§ 2.40 p.m.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, I beg leave 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 are satisfied that full use is being made of the Kingsway Road Tunnel and whether they will consider reopening its Embankment approach.]
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ROYAL NAVY (LORD WINTER-BOTTOM)My Lords, the noble Lord will be aware, of course, that the Strand Underpass is the responsibility of the Greater London Council, as highway authority. My right honourable friend the Minister of Transport, however, is satisfied that the Underpass is being properly used for the purpose for which it was designed. With regard to the Embankment approach, I must stress that the Underpass was designed to relieve traffic congestion at the surface level intersection of the Strand, Lancaster Place and Aldwych. If this intention is not to be defeated then the Embankment approach could not be opened to traffic without major and very costly engineering works.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for his reply, may I ask whether he would agree that it is highly desirable to avoid any increase in the amount of traffic in the Strand? Would it not be possible to allow two streams of traffic to enter the Kingsway Tunnel, and to control them by installing traffic lights in the Tunnel?
§ LORD WINTERBOTTOMThis, my Lords, is a technical point which I do not feel capable of answering. As I said in my main Answer, however, this linking of the two arms of the Tunnel could not be carried out without major and costly engineering works, and it is the opinion of the competent authority that the reduction in pressure of traffic would not justify this expense.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, could the Minister explain a little more fully what he meant, when he said that the Minister of Transport was satisfied that the Tunnel was being used for the purpose for which it was designed? Was it not designed for single-deck, low trams which are not being used now?
§ LORD WINTERBOTTOMPerhaps, my Lords, I was not precise enough. The Tunnel stood empty for a long time and was then converted to use for ordinary motor traffic. As the noble Lord has pointed out, it was originally designed for low trams, and the type of transport which can use this Tunnel is limited to a height of twelve feet.
§ LORD SOPERMy Lords, would my noble friend think that perhaps a mistake was made in using the Tunnel the wrong way round? As one who lives in Kings-way and uses the tunnel frequently, I wonder whether a complete reversal of the traffic would be worth considering, if it were not too costly.
§ LORD WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, the statistics show the contrary, and it is for this reason that this direction of flow was adopted.
LORD FARINGDONMy Lords, would my noble friend agree that this Tunnel was not intended for modern types of traffic, and has been so used recently only because of public pressure to use what so obviously seemed a convenience, although in fact it was nothing of the sort?