§ 2.37 p.m.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper. May I apologise for an error in the Question? It should read "Barnetby", not "Barnethy". The error is mine, not the printer's.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are aware that British Railways Board, whilst submitting proposals to close the Lincoln—Grantham 86 branch line and the Mid-Lincolnshire (Peterborough to Grimsby) main line, are spending £250,000 at Barnethy and undisclosed sums elsewhere for the purpose of diverting an extra 40 freight trains a day to the line which has a level crossing in Lincoln High Street; and whether, in view of the high cost of the greatly increased traffic congestion that this would cause on the main road artery of the city centre, they will institute a public inquiry under Section 90 of the Transport Act, 1962, so that all relevant factors may be taken into consideration before final decisions are taken.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM)My Lords, changes the Railways Board make in the pattern of their freight services are a matter of railway management. My right honourable friend is not involved, since his approval is required only for the closure of lines or stations to passenger services. Such investment expenditure as may be authorised in the freight schemes to which the noble Lord refers will be justified on its merits, and not in relation to the proposed passenger closures. The hearing by the Transport Users Consultative Committee of objections to the passenger closures mentioned by the noble Lord has not yet taken place. When the proposals come to my right honourable friend for decision all factors relevant to the closures will be taken into account. I see no need for any other inquiry.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, does this case not go far beyond the limits of an inquiry by the Transport Users' Consultative Committee? Is the noble Lord not aware that already the traffic position is quite chaotic, with many hours during the day when there are queues of vehicles hundreds of yards long at both level crossings? Further, it is anticipated that an hour and a half will be added to the delays by the addition of 40 freight trains going right across the main street of Lincoln. Surely that is something which is a matter for the Minister to consider. Is the noble Lord saying that his right honourable friend is quite powerless to intervene in a matter of this kind?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I am simply saying what I have frequently said in your Lordships' House, and I 87 think the noble Lord knows quite well what my right honourable friend's powers are under the Act. I am not trying to say that this question does not arise. I am sure the noble Lord would like to know that the Lincoln City Council, who are the highway authority for the crossing he mentions, are in touch with the Railways Board about the possible effects on road traffic of the rerouting of the freight routes. I have no doubt that they, as the responsible authorities, will do all they can to minimise the effects of the change, and my right honourable friend has instructed his divisional road engineer to be ready to give any help that he can in the discussions.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I am most grateful for the information given in that second reply. But can the noble Lord now deal with that part of my Question which relates to a public hearing under Section 90 of the 1962 Act? May I remind him that that Act renews the provisions of the 1919 Act, which read—?
§ LORD STONHAMMay I remind noble Lords of this?
§ LORD STONHAMMay I, then, ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that under the provisions of any special Act the Minister of Transport is required or authorised to sanction, approve, confirm or determine any matter or thing, or to make any order for the purposes of the special Act, and he may order such inquiry as he thinks necessary? I am sure the noble Lord will agree that there are these powers, and surely this is the kind of case where they ought to be exercised in the form of a public inquiry so that everyone concerned may see what is being done and may make a contribution.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, on that question I am perfectly well aware of the Section 90 powers. In fact, the noble Lord will recall that we had a debate about the matter not so very long ago in this House. That power of inquiry, as the noble Lord knows, is a very general one; it is not specific. But may I also remind the noble Lord that in my original Answer I said that my right 88 honourable friend could not see any need for an inquiry under that section.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord, then, if he will make representations to his right honourable friend in regard to this particular case? Would he ask him if he is aware that it is thought that, when these 40 freight trains are added, there will be times during the day when neither the railway nor the road traffic will be able to move; they will block each other.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I always hope that I shall be courteous to the noble Lord, and I will convey to my right honourable friend what he has said. If it should be that these things come about, then there are the discussions that I have already mentioned. The noble Lord will also wish to know that if it happened—which I admit it could—that there were 40 extra trains, it would be regarded as a temporary imposition, because in due course rationalisation, and the disappearance of other unremunerative services, would bring the traffic back to the present level.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, instead of waiting until it happens, could we not stop it happening? Would that not be the sensible course?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I do not think I can add anything to what I have already said.