Road Transport Topics
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
In Parliament
TROLLEYBUSES SAFE, QUIET AND COMFORTABLE.
IN the debate on the second reading 1 of the London Passenger Transport ( Agreement) Bill, Mr. Summersby asked why it was proposed to substitute trolleybuses for trams on 148 route miles. If trams were to be done away with, be said, why should not motor-buses be substituted. They were surely as economical, as easy to handle, and as convenient.
Mr. Hore-Belisha replied that the reason primarily was that plant was already in existence and could still be utilized. In .addition, there was no doubt that, on grounds of amenity, qaietness and agreeableness of travel— as well as of freedom from accidents— the trolley-bus was superior to the
tramcar. , At least 265,000,000 passengers a year would be affected, which was about one quarter of the total number of passengers carried on tramways by the Board. The Bill was read a second time without a division.
PREJUDICE AGAINST TRAILERS.
TilE Minister of Transport was asked by Captain Strickland whether his attention had been directed to a decision given by the Licensing Authority for the West Midland area on Wednesday, June 12, under which he had dismissed an application made for a trailer and stated that if an application for a separate vehicle were to be substituted he would regard the application more favourably.
Captain Strickland also • inquired whether the Minister was aware that this officer, at an inquiry held in Birmingham the previous week, had stated that trailers were better off the road than on it. He wished to know the policy of the Government in this matter.
MINISTER DISCLAIMS RESPONSIBILITY.
I N reply, Mr. IIore-Belisha said that, in administering the licensing system, authorities functioned independently and were not subject to his directions. The remarks seemed to have been made either during or after arguments between an applicant and objectors; they appeared to be. obiter dicta.
Captain Strickland asked if the position was that a man applying for a licence for a trailer in one district might receive preferential treatment over a similar application made in another district. He suggested that the Minister should take steps to get some unification of system in the granting of licences.
Mr. Hore-Belisha said that these authorities were appointed by Parliament to act independently, and they were as much outside his control as magistrates were outside that of any Minister. He could not be responsible for °biter dicta uttered by licensing authorities, and had no power in the matter.
TREASURY SCRUTINY OF ROAD EXPENDITURE.
ANEW clause was moved by Lieut.Colonel Moore-Brabazon to provide that the Acts of 1909 and 1920, which authorized the Minister of Transport to make advances to highway authorities, should be amended by the deletion of the words, "with the approval of the Treasury." He argued that when the Government had decided what money should be administered by the Minister of Transport they should give him full, power to deal with that money and not require him to come to the Treasury to get sanction for small payments.
Mr. Herbert Williams thought that each year they should allot to the roads such sums as they could afford which the Ministry of Transport ought to e free to allocate as it pleased. Mr. Parkinson sympathized with the proposal, as there were occasions when the Minister of Transport ought to be able to make a grant at once to enable urgent small works to be carried out immediately.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was not the case now that every detail of road expenditure went before the Treasury officials. They direedked their -attentioii to the big questions of policy.
As the mover did not wish to take away the Treasury's responsibility in. those respects, he submitted that there was no case for the proposed clause. The motion was then withdrawn.
NO OIL-TAX EXEMPTION FOR CANALS.
(IN the report stage of the Finance
Mr. Tom Smith moved a new clause for the purpose of exempting vessels on canals, etc., from duty on heavy oils. He said the canal industry had suffered from both rail and road competition. It had been found necessary to equip barges with motor power, and the most suitable fuel was heavy nil. If the clause were accepted it would cost the Exchequer only 25,000. Mr. Duff Cooper, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, pointed, out that the road transport competitors were now to be subject to the largely increased tax on oil, and a great advantage was thus being conferred on inland water transport.
The National Association of Canal Carriers had estimated the incidence of the existing tax at 45,000 a year, and had admitted that it was not a crushing burden, whilst last March the Chairma,n of the Grand Tin ion Canal Co. had stated that the tonnage carried by the canals in 1934 increased by 52,000 tons over 1932, and that the company had recently placed orders for 100 new boats. The new clause was negatived without a division.
00 PER CENT. GRANT FOR MAIDENHEAD BY-PASS.
THE Minister of Transport informed Sir Gifford Fox that the proposed by-pass at Maidenhead was still under discussion between Berkshire County Council and Maidenhead Town Council. When the scheme was agreed, the Department would be ready to consider it for the normal percentage grant for Class 1 roads of 60 per i-ent. The highest grant made during the past five years was 85 per cent.
PLAIN-CLOTHES CONSTABLES MUST PRODUCE WARRANTS.
THE Home Secretary, in reply to a question, stated that any person who was stopped by a constable in plain clothes was entitled to ask for, and to be shown, his warrant card as evidence of his authority.
THIRD READING OF LONDON TRANSPORT BILL.
THE London Passenger Transport (Agreement) Bill was read a third time in the House of Commons on Tuesday night on the motion of Mr. Hore-Belisha who, after referring to the vastly increased employment which would result from the contemplated new works, observed that the only criticism had been that other areas than those affected by the Bill desired similar facilities.
The Government, he said, had the greatest sympathy viith those other areas, and they had the assurance of the companies concerned that, within the limit of practicability, they would undertake further schemes.
LABOUR OPPOSITION APPROVES SCHEME.
AAJOR ATTLEE, on behalf of the IVILabour Opposition, said his party was entirely in favour of the proposed new work being done. The reforms of the London railway system were long overdue. The reasons for the long delay were the failure to bring unity into London traffic arrangements and the failure of the profits motive. if transport had been regarded as a public serL vice and not as a business, this work might have been done long ago.
He did not think the undertakers would be able to pay off all the money involved in 15 years, but perhaps before the end of the 15 years they would have nationalized all transport.