HL Deb 05 February 1936 vol 99 cc432-8

LORD KILMAINE had given Notice that he would call attention to the present electric service on the Southern Railway, and especially to that between London and Hastings and between Brighton and Hastings, and move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Motion which stands in my name is brought forward chiefly in the interests of the people of Hastings, St. Leonards and Bexhill. Since I put it on the Paper I have had the benefit of a communication from the representatives of Lord Olivier, who sits on the other side of the House. His part of the country, Mid-Sussex, has equally strong objections to the Southern Railway. As your Lordships know, within recent months the Southern Railway have electrified their line between Hastings and London (Victoria). We were all led to expect that when this was accomplished we in the south of Sussex would have the great benefit of a much-improved train service. These hopes, I regret to say, have not been fulfilled. In the first place, all the trains run from Hastings to London now go right out of their way to Eastbourne and then conic up to London. They are very slow trains. They take an hour to get to Haywards Heath and a further hour to get to Victoria. If conditions are not all good, they take over two hours for that journey.

Our chief grievance is against a two-coach service of electric trains which the Southern Railway has put on in the south. It runs weekdays and Sundays between Hastings and Brighton—two little coaches. It stops at every station and halt between Hastings and Eastbourne, and the same train then stops at every station and halt between Eastbourne and Brighton. It takes anything from one hour and a quarter to one hour and twenty minutes to get to Brighton. There is no lavatory accommodation whatsoever upon the train, either in the third class or in the first. I have written frequently to the superintendent of the line and have had an interview with his assistant. I have pointed out that Bexhill and St. Leonards and Hastings contain many old and infirm people as well as women and young children, and that they use the trains. I asked him: "Why is it that we had full lavatory facilities on every train that went to Brighton or anywhere else in the steam days, and now, because you have electric trains, we have them no longer? "He answered: "Oh, well, if anybody doesn't feel well, he can get out of the train at one of the stations." I ask you, my Lords! Here is a train taking an hour and a quarter. Supposing an old lady travels on it with two children, and that one of them is ill; is she to get out on a winter afternoon, with rain and wind beating on her, at a wayside station, to run about looking for accommodation that ought to be provided in the train?

Recently I have been in Brittany. I have travelled there considerably, both by ordinary trains and by auto-railcars. All these trains and cars were provided with lavatory facilities. I come back to this country and travel on the Southern Railway, and the only feeling I have is one of disgust, and pity for the people who have to put up with such a train. I have had a long interview with Mr. England, the assistant manager of the line, and lie promised to bring up the objections, which he quite saw, before his directors, but so far nothing has been done. I have therefore brought this Motion forward in the hope that something may be done and that it may be made compulsory for every railway to provide lavatory accommodation on every train making over an hour's journey.

If your Lordships will excuse my reading it, this is what Lord Olivier says. He complains very decidedly about the train service in his part of the country. Speaking of an interview I had with two friends of his yesterday, they say that they much doubt the wisdom of giving the Southern Railway a free hand to spend the Government grant as they like; it should be given subject to certain conditions. They suggest that trains leaving and arriving at the six London termini should be re-arranged and coordinated, so that each terminus can be used to its full capacity. Four pairs of metals, for fast and slow traffic, should be constructed forthwith between London and Brighton; and a similar improvement should be undertaken on the Mid- Sussex line as soon as the traffic demands it. Certain trains on the Mid-Sussex line should terminate at Waterloo instead of London Bridge. They also ask for a guarantee that the over-all times of at least four down and four up trains between London, Bognor Regis, Littlehampton and Chichester shall not exceed 1 hour 30 minutes. I apologise for reading that, but it is what the representatives of Lord Olivier have put before me. It is astonishing that a railway of that kind, dealing with places which are known to contain invalids of both sexes, old people and young children, should put on a train service with two coaches such as I have described. I earnestly hope that your Lordships will find some means of bringing pressure to bear on the Southern Railway to improve matters. I beg to move.

LORD ROCKLEY

My Lords, as no other noble Lord apparently desires to address your Lordships, I might perhaps as a senior director of the Southern Railway make a few remarks on what this House has just heard from the noble Lord. Perhaps I might begin with suggesting that the question which seems most to agitate him, that of lavatory accommodation on local trains, seems hardly one which deserves the dignity of a debate in Parliament; but putting that aside, and merely saying that it might be more suitable to bring such matters before an annual general meeting of the Railway or even to discuss it with some official of the company concerned, I will make a few observations to-night with regard to what Lord Kilmaine has said. As I understand it, his two chief complaints are that a steam journey in his neighbourhood, Bexhill, Brighton and Hastings, takes if anything longer now than it did, which is not untrue for good reasons with regard to certain trains. The other complaint which he makes is in respect of what we have heard about lavatory accommodation.

First, as regards the speed and management of trains in that district, I would point out that there are considerably more than twice as many trains under electrification than under steam. The number of services between Brighton and Bexhill has been considerably more than doubled under electric operations. It has also to be borne in mind that in all local services—they are distinct from express services—it has not been the custom of any railway in Great Britain, so far as I know, to supply lavatory accommodation where the trains have to run only for travellers of short distances and stop frequently at stations.

LORD KILMAINE

The noble Lord talks about short distances. Is he aware that it takes one and a quarter hours to travel from Brighton to Hastings and that the trains only stop at stations for about one minute or less?

LORD ROCKLEY

I do not know whether the noble Lord would suggest that such lavatory accommodation ought to be supplied, for instance, on every train on the Metropolitan and. District Railways. On such trains it is far more important to have ample seating accommodation. The general opinion of railway management is that in all such cases it is better to provide ample seating accommodation for short distance trains than this accommodation of the sort which the noble Lord desires. After all, in these matters experience is a guide. Further, if we are to go into a wider question, such as that which I think Lord Olivier has suggested to him, I hope he will bear in mind the interests of some of the railway deferred shareholders who have been paid nothing for some years owing to the extreme difficulty of making the railway services pay. What I think is most essential is the question of broad policy rather than the minor matters such as have been brought before the House.

I should have wished that all the things which our critics desire could be supplied if they were reasonable, but I am sure that the House and the noble Lord must recognise that the railways have had a very difficult time recently. They are always being pressed for increased facilities, more stations and other requirements, and the more those requests are endeavoured to be acceded to, the more difficult it becomes, in view of competition, to provide adequate facilities. I hope that some of the things which the noble Lord desires may in time, if thought of real public advantage, be given, but I am sure that in the interests of the shareholders and I need hardly say also in the interests of the public and nation quite as much, we cannot go in for these small improvements (if they be improvements) when so many large issues are at stake. I do not know that I can say much more on this Motion. I have tried to point out the lines of broad policy in railway management, and if those are administered and judged by experts I do not think there should be much to complain of.

LORD MONKSWELL

My Lords, it is with the greatest regret that I have listened to the speech of the noble Lord who has just sat down. It appears to me to be full of the ordinary excuses which I have been listening to for the whole of my life from railway officials. He might have taken every word straight from the mouth of his General Manager. I will not say more on that, but it really does fill me with regret to see that administrators who have such a company in their hands cannot rise and grasp the fact that the public are disgusted with the total lack of trouble that the officials under them take to carry out the interests of the public. Railway officials are totally indifferent to the interests of the public. They care nothing whatever except about themselves.

LORD ROCKLEY

If the noble Lord's belief is anything of this character, I can only say that his own mind is in the deepest possible fog.

LORD MONKSWELL

I disagree with the noble Lord. Take, for instance, the question of punctuality. That is utterly ignored by the railway officials, and I shall be very much interested if the noble Lord, or one of the Southern Railway Committee whom I see sitting on the Benches opposite, can tell us a little about that. What have they done about punctuality? I hear of the most extra ordinary things that are going on. I happen to have the advantage of having studied railways all my life, and I know intimately a great number of railway officials, not only in this country but in other countries. Indeed, I think I am safe in saying that I know more about railways than the whole of the Southern Railway directors sitting here to-day.

I think the sort of line that railway officials take may be well illustrated by the fact, which I believe is perfectly true, that one of the Southern Railway officials has lately, in public, given vent to the view that railway dividends have now dwindled so much that it is unnecessary to consider that railway shareholders have any longer any interest in their holdings. I was told the man's name, but I will not add anything more about it at present. That is the sort of line that these people take. I would like to repeat what I said at the beginning, that there does not seem to be the slightest conception in the minds of railway directors or officials of taking, or indeed the slightest desire to take, any real steps in the interests of the public, and I very much associate myself with everything said by the noble Lord who introduced this Motion.

THE EARL OF RADNOR

My Lords, this is not the first time that the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, has complained of the Southern Railway.

LORD MONKSWELL

It is the first time I have ever got an answer.

THE EARL OF RADNOR

Your Lords-Ships at times have had to be very patient with the noble Lord, but I think I am right in saying that elsewhere railway shareholders have not been quite so patient. The noble Lord says first of all that railway directors and railway officials have absolutely no regard for the comfort or the interests of the public, and on the other side he quotes a rather vague statement by somebody unknown that they have equally no regard for the shareholders' interests. He backs up the request of the noble Lord, Lord Kilmaine, for a doubling of the line to Brighton, which would be an extremely expensive and unnecessary undertaking. I do not quite know what he really is driving at.

LORD MONKSWELL

Perhaps I might say I had not really considered the doubling of the line to Brighton. What I really meant was the actual service that is run on the existing line.

THE EARL OF RADNOR

So far as the service on the existing line is concerned, both the noble Lord and Lord Kilmaine seem agreed that no attention is paid to the needs of the public. I have not got the figures, but a very large number of people are increasingly using the new electrified services, and that is the reason why we are finding it necessary to extend our electrification. Further, I may say that such is the increase in the use of the electrified lines that we could not possibly have carried the traffic that we carry today if those lines were still run by steam.

LORD MONKSWELL

I wish the noble Earl would amplify that. I would very much like to hear about that.

THE EARL OF RADNOR

I have stated the facts, and there is nothing I could amplify. We have been told at the annual general meeting the number of people who travel on the railway, and these questions are matters which are very much better dealt with either by the company itself or by the shareholders at the annual general meeting, and not in your Lordships' House.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH)

My Lords, I am afraid there is nothing I could usefully add on behalf of the Government. The matters we are discussing concern the detailed internal arrangements of the railway company, and I can only say that His Majesty's Government have no wish to interfere in that respect.

LORD KILMAINE

My Lords, I will withdraw the Motion, but before I do so I may say that we down in the south cannot see why facilities that were available with the steam trains are now denied us with the electric trains, which take longer. I beg leave to withdraw.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.