HL Deb 19 July 1966 vol 276 cc361-4

2.42 p.m.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, while the present 70 m.p.h. speed limit is in force, the driver of a car doing 70 m.p.h. is justified in refusing to give way to an overtaking car.]

THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD CHAMPION)

No, my Lords. Drivers should observe the Highway Code and keep to the left, except when overtaking or turning to the right. No driver is justified in any circumstances in deliberately obstructing another wishing to overtake him; it may encourage the dangerous practice of overtaking on the nearside. It is relevant that fire engines, ambulances and police cars are not, in general, subject to speed limits.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for the reply, may I take it that an occasional burst of speed of over 70 m.p.h. will be justified, in order to avoid undue bunching and to speed up the flow of traffic?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, to exceed the speed limit of 70 m.p.h. on these roads is never justified, in any circumstances. I cannot accept the premise of the noble Lord. The point is that enforcement of road traffic law is the responsibility of the police, and drivers must not take it upon themselves by their own driving to stop others committing offences.

EARL JELLICOE

My Lords, arising from the noble Lord's reply to the supplementary question, is he satisfied with the present state of the enforcement of this particular rule? Would he not agree that, at least on the right hand side of most motorways, the present rule is now "more honoured in the breach than the observance"?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, I would not agree. In the beginning, of course, the 70 m.p.h. limit was fairly well recognised and obeyed. I must admit there has been some little falling-off in virtue in the months which have passed since the initial speed limit became law, but in the Road Research Laboratory, where this question has been looked into most carefully, it is felt that this limit is worthwhile; and, despite the fact that some people do exceed the limit, the roads have become safer as a result of the 70 m.p.h. limit.

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that when, in his supplementary answer, he said that an occasional burst of speed over this limit would not be justified he should have said that it is, in fact, illegal? Is he further aware that the two are not always synonymous?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, the noble Lord has corrected me, and I completely accept his correction.

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, would the noble Lord further agree that his original Answer, in the terms that he made it, can have done nothing but good, by drawing attention to the facts of this situation, which are otherwise open to abuse; and that had he said anything else it would have encouraged the very undesirable practice of passing on the inside, particularly having regard to the possibility of a differential error in people's speedometers?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, I hope that everything I say does good.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, since my noble friend has introduced the element of virtue into one of his replies, would he heed the converse of the biblical injunction, that narrow is the road that leadeth to destruction and broad is the road that leadeth to life, and urge upon the Minister a more extensive programme of road widening in the near future?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, despite my noble friend's reference to a biblical quotation, I am bound to say that that is another question.

LORD REA

My Lords, in the case of a motorist travelling at 70 m.p.h. and being overtaken by another travelling at 90 or 100 m.p.h., has he a civic or moral duty to report this to any authority?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, that is a slightly different question and I should like to have a chance of considering it, but I believe it is the responsibility of every citizen to try to ensure that the law is obeyed.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether this also applies to the 30 m.p.h. limit, at which I find myself constantly being passed?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, I would say the same thing applies exactly. The noble Marquess must not himself obstruct some other foolish driver who exceeds the speed limit.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, would the noble Lord suggest to the police that they should try the experiment of themselves going at the legal limit on the near side lane and observe the vehicles, other than ambulances and so forth, which pass at double their own speed?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, I will try to bring all these points to the notice of my right honourable friend.

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that if there is a police car observing speeds from a near side lane nobody will exceed the limit at all?

EARL HOWE

My Lords, if there is a danger, as is implied in the noble Lord's remarks, of a speed limit of 70 m.p.h. being exceeded from time to time and motorists passing on the near side, would it not be wiser to think in terms of a more realistic speed limit of 100 m.p.h. on motorways?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, this speed limit of 70 m.p.h. has been very carefully considered and it was applied for an experimental period. It is being further considered in the light of reports. So far some reduction of accidents as a result of the enforcement of the 70 m.p.h. limit has been shown.

LORD CHESHAM

My Lords, is the noble Lord not aware that there is an element of opinion in this country which would not agree with him in saying that it has been carefully considered?

LORD SOMERS

My Lords, can the noble Lord give any indication of what the experimental period is? I do not know whether he remembers that the Slough experiment went on for about five years?

LORD CHAMPION

My Lords, experiments are conducted until such time as we feel that there is an answer to the question being asked by the experiment.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, is the noble Lord further aware that a great number of persons think the Minister was perfectly right to retain the speed limit?