§ 4.28 p.m.
§ Amendments reported (according to Order).
§ Clause 1 [Schemes for provision of special roads]:
§ LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEY moved to leave out Clause 1. The noble Lord said: My Lords, your Lordships will remember that during the Committee stage of this Bill we on this side sought to insert in the Schedule of the Bill certain words to make it clear that all who might be affected by any scheme in connection with the construction of special roads, and who might desire to object, should be fully informed about the scheme in ample time. From the Government Benches it was contended that that would not be feasible, and that the Amendment, if accepted, would interfere with planning. We therefore withdrew the Amendment, and I am now moving the deletion of Clause 1 in the hope that we may hear from the noble Lord who is in charge of the Bill to-day exactly how the Ministry of Transport proceed in making these schemes, and orders under schemes, and how the interests of the parties likely to be affected are safeguarded by the procedure adopted by the Ministry. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Leave out Clause 1.—(Lord De L'Isle and Dudley.)
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF WORKS (LORD MORRISON)My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord has explained why at this late stage he has moved this Amendment. I am pleased to respond to what he has said by making a considered statement on the procedure for making a scheme authorising the provision of a special road, which will be made under this Bill when it becomes an Act of Parliament. Before a proposed scheme can be formulated, a great deal of preparatory work will be necessary, not only to determine the most suitable line of the proposed road but also to integrate the road proposals with town planning and schemes for industrial development. In the course of this work there will necessarily be close and early consultation with the various authorities and interests, private or public, in order to reconcile conflicting interests and generally to iron 928 out, so far as possible, difficulties which would otherwise lead to objections and delay to the scheme at a later stage. Apart, therefore, from visual evidence of publication of discussions at council meetings, and the activities of surveying parties, which will portend that the proposals are in the air, a general idea of what is intended will be known to local interests long before proposals are ready for the scheme stage. It is in fact the usual practice as regards the Ministry's roads to sound the reaction of land owners whose property may be affected by trunk road proposals.
The first step in the formal procedure for making a scheme is the publication of a notice in at least one local newspaper (and usually two) circulating in the neighbourhood where the special road will be situated. The notice must also be published in the London Gazette, or the Edinburgh Gazette, or both, according to the location of the road. The notice will state the general effect of the scheme and give an address where a copy of the draft scheme, and a plan showing the proposed centre line of the road, can be inspected during the following three months by anyone interested. The notice will also specify a period of three months for lodging objections with the Minister. Copies of the published notice, with copies of the draft scheme and plan, must be sent to the local authorities through whose areas the special road will run, and also, where the scheme provides for the construction of a bridge over or tunnel under navigable waters, to any navigation authority, catchment board or river board concerned.
If objection is made by any of the authorities on whom notice is served within the period prescribed, and is not withdrawn, the Minister must hold a local inquiry. In other cases where objections are made and not withdrawn, the Minister is given discretion to dispense with a local inquiry if he is satisfied that, in the circumstances of the case, an inquiry is unnecessary. For trunk road order purposes it is the Department's practice to hold an inquiry wherever substantial objections are made. After considering any objections and the result of any inquiry which is held, the Minister may make or confirm (as the case may be) the scheme, either with or without modifications. This procedure is the same as that laid down for the making of trunk road 929 orders. Experience over the past twelve years gives every reason to think that it works satisfactorily in practice, and that it brings proposals to the notice of all persons and bodies likely to wish to object. The inquiry proceedings are of an informal nature and the Minister's representatives are there to clarify points of detail, so far as they can at that stage.
In any event, however, details of proposed works for side road junctions with the special road, and alterations to side roads, will form the subject of a separate order under Clause 3 for the making of which the same procedure as set out above, as regards newspaper notices, service of notice on local authorities, navigation authorities and so on, and the lodging of objections and the holding of inquiries, must be followed. Interested persons can ascertain fairly closely the land which will be required for the scheme by inspecting the plan showing the centre line of the road and by asking questions at the inquiry. The procedure for acquiring the land, however, is separate and self-contained. If compulsory acquisition is necessary, the procedure of the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) Act, 1946, must be followed: this provides for the service of notices on all owners and tenants of the land, for the lodging of objections and the holding of a public inquiry if objections are not withdrawn. If the terms of purchase, including accommodation works, cannot be agreed, the matter is referable to arbitration under the Acquisition of Land (Assessment of Compensation) Act, 1919. I hope that that statement will be satisfactory to the noble Lord.
§ LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEYMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his clear and complete statement of the procedure which is followed. I am particularly glad to notice that it is the practice of the Ministry of Transport to have informal consultation with land owners before a scheme is propounded. I hope that they will always be extremely careful to consult small as well as great land owners because often those with a small interest in land have not such good facilities for informing themselves of these matters as have those with larger estates. Later on during this Report stage, my noble friend Lord Llewellin will be moving an Amendment which lays down that the proposed centre line of the 930 road should be included in a scheme. When we couple that Amendment with the statement which the noble Lord, Lord Morrison, has just made, I think we may feel reasonably well satisfied that the interests of those affected by a scheme will be adequately safeguarded. In the circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 4:
§ Restriction on laying of mains, etc., in special roads
§ 4.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the powers conferred on statutory undertakers by or under any enactment to lay down or erect any apparatus on, under or over any land shall not be exercisable in relation to any land comprised in the route of a special road except with the consent of the special road authority:
§ Provided that the consent of the special road authority shall not be required under this section for the laying down or erection by statutory undertakers of any apparatus by way of renewal of any apparatus for the time being vested in or belonging to them.
§ (5) Where the consent of a special road authority is required under this section in respect of apparatus to be laid down or erected otherwise than as mentioned in subsection (3) of this section, and the special road authority are a local highway authority, the statutory undertakers may appeal to the Minister against any refusal of that consent or any condition subject to which that consent is granted, and the Minister may make such order as he thinks fit.
§ 4.38 p.m.
§
EARL HOWE moved, in subsection (1) to omit all words after "special road" (where that term first occurs) and to insert:
but statutory undertakers may lay down or erect by way of renewal any apparatus laid down or erected before the special road was constructed or became a special road and for the time being vested in or belonging to them.
§ Provided that in the case of apparatus so laid down or erected by way of renewal—
- (a) along the line of route of the special road the apparatus shall be laid down or erected elsewhere than ender or on the carriageway and shall be placed as far distant as practicable from the centre line of the special road; and
- (b) across the route of the special road the apparatus shall except where laid down or erected on a bridge be placed in a subway or culvert under the special road."
§ The noble Earl said: The purpose of the two Amendments which appear in my name on the Marshalled List at this 931 point is quite simple. We want to avoid the possibility of the road surface of these new special roads being pulled up by public undertakers in order to get pipes or cables, or whatever it may be, across the roads. These roads will probably be used more by heavy commercial traffic than by any other sort of traffic. We know that the cost of these roads will work out at something like £160,000 a mile. They will require extremely complicated and very special foundations, probably involving the use of reinforced concrete. The deeper the foundations go, the more breaking-up will take place, and the more difficult it will be to repair the surface.
§ I am pleading with the Government to say that when a public undertaking want to take a pipe or main across a road, they must take it either over or under. I can see no reason why an electric cable cannot be taken across a special road on a special bridge or, if it be a pipe, taken under the road by a special culvert. I cannot see any reason why the Government cannot accept this Amendment or, if this does not quite fit, something on these lines. Alternatively will they give the House a definite assurance that the Minister is not going to allow any undertaking to dig up the road surface to lay cables or drains? Digging up a special road would damage it to such an extent that we would never get it right afterwards.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 11, leave out from the first ("road") to the end of line 17, and insert the said new words.—(Earl Howe.)
§ LORD LLEWELLINMy Lords, as I have an Amendment later on dealing with exactly the same point, but in rather a different way, perhaps it would be convenient if we could discuss the two Amendments together and then, if it were thought that my solution was the better one, I would formally move my Amendment. I think we are all agreed that we want the minimum of pipes and cables under the carriageways of the special roads. We all deplore the sight of one statutory undertaking after another, coming along and digging up a bit of a road, so that when one has relaid the surface another comes along and digs it up again. It is alarming to think how much these special roads are to cost. When one thinks of the cost of the railways, even 932 with stations, it is difficult to realise that the special roads will cost even more.
We are all agreed that the last thing we want is to have pipes or mains going down the length of the road. That is the silliest place to put them. In some cases it will be necessary for them to go across the road; we cannot have a special road from London to Bristol without some undertakings having to lay drains or cables across the road. The special road cannot be a concrete "curtain," preventing anything going from one side to the other. I do not like the wording of the Bill as drafted because in some cases, though possibly not many, the special road authority might be the undertaker responsible for these public utilities. In my view, the decision about the laying of pipes or mains should not be in the same hands. Therefore, my Amendment says that in no case shall this be done except with the consent of the Minister. It will be the Minister who is paying out most of the money and it is in his interest not to waste that money. I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Howe, that the surface of a road is never the same once it has been dug up: it is always a patched-up affair. If my Amendment were acceptable to the Government, and we were told that only in the most exceptional cases would the Minister allow the apparatus of any statutory undertakers to run down the length of the road, and would allow their apparatus to cross it only when absolutely necessary—and then in a culvert or some other special means—and if we were assured that the decision would rest in the Minister's hands, I think that would go a long way to meet the point raised from this side of the House, upon which I believe we are all agreed.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, the impression I have after this brief discussion is that there is very little between any of us in this matter. The only difference between the noble Earl, Lord Howe, who has great experience of this kind of thing, and myself, is that he is not prepared to make any allowance for exceptional cases. He wants to close the door altogether. I do not know whether the noble Earl visualises a time when there might be a Minister of Transport who would be careless and allow these roads to be broken up, but I think he will agree that we are all very much opposed to that, not only because it is a stupid thing to do, but because it is extremely expensive. I gladly 933 give an assurance that it will normally be the practice to insist that mains be put on the verges of special roads, if they must go along the road at all. The situation might well arise, however, when the circumstances leave no alternative to laying a main in the carriageway and when the importance of the apparatus and the balance of the national advantage compel exceptional departure from the general practice. The point I want to make is that there are exceptional cases.
Between the points of view of the noble Earl and myself, representing the Government, is interposed the Amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, the effect of which is that a local special road authority cannot themselves give permission for the laying of mains under the carriageway or motorway and that such permission must come from the Minister. That meets the point which the noble Earl has just argued, that there might be a local authority who were in effect giving themselves permission to break up a roadway. The noble Lord's Amendment has been considered by the Government, and I am authorised to say (I say it now, though the noble Lord has not yet moved his Amendment, in the hope that it will meet the point of the noble Earl, Lord Howe) that if the noble Earl is willing to withdraw his Amendment, when Lord Llewellin moves his Amendment I will accept it on behalf of the Government.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord very much for his answer, before I say anything specifically in reply to it I should like to draw attention to the fact that he has just made one announcement, for the first time. He has said that in special circumstances it might be necessary to take the apparatus of a public undertaking along a special road. Up to now, the discussion has been mainly about the works of public undertakers crossing the road. I am in a position of considerable difficulty in this matter. I feel certain that the present Ministry of Transport, and the staff of that Ministry, would rigidly set their face against anything of the sort. But the trouble is that Ministers come and go. We have now the right honourable gentleman Mr. Barnes, but to-morrow we might have (who shall I say?) Lord Llewellin or Lord De L'Isle and Dudley. I do not know whether I 934 could trust them! I give that merely as an illustration of what I mean. Is it really necessary to allow these works to go along the road, as well as across it? The replies up to now have always been that where they go along the road they will be on the strip at the side.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I think the answer to that is, first, that no Minister of Transport will ever be quite suitable to the noble Earl. The principle which I have indicated would be abandoned only in a most exceptional case, as I endeavoured to say. The noble Earl, by his Amendment, shuts and locks the door and throws the key in the canal so that nobody can find it and reopen the door! The Government view is that we must be prepared at some time for an exceptional case, and that this must be provided for. If we incorporate the noble Earl's Amendment it will be impossible to deal with the exceptional case.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, I understand that reply, although I regret it very much. I am very nervous about this point. The noble Lord must remember that the reply he has just given in the case of Clause 1 gives public, undertakers ample opportunity to know the exact line of a route, to object to it and to make all their proposals known in regard to it. Therefore, there will be little enough excuse for anything of this sort happening. However, having regard to what the noble Lord has said in relation to Lord Llewellin's Amendment, I beg leave to withdraw mine.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, I desire to move in a slightly different form from that in which it appears on the Marshalled List the next Amendment in my name.
After the words "subway under" I would like to add "or bridge over." The purpose of this Amendment is the same as that of the previous one—to take the apparatus either over or under the road. There is no difficulty where it is an electric main or a water main. It can as easily be taken over a special road as under it in a culvert. I do not know whether the noble Lord has anything to say on this. I beg to move.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 5, line 18, leave out from the beginning to the end of line 32, and insert—
(2) Statutory undertakers may with the consent of the special road authority lay down or erect apparatus along a line crossing the route of the special road provided that the apparatus is placed in a culvert or subway under or bridge over the special road and such consent may be given subject to conditions other than a condition requiring any payment to be made by the undertakers to the special road authority in respect of the exercise of the powers to the exercise of which the consent is given and that authority shall not withhold their consent under this section unless there are special reasons for doing so.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords I can add very little to what I have already said, because this covers a similar point to the Amendment with which we have just dealt. As a general rule, the object and the intention is not to allow the roadway to be broken up for this purpose. The mains need not necessarily go in a culvert or a subway under the road. For example, electricity cables might be slung on pylons over the road, and pipes might be carried over on bridges carrying side roads, where conveniently situated, or by an individual pipe bridge. In the vast generality of cases means will be found of taking mains across special roads suitable to the type of main, and to the circumstances of the case without interfering with the carriageway, but we cannot entirely rule out the possibility of there being an exceptional case. It is the same point.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
LORD LLEWELLIN moved, in subsection (5) to leave out all words from and including "the statutory undertakers" down to "and", and to insert:
then—
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already given my reasons for this Amendment, and I formally beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 5, leave out from ("authority") to ("and") in line 7 and insert the said new words.—(Lord Llewellin.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, it may save time if I say that the Government accept this Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this Amendment and the next are drafting Amendments. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 14, after ("Scotland") insert ("in subsection (4)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 6, line 15, after ("of") insert ("that"); leave out ("(4)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 10 [Additional powers of acquiring land for special roads]:
§ LORD MORRISON moved to leave out subsection (1) and to insert in its place:
§ "(1) Subject to the provisions of this section the power of a special road authority to acquire land under section thirteen of the Restriction of Ribbon Development Act, 1935, shall include power to acquire any land which in the opinion of the authority is required—
- (a) for the improvement of an existing road which is included in the route of the special road but has not been transferred to the authority by an order under this Act;
- (b) for the purposes of any order made in relation to the special road under section three of this Act; or
- (c) for the provision of service stations or other buildings or facilities to be used in connection with the construction of the special road or the use or maintenance thereof.
§ (2) A special road authority shall not be enabled by virtue of this section to acquire otherwise than by agreement any land lying more than two hundred and twenty yards from the middle of the special road or, where the land is required for the construction, improvement or alteration of any other road, from the middle of that other road."
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, this rather long Amendment arises from the fact that in Committee the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, promised to consider the possibility of including an Amendment which would lay down that land beyond a certain distance from the centre of the road could not be acquired, even for the purposes of subsection (1) (b) of this clause. The effect of this Amendment is that, while retaining the purposes for 937 which the land acquisition powers of subsection (1) (a) and (1) (b) may be used, it is made clear that the clause does not enable a special road authority to acquire, except by agreement, any land situated more than 220 yards from the middle of the special road, or, where the land is required for the construction or alteration of a side road, more than 220 yards from the middle of the side road. Land required for service stations and so on must also be within 220 yards from the middle of the special road, unless it is acquired by agreement.
§ The land acquisition powers of a special road authority will therefore differ from those of a highway authority for ordinary highway purposes under Section 13 of the Restriction of Ribbon Development Act, 1935, only in two respects. First, land can be acquired for the construction or alteration of roads for which another authority is at the moment the highway authority—normally, of course, a highway authority can acquire land only for their own roads. Secondly, land can be acquired for service stations, and so on. I hope that noble Lords opposite will be prepared to agree to this Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 6, leave out subsection (1) and insert the said new subsections.—(Lord Morrison.)
§ LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEYMy Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord opposite, and to his friends, for having found it possible to modify the very wide powers in the Bill as originally drafted and as it came to us from another place.
It seems to us reasonable that a limit should be set to the powers of acquisition of land by the Minister of Transport. Theoretically, at any rate, as the Bill was drafted he had powers to widen the North Road from the East Coast to the West Coast. We gratefully accept this Amendment, and tender our thanks to the noble Lord.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the last one. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 11, line 24, leave out ("as aforesaid by") and insert ("by virtue of this section by a special road authority being").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
938§ 4.59 p.m.
§ LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEY moved to omit Clause 10. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the House will recollect that in our former discussions on this Bill we on this side of the House were rather concerned about the provision of accommodation works so that land, and particularly agricultural land, should not be permanently adversely affected to a greater degree than was entirely necessary. It was conceded, I think, by the Government that a special road—a motorway—must form an almost impenetrable barrier across the countryside, because of the restrictions placed upon the user of the road by all except a limited class of vehicles. Therefore, in our view, it is highly important that adequate accommodation works should be provided in order, for example, that farmers may pass their implements as freely as possible front one side of the road to the other by means of bridges or creeps. The Government might pay adequate compensation to the owner or tenant of the land for the disturbance, but we were afraid that there might be neglect to provide adequate accommodation works, and thus the land, and particularly agricultural production, would permanently suffer. We attempted to limit that defect by moving in Committee an Amendment, which, however, did not prove acceptable to the Government. Therefore, at this stage I formally move the deletion of this clause, so that the Government may have an opportunity of stating their views upon the matter and informing us of the policy of the Ministry of Transport particularly in relation to compensation and accommodation works. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Leave out Clause 10.—(Lord De L'Isle and Dudley.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I hope the very brief statement that I shall make will meet with the approval of the noble Lord opposite. It is the desire of the Minister of Transport that improvement of the highway system should be as little as possible at the expense of agricultural land, amenities or other land valuable to the community. To this end it is an established routine that there should be, in connection with proposals for highway improvement, especially improvement of the trunk road system, close consultation between the Ministry 939 of Transport and the Ministries of Agriculture and of Town and Country Planning, both regionally and centrally. Moreover, it is the practice of the Ministry of Transport, when negotiating the acquisition of land, to agree to meet more or less of the total compensation due to owner or tenant in the form of such accommodation works—cattle creeps, drainage, fencing and so on—as may be reasonably required to minimise or eliminate any severance or injurious affection caused to the owner or tenant by the purchase of his land for road works. Negotiations with owners on this point have, in the Ministry's experience, nearly always proved satisfactory, and it is the experience of the Ministry that owners or tenants very rarely resort to the arbitration procedure on compensation that is available to them. There is no intention of departing from present practice in these respects, and, so far as can be foreseen, what has proved in the past a satisfactory policy for trunk roads will continue to be the best policy for trunk roads and for special roads and, as such, will continue to be followed.
§ LORD LLEWELLINMy Lords, we are obliged to the noble Lord for that statement. What one has always to bear in mind is that if a farm is being severed and a lump sum in money is paid as compensation for that severance, that money may be used for any purpose. Such a payment may not be so effective for the continued proper cultivation of the land as making a proper creep or bridge, so that the farm buildings built for an acreage of that size may still cover that area of land, and there may be access from one side to another. I was glad to hear that the policy of the Ministry, in all practical cases, is to try and satisfy that claim for severance by providing those accommodation works. I think we all realise that that is the right way of doing it.
§ LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEYMy Lords, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 12:
§ Provisions as to use of special roads
§ (2) The Minister may make regulations with respect to the use of special roads, and such regulations may, in particular— 940
- (a) regulate the manner in which and the conditions subject to which such roads may be used by traffic of the classes authorised in that behalf by a scheme under section one of this Act;
- (b) authorise, or enable such authority as may be specified in the regulations to authorise, the use of such roads, on occasion or in emergency or for the purpose of crossing, or for the purpose of securing access to premises abutting on or adjacent to the roads, by traffic other than such traffic as aforesaid, or relax or enable any such authority as aforesaid to relax any prohibition or restriction imposed by the regulations.
§
EARL HOWE moved, in subsection (2) (b) after the first "roads" to insert:
except roads authorised to be used by traffic of Class I or Class II or both of those classes.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Amendment is proposed in order that the special roads authorised by this Bill shall not be made more dangerous by having anything in the nature of level crossings for the use of general road traffic. As we see it, under Clause 12 (2) (b) it would be possible to permit the use of level crossings by all classes of traffic, including horse drawn vehicles and cattle. Many attempts have been made during previous stages of the Bill to try to clarify this position, but so far nothing very definite has been said. On the Committee stage, the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, speaking for the Government, said:
I can obtain more information about the sort of provision which highway authorities have in mind for inclusion in a regulation that they might make for this purpose, and that information I will obtain before the next stage of the Bill.
We want to know a little more about it. If level crossings for ordinary traffic are envisaged by this Bill, we think they will be just as dangerous as they would be on a railway, and just as much a nuisance in the general hold-up of traffic. In fact, they would very largely nullify the value of a special road. We hope that the Government will be able to tell us what they have in mind. If they do not mean to have level crossings for ordinary traffic, then there is no need for my Amendment. Perhaps the noble Lord will be able to tell us more. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 12, line 35, after ("roads") insert the said words.—(Earl Howe.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, first of all, may I tell the noble Earl why it is impossible to accept this Amendment? The reason is that it is too sweeping. As we are old friends, the noble Earl will forgive me for saying that, because he probably knows more about the motor industry and motor driving than most of us in your Lordships' House. The noble Earl may have heard the question which I have often heard: "How do you tell a good motor driver?" The answer is: "By the way in which he handles an emergency." Similarly, I would ask, "How do you know that an Act of Parliament is a good Act?" The answer is: "By the way in which it can be applied in an emergency."
Under the noble Earl's Amendment, the Act could not apply in an emergency at all. His proposal would make it impossible in any circumstances to divert other traffic on to the special road. The noble Earl knows that there may be exceptional circumstances—the road may be flooded. There may be a number of other uses which can be included in the words "on occasion." On occasion there may be a visit by a member of the Royal Family, and it may be necessary to divert the traffic. If this Amendment were accepted, it would be quite impossible to meet these exceptional emergencies which would arise. So far as I understand the Bill—and I have come into the discussions only during the later stages—at certain points it may be necessary to have what the noble Earl calls a crossing, in order to provide in exceptional cases an opportunity for people to cross. The noble Earl has to look ahead and realise that these motor roads may cover areas where the population is not very dense. It would be extraordinary, for instance, in the County of Sutherland, where the population is eight per square mile, if, because one person wanted to cross the road once a week to visit the grocers, we had to make a tunnel or a bridge to enable him to get across the road. It is because the noble Earl's Amendment would close the door entirely to these exceptional circumstances that I am unable to accept it.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, I can quite see that, in special circumstances, side roads may be banned to some organisation which says, "Mosley shall not pass," and they may have a battle over it. In 942 that case, it may be necessary to divert ordinary traffic on to special roads. When the noble Lord asks us to go to Sutherland and envisage a special road going all round Sutherland and the North of Scotland, is he really serious? As I understand it, the enormous expense of constructing these special roads will be justified only if it is possible to use them for heavy commercial traffic, and plenty of it. In those cases I am certain that they will pay their way.
But the noble Lord's reply raises in my mind a much more serious question. Are the Government really serious about the safety of the highway, or are they not? If they are serious, and particularly in regard to these special roads, they will see to it that neither pedestrian crossings nor crossings for ordinary traffic are allowed on them. What I suggest is that where a crossing has to be made, it should be taken either over the road or under it by some fly-over or fly-under junction. To have ordinary crossings for pedestrians and traffic will be to invite disaster, and there will be many casualties because the traffic will, be moving at a very high speed. The more exceptional the circumstances, the more will be the danger. I beg the noble Lord to consider the question of public safety. If people are to be allowed to emerge from a gap in the hedge or something of that kind, the next demand would be for some form of lights or other signals, and the whole idea of the special road would be nullified at once. Surely the noble Lord can give us a more practical answer than he has done so far. I do not regard it as being a good answer from the point of view of public safety, and I ask him to give the matter further consideration.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I can speak again only by leave of the House. The noble Lord's Amendment refers to the bringing of slow-moving traffic on to the roads, and his speech dealt with pedestrians. It will be a general rule that bridges or tunnels will be supplied for pedestrians. But, as I have said before, the Government have a duty to make provision in purely exceptional cases, and the same thing applies to this slow-moving traffic. There may be cases in which persons or slow-moving vehicles are obliged to come on to the road; there may be a fire at a petrol 943 station, and an old-fashioned hand-propelled fire engine has to be brought on the road to deal with it. Under the noble Lord's Amendment this could not be done without breaking the law. The same thing applies to any road repair vehicle that may come on to the road to assist a vehicle that has broken down. These are the exceptional cases, and I must emphasise again that the Government desire to cover only exceptional cases which might arise.
§ EARL HOWEI thank the noble Lord very much for having said what he has, but I regard his reply as most unsatisfactory. However, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ 5.13 p.m.
§ EARL HOWE moved, in subsection (2) (b), to omit "on occasion or." The noble Earl said: My Lords, I move this Amendment in order that the Government may have an opportunity of explaining precisely what they mean by the words "on occasion or." According to my dictionary the word "occasion" means "in case of need; as opportunity offers; from time to time"; and each of those definitions envisages a different type of situation. So far as this Bill is concerned the occasion may differ; it may be children going to school, or a farmer going to market, or cows being driven, or a doctor taking a short cut to save time, or a shopkeeper on his daily round. If the noble Lord can give us an idea what he means by the words I have mentioned, I shall not—if his answer is satisfactory—press my Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 12, line 35, leave out ("on occasion or").—(Earl Howe.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, one of the purposes which Clause 12 (2) (b) is intended to cover is the use of a special road by vehicles not included in the authorised classes of traffic, which must occasionally use the road for road repair and maintenance purposes or for the repair of statutory undertakers' apparatus along the road. It may also be necessary to allow unauthorised traffic to use part of the special road on some rare or special occasions when the side roads are temporarily not available, for example, 944 during a Royal visit. If the Amendment were made, these intentions would be defeated, and, therefore, I am unable to accept it.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 14 [Amendments of law relating to trunk roads]:
§ LORD MORRISON moved, in subsection (2) to omit "lying more than two hundred and twenty yards from the middle of the trunk road." The noble Lord said: My Lords, the next two Amendments are to bring Clause 14 (2) into line with the Amendment to Clause 10, page 11, line 6, which imposes a 220-yard limit on the land acquisition powers given by Clause 10. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 14, line 19, leave out from ("land") to ("which") in line 21.—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I beg to move this Amendment.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 14, line 26, at end insert:
Provided that the Minister shall not be enabled by virtue of this section to acquire otherwise than by agreement any land lying more than two hundred and twenty yards from the middle of the trunk road or, where the land is required for the construction, improvement or alteration of any other road, from the middle of that other road."—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 16 [Supplementary provisions as to procedure]:
§
LORD LLEWELLIN moved, after subsection (2), to insert:
(3) Regulations made under this section shall provide for securing that the centre line of the special road authorised by any scheme under section one of this Act shall be indicated on a map on such scale as may be prescribed by the regulations.
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, on Committee stage my noble friend Lord De L'Isle and Dudley moved an Amendment to the First Schedule which would have required the Ministry to give considerable information in regard to the proposed road at the Inquiry stage. I think it has been agreed between us that 945 some of the information that he asked for would not have been available by the time we were ready to have the Inquiry—if there is to be one—under the First Schedule of this Bill. However, it seems to me that there certainly ought to be in the Bill a requirement that the centre line of the special road should be indicated on a map of a reasonable scale. Under the First Schedule of the Bill, a man has a right, if he wishes—as, indeed, have county and other authorities—to ask for the lines of the road to be deflected for some particular reason. It will help those people very much if they can at the outset know where the centre line is going to be. The Ministry must presumably have the information at the Inquiry stage, or else the special road authority will have it. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 16, line 37, at end insert the proposed subsection.—(Lord Llewellin.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I am glad to be able to accept this Amendment, and to add that in practice this map will be appended to the draft scheme which paragraph I (b) of the First Schedule requires to be made available for inspection.
§ LORD LLEWELLINI am much obliged to the noble Lord.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 19:
§ Financial provisions
§ 19.—(1) There shall be defrayed out of the Road Fund—
- (a) all expenses incurred by the Minister with the approval of the Treasury under this Act in the construction, maintenance, repair or improvement of roads;
- (b) any sums required by the Minister for making advances in respect of special roads under section eight of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909;
- (c) such other expenses of the Minister under this Act (not being administrative expenses) as may be determined by the Minister with the consent of the Treasury.
§
EARL HOWE moved to add to subsection (1):
Provided that where the expense of the construction or improvement of a special road to be incurred by the Minister under paragraph (a) of this subsection and to be defrayed out of the Road Fund exceeds an estimated amount of £100,000 one-half of the sum approved by the Treasury for that purpose under that paragraph shall be raised by bor
946
rowing on the security of the Road Fund and the approval of the Treasury to such borrowing shall be deemed to be sufficient authority for the expenditure by the Minister of the money so borrowed without further or other approval by the Treasury.
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a point that I dealt with on Committee stage. In reply, the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, said that he would draw the Minister's attention to it and would give me an answer on Report stage. As the position stands at the moment, as I think is clear, the Minister has no power to borrow for the purposes of road construction. Therefore, some such wording as I have submitted in my Amendment would be required in order to empower the Minister to raise any portion of the amount. The reason why I put this point forward is probably obvious to your Lordships. Nothing is more pathetic than to see road works started and then stopped. A good instance of that, of which I am sure everybody must be aware, was the Western Avenue, which got a certain way, and then took another fifteen to twenty years before the work was completed. During all that time, the preliminary work which had been undertaken was, of course, deteriorating. Another instance, perhaps also known to your Lordships, is close to the village of Hand Cross where the work is still incomplete. There is another instance of the same sort on the Great North Road, not far from Catterick. There are plenty of these instances up and down the country.
§ I submit that, wherever road work is started and is not brought to completion, it means that the whole construction of the road is uneconomic and is not being considered on a business-like basis. Where work is started upon one of these special roads, even if money becomes tight, provided that the construction is partially financed by loan it will be possible to go ahead with the work on a reduced scale until money becomes available once more. I am certain that that is the way in which any business firm would approach it. I feel sure that the bulk of local authorities would wish to approach it in the same way. I hope that the noble Lord will give me one small crumb of comfort. He has just given the noble Lord, Lord Llewellin, something out of the bag; perhaps he may try to give me a little too! I beg to move.
947
§
Amendment moved—
Page 17, line 36, at end insert the said proviso.—(Earl Howe.)
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, I can promise the noble Earl, Lord Howe, that before the proceedings on this Bill are over, he will get great comfort; but not on this Amendment. The effect of his Amendment would be that in the event of an emergency of any kind arising—for example, an economic blizzard striking this country, as happened in 1931; or in the event of war breaking out, or any first-class emergency occurring—everything else would be handicapped, hampered and held up, but motor roads, upon which the noble Earl, as we all know, is so keen, would still continue to be constructed. Obviously, that would be an impossible position, whatever Government might be in power. If something happened in the world which made it necessary for drastic changes to be effected, it would be unreasonable to expect that cuts and stoppages would be made in everything except motor roads. For that reason, the Government are unable to see why they should treat motor roads in an exceptional way and allow them to proceed to completion while other capital works, some of which might be of even greater national importance, had to be halted. It is for that reason that I regret we cannot accept this Amendment. The noble Earl has had an unlucky afternoon up to now, but I think I shall be able to oblige him in a moment.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, put in the way that the noble Lord has put it, my Amendment is absurd; but he has taken a very extreme illustration of that sort of thing. As to my crumb of comfort, what I would ask him is this. Can be not tell me that it will be the policy of the Department, so far as can be foreseen, with all special circumstances for the moment put on one side, not to leave one of these special roads in the condition in which the Western Avenue was left for so long—it does not matter whether a Tory Government or a Socialist Government are in power—to ensure that such roads are not left in an incomplete state, suffering deterioration the whole time? If the noble Lord could give me some assurance like that, I should be most grateful.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, any assurance that I could give would not be 948 of much value. The assurance will have to be given by the electors generally.
§ LORD LLEWELLINMy Lords, I would not be content with that. I may tell the noble Earl, Lord Howe, that the Western Avenue was not deteriorating at all during those years. It had a perfectly good surface, but it did not go the whole way; that was the only difficulty. It was of the greatest possible use to me because it went just as far as my constituency—and no farther! Therefore, it was not largely used by other traffic. In those ways, I found it a most convenient road. On the other hand, we all agree that there were difficulties about finishing the road at that time, but I think that everybody would be at one with the noble Earl in saying that one ought not to start a road unless it was intended to finish it.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Third Schedule [Orders under Trunk Roads Act, 1946, to be treated as schemes under this Act]:
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this is where I pay my humble tribute and offer my congratulation to the noble Earl, Lord Howe. This Amendment ought not to be down in my name at all, but in his. This and the next three Amendments that I shall move are similar to those which were withdrawn on Committee stage by the noble Earl, Lord Howe, on the understanding that Government Amendments to cover the point would be made on Report stage. The noble Earl's Amendments, as he had them, were incorrectly located. The Amendments add popular names to the official descriptions of the roads in the Third Schedule. The names adopted are those suggested by the noble Earl, Lord Howe, except that "Haysgate to Crick" is used instead of "Chepstow to Crick." The latter description is misleading, since the road will not start near Chepstow. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 28, line 18, column 2, at end insert ("(Stevenage By-pass, County of Hertford)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, I have to thank the noble Lord very much for what he has said, and for the way he has met me in this Amendment.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
949§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this Amendment is drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 28, line 21, column 2, at end insert ("(Severn Bridge, Counties of Gloucester and Monmouth)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this again is drafting. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 28, line 31, column 2, at end insert ("(Haysgate to Crick, County of Monmouth)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MORRISONMy Lords, this also is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 28, line 34, column 2, at end insert ("(Newport By-pass, County of Monmouth)").—(Lord Morrison.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.