as taxicabs, horse-drawn vehicles and mechanically-propelled vehicles, but if separate representation was given to pedestrians and cyclists as well, all the various motoring organisations would, without the slightest doubt, press for their own claims to representation to be considered. This Committee is already a Committee of considerable size—there are some forty members of it—and I venture to say that there is hardly a ease for altering its constitution after so short an interval has elapsed.

LORD ELTON

I thank the noble Earl for his explanation and beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Third Schedule, as amended, agreed to.