§ 3.5 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government if it is correct that the Minister of Transport should entirely override the recommendations of his inspector, who heard the inquiry in July and August, 1956, in regard to the Hook Road under-pass on the London—Portsmouth trunk road, and that the Minister should make a compulsory purchase order in direct contradiction to the recommendations of the inspector.]
§ THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD MANCROFT)My Lords, there is nothing incorrect in the decision which my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation has made to proceed with the construction of the Hook Road under-pass on the London—Portsmouth trunk road, notwithstanding the fact that the inspector who held the public inquiry into the objections to the proposal recommended that it should not be proceeded with. Parliament has placed upon my right honourable friend the responsibility of deciding these matters. Before a decision was reached in this case prolonged consideration was given to the points at issue, and the views put forward on behalf of the objectors at the inquiry and the inspector's recommendation were fully taken into account.
LORD MESTONMy Lords, arising out of the noble Lord's reply, is it not correct to say that the decision of the Minister was given sixteen months after the holding of the local inquiry; and is 882 it not also correct to say that the decision of the Minister was given two months after the publication of the Report which we know as the France Report?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, both these facts may be true, but in my opinion they are scarcely related. The reason for the considerable time taken over this decision was the great complexity of the problem and the number of views that had been put forward.
VISCOUNT ELIBANKMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord this question? Was an outside person appointed under the Acquisition of Land Act, 1947. to hold the inquiry appointed by the Minister? Further, can the noble Lord say what new information came into the possession of the Minister after the inspector had reported, to make him change his mind?
§ LORD MANCROFTMy Lords, so far as I am aware, no new information came into my right honourable friend's possession. The matter was of great complexity and views were evenly divided. The inspector, after carefully examining all the facts, came to one conclusion; my right honourable friend, after giving the matter equal consideration, came to another conclusion, as he was entitled to do. That is all that happened.