HL Deb 28 February 1968 vol 289 cc773-7

2.30 p.m.

EARL HOWE

My 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 action is to be taken on a petition signed by 280,000 people and handed to the Minister of Transport on December 11, 1967, against the imposition of the 70 m.p.h. speed limit on the motorways.]

THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PUBLIC BUILDING AND WORKS (LORD WINTERBOTTOM)

My Lords, no further action is proposed at the present time. My right honourable friend the Minister of Transport is unable to accept the proposals in this petition, and her reasons were given in a letter to the organisers on January 17. I understand that a copy of this letter was sent to the noble Earl.

EARL HOWE

My Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his reply, may I say that I did receive a copy of that letter from the Parliamentary Secretary; it was unfortunate that I was unable, for reasons beyond her control, to see the Minister herself. May I ask the noble Lord whether he would agree that you cannot brush aside the carefully considered opinion of over a quarter of a million people, comprising people in such different walks of life as lorry drivers, police, motorway patrol police officers, magistrates, ambulance personnel, staff from the Motor Industry Research Association and St. Christopher House, to name a few, against what I consider to be a panic decision taken after the stupid driving of a few motorists in the fog and bearing no relation to normal driving conditions on a motorway?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the point of view of those quarter of a million individuals was not brushed aside. It was weighed against the opinion of the Road Research Laboratory and, in addition, against the point of view of a public opinion poll which showed that 61 per cent, of motorists were in favour of the 70 m.p.h. speed limit.

EARL HOWE

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord again, but I hope he will bear with me when I ask these questions, because I am representing a very large number of motorists. What is the point of a speed limit that, in my experience, few motorists observe? Why cannot we have a more realistic speed limit with which everyone will be happy, including the police and possibly myself?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the point is that very concrete evidence has shown that a drop in the upper speed limit in America from 80 m.p.h. to 70 m.p.h. has cut the accident rate three times. I think this is incontrovertible evidence in favour of the lower speed limit.

EARL HOWE

My Lords, may I have some assurance from the noble Lord that this huge petition will be balanced against the previous recommendations of the Road Research Laboratory? And will the noble Lord convey to his Minister the strongly held view of what I believe to be the majority of motorists using motorways, that the present limit is totally unrealistic and achieves nothing but resentment among the motoring community?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, I am certain that my right honourable friend will note what the noble Earl has said.

EARL HOWE

I thank the noble Lord.

LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD

My Lords, may I put to the noble Lord that my noble friend has considerable substance in the point he is making? Whilst American experience is so weighty that we must pay attention to it, nevertheless the result achieved in America of additional road safety from these speed limits cannot be achieved here without an immense increase in the road patrol service by the police, and we have a long way to go before we can get sufficient obedience to this strict ruling to obtain the full benefit of it. Will the noble Lord consider relaxing the limit to 80 m.p.h. or alternatively—much better—a very much increased number of mobile police on the roads?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, one of the gratifying facts that have come out of the study to date—and, after all, this particular limitation has not been running a very long time—is that a very substantial proportion of the motorists driving on the motorways are observing the 70 m.p.h. limit. One of the complaints about the situation is that, because a large number of motorists who previously were driving above 70 m.p.h. are now driving below 70 m.p.h., there is apparently a slight appearance of greater congestion at this moment in the 60 m.p.h. to 70 m.p.h. band. The evidence is that most motorists are obeying the rule.

LORD LEATHERLAND

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that whereas the 280,000 motorists may deserve some consideration, there are well over 50 million people in this country who are shouting "Good old Barbara!"?

LORD ALLERTON

My Lords, I am not clear on this point. Is there any evidence in this country that the 70 m.p.h. limit has in fact reduced the number of accidents?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the reduction is hypothetical. One has to calculate on probabilities. One cannot actually say specifically that because the upper limit of speed has been cut, therefore the drop in road deaths is caused by it. But as the Road Research Laboratory, using scientific methods, has indicated, something just under 500 lives may have been saved by this particular reduction in the upper speed limit.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that most motorists in America have much further to go than motorists in England, and if there is every justification for lowering the limit in America to below 80 m.p.h. there is far more justification in this country for maintaining it at 70 m.p.h.?

LORD ALLERTON

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord another question? Would it be possible to say whether the number of accidents on motorways has fallen or has not fallen since the introduction of this speed limit?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, with the House's permission, I will send the noble Lord a copy of the Road Research Laboratory's findings.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, the 70 m.p.h. is suicidal.

LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICK

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord this question? Is it not true that the Estimates Committee of another place severely criticised the way the Ministry had forced the Road Research Laboratory to conduct an opinion poll prior to the announcement that the Minister would keep the limit on indefinitely? And has a working party been set up to examine charges made by that Committee of increasing political interference?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the noble Lord's view that the Minister forced a policy on the Road Research Laboratory is entirely unjustified. The Road Research Laboratory is proud of its scientific independence, and its findings were made in a spirit of scientific independence.

THE MARQUESS OF ABERDEEN AND TEMAIR

My Lords, is it not the case that most accidents and pile-ups are due to drivers following each other too closely?

LORD WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the noble Marquess is quite correct. It is possible to have a pile-up at 40 m.p.h. I have seen it.

EARL HOWE

My Lords, I do not want to go out of my way to make things difficult, but to take one county—

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS (LORD SHEPHERD)

My Lords, would the noble Earl forgive me? He has delivered a number of what I might call very fast questions. The object of supplementaries is to obtain further information, and not to deploy argument. There are other ways in which the noble Earl can do that. If the noble Earl wishes to ask a question for the purpose of getting information he will be in order. Otherwise I think he would be out of order.

EARL HOWE

My Lords, I bow to the noble Lord's superior knowledge.

Back to