§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they propose to stand by our present protests that 11 tons axle-weight and 50-foot lengths of articulated road vehicles do not suit our congested or inadequate roads despite the disregard of our objection by the Brussels Commission.
473§ My Lords, Her Majesty's Government intend to maintain, in the consultations which are due to take place with the Member States of the European Economic Community, their opposition to the proposed axle weight limit of 11 metric tonnes. No such strong objection has been raised to the proposed 15½metre length limit for articulated lorries, which is only half a metre longer than the current British limit.
§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLEMy Lords, my noble friend has given me a short Answer; but why I ask this Question is that on the dates I mentioned just now my noble friend did not give me a satisfactory Answer. The Question provoked a great many supplementary questions that the Answer did not satisfy; so I have to come back to bother him again. The point is—
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)My Lords, I fear that I should be accused, and rightly, of partiality if I were to allow my affection and respect for my noble friend to prevent me from reminding him that it is now time he put a Question.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, when I was Leader of the House the noble Earl was held in such affection that I always found the Opposition Front Bench at that time were willing me not to put him down. The noble Earl the Leader of the House has more courage than I.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, will the noble Lord consider, since there is a widespread anxiety about the effect of the sizes and weights of lorries circulating on the roads, that perhaps my noble friend could put down a Question for Written Answer and that perhaps the noble Lord could arrange that a fairly substantial explanation of what he wants to know should be incorporated in that reply and circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT?
§ LORD BALOGHMy Lords, would the noble Lord inform his noble friends that this particular affair is entirely due to the Bill which they have fought with much tenacity, stupidity and obstinacy in this House.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I think that this is getting a little beyond what is fair or true. The 474 fact is that already the permitted length of a lorry and trailer is 18 metres. It is merely proposed that the length of articulated lorries be increased from 15 metres to 15½ metres. Furthermore, under the E.E.C. regulations, articulated lorries must have much better turning capacities. It is in that respect that the "stickages" occur in the smaller towns and roads. As regards weight, this is a matter which affects only accidents and wear and tear of the roads.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, will the noble Lord tell us what is a "stickage"?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, it is a blockage of vehicles in a street.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, does not the noble Lord realise how disappointed this House will be at his Answer?—that because the length is only an additional half metre we take no further action and raise no protest. Is he not aware that a vast volume of public opinion is protesting vociferously and sometimes violently against the continuing extensions in length of these road vehicles because of the hazards they present in many of our major "A" and "B" roads? Ought we not to look again at the question of protection against the further half metre?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, lorries with trailers may already measure up to 18 metres in length. It is only in the matter of turning in towns which do not have wide streets that trouble occurs—and E.E.C. regulations will demand better manoeuvrability.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, will the noble Lord not agree that we have no option but to accept this?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONNo, my Lords; I would not agree. My right honourable friend will have every chance for consultation and for putting our case very strongly.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONMy Lords, would it not save a great deal of argument if these heavy loads were carried on the railways and not on the roads?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, the public have the right to choose the best and most economical method.
§ VISCOUNT ADDISONMy Lords, is it not now time for the Government to introduce legislation on the matter?
§ LORD ROBBINSMy Lords, may I ask rather a frivolous question? Does the noble Lord recall an episode in Alice in Wonderland in the trial scene in which Alice, having eaten some nutritious substance, grew until she threatened to fill the room? The judge then made this magisterial utterance: "All persons over half a mile in height will leave the court." Does he think that that utterance has mutatis mutandis some bearing on the present problem?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend for those words.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the wording of this Question contains an implied indictment of our present road system? Would he state what the Government intend to do to remedy not only the existing state of congestion and inadequacy of the roads but also the vastly increased congestion which is likely to arise in 20 years' time?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving me the opportunity to tell the House that we are this year in England alone (not in Wales and Scotland) beginning the building of £400 million worth of new roads. Further, by the end of 1979 we shall have begun on new road projects amounting to a further £3,800 million. As these roads are built we shall be encouraging the local authorities to use the powers they have to deny the use of some roads to heavy vehicles at certain specified times provided that access is allowed to meet the townspeople's requirements. Local authorities have powers to forbid the passage of vehicles over certain sizes. As the new roads become available. that will happen. Moreover, by the 1980s, 84 of the 105 historic towns now on trunk roads will have been by-passed and there will be no need for these large vehicles to go through them.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, will the noble Lord say how much this—
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I think that we may be incurring a "stickage" in the rest of the programme for this 476 afternoon if we allow the debate on this Question to continue further—unless, of course, my noble friend Lord Albemarle wishes to put a further supplementary.
§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLENo, my Lords.