AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

No Jack Debate

23rd February 1962
Page 54
Page 54, 23rd February 1962 — No Jack Debate
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

4.P.s had had nothing but evasion from In the Minister of Transport about a debate on the Jack Committee's Report, claimed Mr. Percy Browne (Cons., Torrington) in the Commons, urging that time should be found for this discussion.

But he received little encouragement from Mr. fain Macleod. "I regret to say that I see no prospect, at this time of the year, of Government time for this subject," he said.

Inspection Powers Sufficient

THE idea of legislation to provide for "regular inspection and high standards of maintenance" of all commercial road vehicles was rejected in the Commons by Mr. John Hay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport. Mr. George Darling (Lab., Hillsborough) made the suggestion "in view c14

of the incidence of serious road accidents involving heavy lorries," but was told that the powers provided under Sections 183 and 184 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, were sufficient for the purposes he had in mind.

Anti-smoke Enforcement

THE Ministry of Transport is now

tackling the problem of how to make sure that the law against harmful fumes is better observed. Mr. John Hay, Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry, who gave this news to M.P.s last week, said his Department had held discussions with the National Society for Clean Air.

"If we succeed in developing a satisfactory method of roadside measurement, it would be possible to impose a specific limit on the density of smoke emitted," added Mr. Hay.

The Ministry was keeping under review work both here and in the United States on methods of eliminating the harmful constituents of petrol exhaust fumes.