TRANSPORT CHARGES, &c. (MIS CELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL (Hansard, 26 July 1954)

§ THE EARL OF SELKIRK

My Lords, with a Miscellaneous Provisions Bill it is generally not very easy to give a coherent picture of the purposes of the Bill. At the same time I think that it is possible to give certain general considerations which arise under it. The object of this Bill is, on the one hand, to bring within a common system the machinery for the determination of fares in all forms of road transport—that is, buses, trams and trolley buses, and, on the other hand, to bring independent railways under the same general system for determining charges which applies in the case of the British Transport Commission. In order to do this, it is necessary to repeal a very large number of both private and general Statutes, going back over a century. Many of these will be seen in the Schedule.

The Bill will have the further advantage of dispensing with the need for employing Defence Regulations in regard to transport charges which have been extensively used by Ministers of Transport over the last fifteen years. Under the present system, the Minister may be requested to use his powers under Defence Regulations to authorise fares for most undertakings at one time or another mentioned in this Bill. If he had not been able to use these powers, the only alternative would have been Private Acts of Parliament. I think I can add, further, that the general system proposed here not only is much simpler but has the advantage of being known and, so far as road transport is concerned, to have been proved successful in operation over some twenty-five years. And it was recognised as being successful by the recent Report of the Thesiger Committee. Finally, I think I can say that this Bill has a very wide measure of agreement, if not indeed complete agreement, in regard to the objects which it has in mind. Perhaps I might make one general remark. In transport there is always the very real problem of correlating the interests of the general public who travel with those of the transport undertakings, some of which have a monopolistic position, and many of which have built for 20 themselves a position of some advantage. Experience shows, I think, that this applies to some extent even to municipal authorities.

The purpose of this Bill is to provide, where possible, fair competition, and thereby to ensure the best service for the public in the varying circumstances of different localities. I might add that none of the undertakings run directly by the British Transport Commission is concerned in the Bill, but some undertakings run indirectly, perhaps through a majority shareholding, will be affected, but only if such undertaking is a statutory undertaking. Clause 1 deals exclusively with statutory bus operators. In many cases the maximum charges have been fixed by Act of Parliament, and with rising costs the operators have had to make applications to the Minister as necessary to use his powers under Defence Regulation 56. We propose in this clause that these statutory undertakings should be subject to the general control of the licensing authority in respect of fares. The effect of this will be to make statutory and non-statutory undertakings controlled under the same authority. Clause 2 deals with trams and trolley buses which, by their nature, are all statutory vehicles and, accordingly, do not require a road service licence and are not subject in any way to the licensing authority. Here, too, the undertakings, when they have found it necessary to increase their fares above the statutory limit, have had to make repeated applications to the Minister to use his powers under Defence Regulation 56. If they had not been able to do so, an Act of Parliament would have had to be promoted.

In practice, what has happened has been this. Supposing that a statutory authority running buses and trams and trolley buses wanted to raise their fares above the maximum laid down by the Statute controlling them, the following situation might arise. First, they would apply to the local licensing authority to increase the fare for their buses under the road service licence. Secondly, if the licensing authority agreed to a fare exceeding the statutory maximum they would then have to go to the Minister and ask him to use his powers under the Defence Regulation. The Minister, in his turn, would then ask the licensing authority to advise him on what was fair 21 and just. Thirdly, the local authority or the undertaking might simultaneously ask for an increase above the maximum statutory limit for trolley buses and trams. They would make this application to the Minister to use his powers under the Defence Regulation, and he again, in his turn, would ask the advice of the licensing authority. This would mean, in practice, that one person would be performing three functions simultaneously. We think that this is a cumbersome system, and we propose to introduce a much simpler method, and at the same time to get rid of war-time regulations.

So far as fares are concerned, trams, and trolleys will come ender the licensing authority in much the same way as buses. The manner in which licensing authorities will exercise their powers and duties is laid dowel in the First Schedule. The procedure is almost exactly the same as exists for buses, except, of course, for the fact that a trolley or tram undertaking does not require a road service licence. There is, however, one exception to this system which I should mention: it was incorporated at the Committee stage in another place to meet representations made by the Scottish Association of Counties of Cities. The effect of this provision will be that where a local authority had, by Statute, a virtual monopoly within its own local authority area it should be free to determine the actual fares to be charged. Where, however, the route lies partly within the authority's own area and partly outside it, then a right is given to the other local authority, or to any other operator providing a service over the same route, to apply to the licensing authority for a review of the fares over the whole route, including the area within the monopoly itself. I understand that this has met fully the point raised by the authorities concerned.

Clause 3 applies to independent railways and waterways. When a charges scheme is prepared by the British Transport Commission under the procedure laid down in the Transport Acts of 1947 and 1953, it is submitted to the Transport Tribunal, who then hold a public inquiry before settling the terms of the scheme. When they have settled the charges, and the scheme has been approved, it can then be applied to independent railways and inland waterway undertakings, 22 Clause 4 makes it possible for the Minister to make such modifications or alterations of a charges scheme under Clause 3 as may be necessary in the application to the special circumstances of independent railways and inland waterway undertakings. Under Clause 5, independent railways are freed from the provisions relating to equality of charge and undue preference in exactly the same way as the British Transport Commission have been freed from such provisions by the Transport Act, 1953. There also, I should add, the independent railways are freed from these provisions under the same safeguards as have been incorporated in the Act of 1953 in respect of the British Transport Commission.

Clause 6 deals with the revision of charges made by statutory independent undertakers of special kinds, such as harbours, ferries, bridges and so on. The Minister is required to consult those interested, and in certain circumstances he may cause a local inquiry to be held, Thereafter the Minister may by statutory instrument fix the charges which may be made. The general lines of Clause 6 are similar to the model clause which was agreed in 1949 and which has beer applied in a number of Private Acts of Parliament. Clause 7 gives local harbour undertakings power to charge landing fees for seaplanes. Clause 8 revokes Defence Regulation 56 of the Defence (General) Regulations, subject, however, to retaining the validity of all charges in existence at that time which had been authorised by the Minister under these Regulations. Clause 9 gives the Minister power to control the number of seated and standing passengers in buses, trams and trolley buses. It is essentially a welfare and safety regulation. It is here necessary for the Minister to balance safety and welfare with what is fair to the public, to the employees and to the undertaking. These regulations are subject to Negative Resolution of the House. The remaining clauses are, I think, substantially formal. Clause 10 makes for simple accounts and statistics, which I think we shall all welcome. Clause 14 is a general "mopping-up" operation which repeals various Statutes which have got to go to clear the way for the provisions of the present Bill.

23 My Lords, I suggest that this is a sensible way of dealing with the problem and in essence is very simple, though I confess that the drafting is complicated. The reason for this is that transport is a very varied subject, and because, over its whole field, it has been so liberally sown by Parliament with public and private Statutes. Accordingly, clearing up is rather difficult. I say frankly that, while I shall do my best, it will be extremely easy for any noble Lord to ask questions of detail which I shall not be able to answer with complete accuracy without taking advice. But I very much hope that your Lordships will give the Bill a Second Reading. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a Second time.