§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will state who pays for the police who escort vehicles carrying unwieldy loads along the route of their journey, and whether any compensation is payable to those inconvenienced by the re-routing of public service transport some miles off their scheduled route, made necessary for the passage of these vehicles, as instanced on the Newbury-Winchester road on Monday, 1st November.]
§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (LORD MANCROFT)My Lords, mobile police patrols undertake the task of escorting abnormal loads as part of their general traffic duties. In so doing, they try to reduce to a minimum the inconvenience caused to other road users. The cost falls on the police fund. No compensation is payable from public funds to anyone inconvenienced or delayed as a result of the passage of these loads or of their breakdown.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, am I to understand from the Answer of the noble Lord that the charge for these mobile police, who have to escort these ever-increasing abnormal loads from the north to the south of the country, is borne by the taxpayers of the country?
§ LORD MANCROFTNo, my Lords, that is not wholly correct. The charge is borne by the police fund, and the police fund is financed as to 50 per cent. 1200 by the taxpayers and as to 50 per cent. by the ratepayers.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, am I then to understand that the only people who escape this imposition are those who do not qualify as ratepayers or taxpayers?—which really means that the public pay. Would the noble Lord take note of, and convey to his right honourable friend the Minister of Transport, these facts? The vehicle which is the subject of my Question was 122 feet long; the load it carried was 75 tons; it was routed upon the A.34 road, which meant that it had to negotiate a gradient of 1 in 8; upon this gradient it stuck, ran backwards and blocked this A.34 road, the main road from Newbury to Winchester, from five o'clock one afternoon until eleven o'clock the next morning.
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport is already aware of the facts which the noble Lord has given with substantial accuracy. I will, of course, bring the point he has made to the attention of my right honourable friend. I would, however, bring to the attention of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, the fact that the load could not have gone by rail and was a load of essential importance to the economy of the country. I do not say that in any way to minimise the inconvenience which he and fellow-travellers on that road experienced. As I have already indicated, we will do our best to minimise the inconvenience, but I think the other side of the picture should also be borne in mind.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, the noble Lord provokes me to ask him another question. If the charge that falls now upon the taxpayers and ratepayers of the country fell upon those who are responsible for the cartage of these loads, would it not induce them to transport the loads, not by rail, as the noble Lord says, but by coastwise shipping, which I should think is the most appropriate means of travel from the Clyde to Southampton Water?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, that is a different and much wider question, and one which perhaps we could discuss more advantageously in a debate on the Motion which I believe the noble Lord has on the Paper for "No Day Named." 1201 As to the burden of the charge, I would only remind the noble Lord of this. It would be difficult to allocate the charge fairly; this would be yet one more of the cases where hard cases would make bad law.