§ 3.24 p.m.
§ EARL HOWE had given notice that he would ask His Majesty's Government whether they are now in a position to indicate when it is proposed to bring the rationing of petrol to an end, and if not, whether they will state clearly the reasons for its continuance. The noble Earl said: My Lords, the question which I desire to ask His Majesty's Government this afternoon is one which goes a very great deal further than just the personal convenience 973 of any one of your Lordships. So far the question of petrol rationing has never been very clearly stated in either House. There have been a number of questions relating to it in another place, but, in so far as your Lordships' House is concerned, I think I am perhaps right in saying that no very clear answer has been given.
§ What a number of people in the country desire to know is, first of all, what is really the reason for petrol rationing. Is it intended to continue petrol rationing? If so, for how long? If these questions could be answered clearly, so that everybody could understand, I think it would help the ordinary man and woman very much. But the trouble is that the replies which the Government have so far been able to give about this question have not been clear and have not taken us very far. Therefore I wish to ask His Majesty's Government a few questions with which I would like them to deal if they can. It has been suggested, of course, that you do not want to remove petrol rationing because you have got a large staff employed. Some people have put that number as high as 20,000 but, according to an answer in another place, it is much lower than that, though the total is still appreciable.
§ It has also been stated from time to time that petrol rationing is still necessary because of a shortage of tankers. I wonder if that is really so. I wonder if that is the reason, and, if it is so, whether it is a fact—and this I would like to ask His Majesty's Government particularly—that tankers have been lying in the harbours for as long as three weeks, because they have been unable to discharge their cargo. My information is that that state of affairs has occurred in the past. If the Government could lay that ghost, no one would be more pleased than I. Further, it has been said that the Government are exporting oil, that oil is one of our greatest exports. Well, if oil is being exported, would it not help us all to appreciate the problem in all its implications if we could be told to what places oil is being exported and on what terms?
§ Another argument is that the demands of the Services are so great that petrol rationing cannot be removed. I should like to ask the Government: Are efforts really made in the Services to effect economies? I have here a statement made 974 in a responsible organ of the Press, which states that the writer is serving in Italy, and that he was told that the Army in Italy were burning petrol because they did not know how to get rid of it. He did not believe it, but he did go to a place where this was supposed to be happening, and found that that was the fact, that petrol was being burnt because the Army did not know how to get rid of it, and being burnt at a very appropriate place, on the slopes of Mount Vesuvius. Again, is there any hanging back on the part of the Government because they consider the possession of a motor car a luxury? That has been suggested by many people, and if in any answer given for the Government that point could be dealt with, no one would be more grateful than I. May I observe also that what is one man's luxury is another man's necessity? I therefore hope that His Majesty's Government will be able to lay that ghost.
§ There was, I believe, a Committee on Public Safety set up by the police and the Ministry of Transport, which included representatives of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. That Committee sat in 1944. Amongst its recommendations was one which suggested that the return of motor vehicles to the roads should be regulated and controlled by means of petrol rationing. Is that what we are really enduring at the present time? Lots of other people suggest, quite wrongly as I am sure they would be the first to realize if the Government would make it clear, that the Government are keen on control for control's sake. Is there some mystery about it? At any rate let us know what the facts are.
§ Then I would like to point out the sort of thing that happens. I am told you can go anywhere in London and for five shillings buy a petrol coupon. In other words, so long as this system of petrol rationing continues it gives rise to a flourishing black market. I feel that such a state of affairs is most undesirable, but at the same time it is understandable because people are being restricted in the gratification of their desires and that sort of thing. Far be it from me to defend the black market but I can quite understand how it arises, and if the Government would only give us some sort of hope that they will increase the ration—if they cannot do away with it in one go—they would do much to do away with 975 this black market. It must be remembered that at the present time small traders with delivery vans are hopelessly constricted in their movements. Several have told me that if only their allowance of petrol were greater they could do much to abolish queues. We are surely in favour of anything that does away with queues. It seems to me there may be something in that point. If the traders were able to give faster and better delivery and if they could extend their deliveries, that might do something to do away with queues. I do not feel I need say very much about that.
§ Suggestions have been made in the Press and elsewhere that we should go in for an extension of the Fido system at airfields for the landing of aircraft. I believe I am right in saying there is only one airfield at present using the Fido system, and that is at Manston. I understand that the consumption of the Fido system is 80,000 gallons of petrol an hour; in other words, enough petrol to run a 10 h.p. car for 280 years. If only the Government would consider these points and also turn their mind to what is going on abroad! I understand that Franco's Spain has done away with petrol rationing and I am sure His Majesty's Government will be anxious to follow that good example. I understand that Belgium, the Channel Islands, Sweden, and Switzerland—I cannot say about Portugal and Holland—have done away with petrol rationing. I was in France the other day and I happened to be talking with a certain member of the French Government. He informed me that there was a great urge in France to do away with petrol rationing, as there is here, but the authorities in France were holding their hand because they wanted to see what was going to be done here. I am informed that New Zealand has also done away with petrol rationing.
§ Would the Government say quite clearly what our petrol stocks are? We get a return which comes out from time to time. I have the latest published figures here but I will not weary your Lordships with them. They seem to me to show there are vast quantities of petrol being imported into this country. I cannot for the life of me see why the continuance of petrol rationing should be necessary. One feature of our petrol rationing is that 976 which involves the use of Pool petrol. Those of you on both sides of the House who are acquainted with the running of motor vehicles will know the effect of Pool petrol. You find your engine pinking, or if you leave your engine for a sufficiently long time you find the petrol pipes choked up and a gummy deposit in the petrol tank which will take any repairer quite a long time to get rid of. The whole thing is a thorough nuisance from the word "Go." If we could get back to branded petrol that would be something gained. I do not know if the noble Lord who is to reply can give us some hope there. What those of us who are interested in the matter feel is that the alleged shortage of petrol is artificial. We feel that there is any amount of petrol in the British Empire, and that there are ample supplies available largely to increase the ration or even to do away with it altogether. We feel that if the Government had really got their will behind it they could do this.
§ It must be remembered that the motor vehicle industry is really being knocked in a number of ways at the present time. The manufacturers find it difficult to produce new cars because they are told they cannot have the steel. I belong to a firm which makes heavy motor cars and at the moment we have difficulty in getting steel to make wheels for our vehicles. We have enormous orders from South America, South Africa, and all over the world, and yet very shortly we are not going to be able to get the steel to make the wheels to complete the orders. And again, the motor world is suffering from severe taxation. I am not going to dogmatize upon what the basis of taxation should be; but I want to say it is almost time that the motor vehicle owner got a break. Give him a little hope, show him a little blue sky, show him that the clouds have some sort of a lining—I will not say silver or cupro-nickel. Give him some sort of hope and he will be much better able to put up with the tiresome restrictions.
§ 3.38 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGIMy Lords, my noble friend has put up a very powerful case, as he always does, and I am sure your Lordships will await with interest the reply for the Government. I understand this is to be in the hands of my noble friend Lord Chorley, and I take 977 this opportunity of congratulating him on his elevation to the status of spokesman for the Government. I have always understood that one of the reasons why this restriction of petrol has obtained is that there is a shortage of rubber and a shortage of tyres. There may not be a shortage of rubber because I understand the rubber plantations are resuming again, but the shortage of tyres will surely prove an understandable reason. It was in order to deal with that situation that the petrol restriction was put on. My noble friend does not, I believe, speak for the Ministry of Transport on this, so I will address my remarks to the noble Lord, Lord Walkden, who does speak for that Minister.
If you are going to remove the restrictions upon petrol and tyres you are going to have a great influx of cars on the market. What is going to happen to the streets of our cities and to the roads leading thereto? That question is far more urgent than doing anything to increase the number of cars already on the roads, which are already too many for the capacity of the roads. I returned to London at the end of last week after being away for only seven weeks. To see a child grow you have to be away from it for some time and then come back. After these seven weeks—and all your Lordships who have been away for the same time will also have this experience—I noticed an extraordinary increase in the traffic in and around London. It is appalling. I could hardly get to my first engagement in the House this morning owing to a terriffic traffic block in Parliament Square, and there are traffic blocks of that sort all over this city of London. What is even more tragic is that I can see no signs of anything having been done during those seven weeks to open up the bottlenecks and to improve the means of communication. I do suggest that this is a very apposite subject to that raised by the noble Earl, Lord Howe. If you are going to have petrol rationing removed, more cars on the road and motoring facilities greatly encouraged, then you will really have to do something about the traffic facilities in this city of London and in other great cities.
During the Recess many of your Lordships took the opportunity of crossing the Atlantic. I went back to New York City after an absence of some twelve years, and I must say that I was astonished at the tremendous improvement that had 978 been made in those twelve years to the means of communication in that city. London has hardly changed, apart from war damage; very few new outlets, new exits or through roads have been made. I think in those twelve years we have had improvements made to the North Circular Road, and we have opened out Western Avenue, but within the confines of the city itself practically nothing has been done. Since I was in New York City last magnificent wide riverside drives have been put down which are linked up with a series of through roads, and there are no cross-tracks at all. The result is that they have practically solved a far worse traffic problem than we have here, because New York City for its size is a more congested area than this beautiful but sprawling city of London. They have built tunnels under the roads and bridges over the roads, all for motor traffic; they have built new bridges across the rivers, also for motor traffic, and fast roads radiate in all directions from that great city. I think they have done a wonderful job. I have already privately suggested to my right honourable friend the Minister for Transport, Mr. Barnes, in the other place, that he should send a small expert committee over there, with representatives of course of the city of London, the city of Manchester and other great cities, to see what has been done in New York. If that can be done in New York in war time, why have not we done more in the city of London?
This is not a matter for which any responsibility can be placed on the shoulders of the noble Lord, Lord Chorley, or on the shoulders of the noble Lord, Lord Walkden. I do in the most friendly manner make the suggestion that as soon as we possibly can we have got to quicken up the improvements to our communication systems within the city of London and other big cities. I know the difficulties of labour and material, but if we do not do that we will have the most appalling blockages of traffic as soon as the happy state of affairs envisaged by the noble Earl, Lord Howe, comes about. There are many complaints from the public, but I myself would suggest with great diffidence that we should think twice about encouraging a greater volume of motor traffic on the roads until we have, at any rate, begun to tackle this growing evil in all our great cities.
§ 3.43 p.m.
§ LORD CHORLEYMy Lords, I am afraid the noble Earl, Lord Howe, may be a little disappointed at the answer which I am going to give to his question. He spoke about the hopes which he entertains. Well, hope is always doomed to be disappointed, or largely disappointed. On the other hand, my noble friend Lord Strabolgi will not be disappointed, because he was apparently afraid of what might happen on the immediate withdrawal of these restrictions on the issue of petrol. The noble Earl, Lord Howe, covered a great deal of ground at a very rapid rate. Those of us who know him are perhaps rather accustomed to the speed at which he traverses a considerable area of ground and are not therefore in any way surprised. A number of the matters which the noble Earl mentioned are matters which I can assure him are very much in the mind of my right honourable friend the Minister of Fuel and Power. Other observations which he made to your Lordships were in regard to the difficulties which inevitably, to a greater or lesser extent, follow every system of rationing. We all hope that all these rationing systems may be abolished before long. He also drew attention to difficulties which crop up from time to time in this sort of connexion. Some of them are present to the mind of my right honourable friend, and I can assure the noble Earl I will bring the others to his notice.
With regard to the general question of relaxation, a statement was made on the subject of petrol rationing by my right honourable friend the Minister of Fuel and Power in another place on July 16, and as I am afraid there is no.' very much to add to that, perhaps with your Lordships' permission I may refer to what was then said. The statement is rather a long one. I do not propose to read it verbatim to your Lordships, but perhaps with your Lordships' permission I might be allowed to summarize what the Minister said. In the first place, he made it very clear that the problem was to a large extent bound up with difficulties of currency and foreign exchange. He pointed out that, although the American Loan had been ratified, we had to utilize the additional dollar credits which it has brought to us in a number of different directions, only one of which was the provision of greater quantities of petrol 980 for the users of motor vehicles in this country. He had, however, endeavoured to spread the relaxation in petrol rationing over as wide an area as possible, and he had decided to increase the basic ration by 50 per cent. Although the noble Earl suggests that there was a complete absence of blue sky, I can assure him that, during the holiday season, at any rate, many motorists regarded that as a very useful break in the clouds and profited by it to that extent. The Minister pointed out that this concession would absorb more than half the additional supplies which he was able to make available.
In regard to motor cycles the Minister was able to promise a larger increase in the case of the smaller and more economical machines. In regard to what are called the semi-essential class, to which the noble Earl made special reference, that is to say, some 330,000 cars which are used by people like commercial travellers, insurance agents and business men making deliveries, there he agreed that there had been a severe rationing of that type of user. The administrative problem of making larger supplies available for them was a somewhat difficult one, but what he had done was to increase the current issue of the S unit coupons to a value of 50 per cent., and he would consider whether he would not be able to increase the maximum allowances so as to help those categories in the greatest need. The Minister then dealt with the position of the owners of hire cars and taxi-cabs and mentioned the restrictions to which they have been subjected, of which your Lordships are aware. He said that he proposed to remove the restrictions completely and to give increased allowances of 25 per cent. in fuel—a very considerable concession.
Finally, he dealt with what is called the essential class, pointing out that very many users of vehicles in this class had received as much petrol as they required but that in other cases there had been a certain stringency in the allocation of the petrol, and that he, especially having regard to industrial requirements, was giving instructions to the regional petrol officers to make rather more generous allowances where those could be justified. That is the substance of the statement which my right honourable friend made on July 16 in another place. Since then the position has been constantly under 981 review by the Government. The importance of the matter is very clearly understood and recognized, but in present circumstances the Government are not yet able to announce any further relaxation.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, I wonder whether, with the leave of the House, I may be allowed to ask one question of the noble Lord, after thanking him very much for his reply. The question is whether he can give us any sort of forecast in regard to the future.
§ LORD CHORLEYMy Lords, I am afraid I am quite unable to add anything to the answer which I have given to the noble Earl.
§ LORD REAMy Lords, will the noble Lord explain how it is, if all these considerations which he has put before us apply, that there are these huge quantities on the black market?
§ LORD CHORLEYIt the noble Lord will give me specific details about any huge quantities of petrol on the black market, I shall be very glad to take steps to absorb some of it. The noble Earl referred to a supply of petrol which would be sufficient to run a 10 h.p. car for 280 years. I am the proud possessor of a rather old 10 h.p. car, but I can assure your Lordships that I have no intention of trying to run it for 280 years.