§ 2.47 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether from May 2 British Railways are diverting freight traffic away from the Grimsby—Peterborough line; and, if so, why.]
§ LORD CHAMPIONMy Lords, decisions to reorganise freight traffic are matters for the Railways Board. If the noble Lord cares to address his inquiries to them, I am sure they will be able to explain changes in freight facilities and the reasons behind them.
LORD HAWKEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his reply, may I ask whether he is aware that this failure to give more information will feed the rumours which are circulating in the district, that this movement of freight traffic away from this railway line is designed only to increase the loss in order to strengthen the case for closing it by British Railways?
§ LORD CHAMPIONMy Lords, on the first point of the noble Lord, there has under Statute to be advance notice, and this was given in the appropriate newspapers, The Times and the Daily Telegraph on April 1, 1966. The second point is one to which I cannot really give a reply, but I would hope that no Railways Board would act in such a manner suggested by the noble Lord.
LORD HAWKEMy Lords, is it a fact that the Minister of Transport has so far refused leave to close this railway?
§ LORD CHAMPIONMy Lords, that is a separate point. But up to now of course if a closure affects passenger transport the Minister has power to intervene; but the Minister has no such power in relation to freight, as I suggested in my original reply.
LORD HAWKEMy Lords, will the noble Lord not agree that his last answer is going to deepen the suspicion locally that the one act which the railway can take to increase the loss on this line seems to be about to be taken.
§ LORD CHAMPIONMy Lords, I cannot answer for the suspicion locally, and I hope that no Board would act in the way suggested by the noble Lord.