§ 2.37 p.m.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy 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 what further discussions have taken place concerning the provision, on a less costly financial basis than previously contemplated, of direct access between West London Air Terminal and Gloucester Road Station; and whether they will make a statement.]
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, further discussion between the Ministry of Transport and the London Transport Board confirms that no form of direct access, however simple, could be provided for much less than the sum of about £1 million, the figure mentioned by my noble friend, Lord Champion, in answer to a Question on December 13. The station and the Terminal are some 400 yards apart, and the platforms and concourse are at quite different levels. A subway joining them would involve expensive engineering. My right honourable friend the Minister of Transport is, however, asking the Operations Group of the Transport Co-ordinating Council for London to consider whether there are any other improvements that may be practicable.
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that Answer, may I ask him whether he is aware that the last part of it gave me most satisfaction? Can he hold out hope to the House that if a Question is put down at a later stage we may receive a more favourable reply?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I should not like my noble friend to think that the hopes which I may have given her in my last few words mean, in fact, a major alteration or major assistance. It may well be that what can be done will be in the area of signposting. This is being actively considered. I believe that an inspector was down there last week to see what could be done. His report was that the signposting was not bad but perhaps some improvements could be made. If my noble friend would like to get in touch with me, in—shall I say?—two weeks' time, I will see whether I can give her some further information?
§ BARONESS BURTON OF COVENTRYMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that I should not have been nearly so glad it I had thought that he was referring only to signposting? May I ask him whether he is aware that we shall be pursuing this matter at a later date?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I wanted to amplify what I had said because I certainly did not want to mislead my noble friend.
§ LORD FERRIERMy Lords, having pursued this matter since 1963, I find the noble Lady's Question doubly welcome. May I ask the noble Lord, first of all, whether the authorities realise that this is not only a question of inconvenience? There is real possibility of traffic acidents in the straggling of passengers carrying baggage across Cromwell Road. Secondly, in terms of the outlay, which is obviously great, would the authorities concerned consider consulting private enterprise as to whether the provision of travellators, or some such expensive equipment, could be aided by private enterprise, and a toll?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, as I understand it, there are relatively small numbers of persons who find it necessary to move from the Air Terminal to the railway station. I do not believe that the noble Lord's suggestion that private 113 enterprise should be brought in, presumably to make a charge for such a service, would be a practicable proposition. The noble Lord will be aware that the Interchange Group of the Transport Co-ordinating Council for London is at the moment studying the possible development of the railway line from Victoria to Heathrow. I understand that their report may be out this summer. If that report is favourable, in the sense of a combined terminal for B.E.A. and B.O.A.C. at Victoria, then many advantages would arise. But it would not be right, particularly at this stage, when the matter is still being considered, to embark upon a £1 million development.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that many people are sceptical about the figure of £1 million as the cost of a tunnel from Gloucester Road to the West London Air Terminal? We accept that probably a distance of 400 yards may be involved here. But is my noble friend aware that the Underground Railway system runs adjacent to the Air Terminal, and that many of us need to be convinced that it would be necessary to make contact with Gloucester Road Station? Surely some kind of convenient access to and from the Underground might be arranged alongside the Terminal. Will my noble friend give an assurance that this matter is still being actively considered by the committee to which he referred, because it will be many years before the sort of scheme referred to in the latter part of his Answer, regarding the extension from Victoria to Heathrow is accomplished. The inconvenience caused to people carrying their baggage from Gloucester Road to the Air Terminal is very real, and in this clay and age surely some other line of approach ought to be envisaged.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I sympathise with the noble Lord's view about the inconvenience, and also about the danger that may be involved. But in terms of the total number of passengers using Heathrow or the Air Terminal the number concerned here is relatively small. I, too, was sceptical about the figure of £1 million. But all the advisers of whom I asked the questions satisfied me that that this was pretty well the figure which the development would cost. The noble Lord must bear in mind that if we were 114 to build a tunnel for the convenience of passengers, it could not be a deep tunnel and, therefore, if it were a tunnel close to the surface of the road, it would involve a tremendous alteration of the gas, electricity, sewage and water pipes. It would be a tremendous undertaking. I am sorry, but I cannot give any hope to the noble Lord as to the development of such a tunnel.
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, there is one point that arises out of the noble Lord's Answer. He says that there are comparatively few people from the Air Terminal who want to use Gloucester Road station. But is he aware that far more people would use it, instead of taking taxis to all parts of London, if it were easy to get there with their luggage?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Earl may be right, but one has to make one's judgment, particularly with so many priorities in front of us for capital expenditure, as to the number of people who now move from the Air Terminal building to the railway station on foot. I understand that the vast majority are members of the Corporation. The number of passengers, in terms of those who use the Air Terminal, is relatively small.
§ LORD WAKEFIELD OF KENDALMy Lords, why cannot some simple form of chair-lift or aerial transportation be used? Anybody who has been to the Alps knows that such transportation is easily carried out, and costs very little. Surely something of that kind could be done with great advantage.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, people go to the Alps for pleasure, and they accept the rigours of the climate. I cannot believe that any of the passengers who use the Terminal would be satisfied with the suggestion the noble Lord has made.
§ LORD WAKEFIELD OF KENDALMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that, in addition to people, milk cans and the like are carried by that aerial transportation system?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord will recognise that passengers are not milk cans.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, is it not rather a weakness on the Government's part that they should base their view on the number of passengers using this particular route at the present time? Are the Government taking into account the mass travel by air which will come about in the next few years, and preparing for that mass travel, rather than looking backwards at the past, or even at what is happening at the present?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord will recognise, I think, that no country involved in air transport can really say that the provisions made have ever been adequate to meet developments of the aircraft industry. I said to the House that there is an inquiry as to whether we should develop a rail link between Heathrow and Victoria. The report will be available in the summer. I would suggest that, until that report is available, we should waive our views and see whether there is not a better future for passengers through this link between Victoria and Heathrow, rather than embark upon such an expensive scheme, or to criticise those who are making judgments now. Perhaps the initial mistake was in putting the B.E.A. building where it is, and that was certainly not our responsibility.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, would my noble friend see whether something can be done to expedite the Victoria-Heathrow report? This rail link would appear to be the obvious logical solution. If it is a practicality, it seems to me that the work could be carried out as quickly as a tunnel could be constructed across to Gloucester Road Station, because the lines are already there. It is the matter of terminal points that has to be considered. If the report is expedited, instead of just lying about for a time, it might well be possible to begin on this work and suit everybody's convenience.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I will see whether it is possible to have the report expedited, but I am bound to say that I do not hold out a great deal of hope, in view of the difficult problems and points that have to be considered.