resting Stations Under Fire Again in Lords Debate

18th March 1955, Page 83

18th March 1955

Page 83

Page 83, 18th March 1955 — resting Stations Under Fire Again in Lords Debate

Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Keywords : Parking, Lord Chancellor, United States Constitution, Reconstruction

BY OUR PARLIAMENTARY CORRESPONDENT

POSS1BLE changes in the proposals for inspection of vehicles. and the adoption of a " spot-cheek system to augment pilot testing stations, were hinted at during the report stage of the Road Traffic Bill

in the Lords on Monday.

Lord Lucas moved an amendment to provide that private cars be subject to the same regulations as goods vehicles in regard to mechanical condition, inspection and prohibition. A certificate of fitness should be given on the retail sale of a used car.

If testing stations were set up. said .ord Lucas, to examine the 6m. vehicles ow on the roads, there would have to c about 15,000. The stations could at be run with less than a staff of six ach. of whom four would have to be killed. That meant a possible total of 00.000 people. Even if the mechanics 'ere paid 5s, an hour. the lowest grade Dr the job. the bare cost of an xamination would he £2 2s.-C3 3s. Spot checks would keep motorists live to the fact that their vehicles had 3 be in first-class condition. The ertificates for used cars would put the nus for their fitness squarely on the boulders of the trade.

Inconvenience to Public

Earl Howe thought the amendment vould do a good deal for the used-car usiness, but the Earl of Selkirk, for he Government, said they should not nderestimate the inconvenience to the ublic of being suddenly stopped on the ighway and having the vehicle checked or half an hour or so before being Ilowed to go on.

When the Lord Chancellor spoke tier he said he had hoped that it would ave been possible to have given the louse a new plan for the operation of n inspection scheme, but that had not een possible. He suggested that the 'louse should give the Minister an Ipportunity of finding out the best ystem. In reconsidering the matter, the elinister could not only set up a pilot ispect ion station, hut could operate pot checks at the same time.

bard Lucas pressed his amendment a a division, hut was defeated by 36 L) 23.

Removal of Vehicles

Lord Mancroft, Under-Secretary for lome Affairs. moved an amendment to ivc powers to the police to remove vehicle from the streets if it were ausing an obstruction. This, he said, as designed to ease the congestion on he streets. It was not intended that he police should "have the afternoon ut " moving all the cars they could lay heir hands on—but the amendment rose from complaints from the fire ervice.

'I he amendment was agreed to. The Lord Chancellor moved a new iovernment clause, forecast in earlier lebates, rendering any person who aused the death of another person by riving recklessly or dangerously liable in conviction on indictment to

imprisonment for not more than five years, or two years in the case of proceedings before the sheriff.

The clause provided also that if the jury were not satisfied that the person's driving was the cause of death they could convict him of dangerous driving.

The clause was agreed to.

Lord Brabazon moved a new clause to enable a jury. if satisfied that the accused, although under the influence of drink or a drug, had not driven and had no intention or driving or attempting to drive a vehicle while under the influence, should not be liable to he convicted of the offence.

The Lord Chancellor thought the clause left loopholes, and said it would be dangerous and unwise to attempt to frame the clause in a way which would present an escape valve to a person who was doing something that was wrong criminally and socially.

The clause was withdrawn.

Keeping of Records Lord Selkirk, for the Government. moved amendments, which were agreed. to make it clear that the requirements under Section 16 of the Road and Rail Traffic Act. 1933, which required records to be kept of drivers' hours and so on, applied in respect of goods %chides cAliether they were being driven laden or empty.

Another amendment moved by the Government made it plain that Clause 6 of the Bill applied to vehicles whether they were specified in number or whether they were hired vehicles limited by number but unidentified on the ficenee—the hiring margin. Whatever their position, the owner or holder was responsible for seeing that the records were properly kept when they were being used by him. The amendment was agreed.

When Lord Lucas raised the question of abnomtal loads again . and moved amendments to provide that the Minister might make regulations oil them, Lord Maneroft said that one possibility occurred to him as being worth exploration—whether they could place certain additional powers either in the hands of the chief officers of police or, perhaps, in the Ministry of Transport, who would in this case probably act through their divisional road engineers.

The general idea might be that if loads of such weights and widths as might be prescribed by regulation, were allowed, they might well have to be substantially lower than the existing ones. The manufacturer wishing to move his load by road would, a given period in advance, send full particulars of the load, its route and destination. either to the chief of police in the area where it originated or to the divisional road engineer concerned.

The manufacturer would, in particular, have to give full answers to two questions—whether the load was in fact indivisible and whether the possibilities of movement by some other method had been explored and, if so, with that result.

Appeal to the Minister

On the basis of that information the police or the Ministry could decide whether or not the load could be moved by road. If permission were refused. an appeal would have to lie with the Minister of Transport.

This. he said, was merely a 'cockas to the way in which the problem might be tackled. There would have to be consultations with the large number of people who had an interest. The Minister of Transport was bearing in mind the possibility of providing more lay-bys in the course of his new road programme.

Lord Lucas withdrew his amendment.

Parking Meters Again "[he vexed question of parking meters came up again on Tuesday, with Lord Lucas demanding definite provision that a local authority must have submitted plans for off-street parking places before it applied for an Order to allow it to install meters on the street.

Lord Selkirk, for the Government. replied that there must be a definite link between the parking meters and offstreet parking places. "It is not simply a question of putting down a row of parking meters. There must be a scheme," he said.

He instanced Portman Square; London, where cars were parked on a public highway, although a large car park nearby was empty. The Government hoped that the scheme would encourage garage proprietors to extend their premises, and he envisaged possibilities of local authorities helping garage owners, Lord Lucas asked how this was to be done. Lord Selkirk replied that Clause 15 of the Bill gave local authorities power to make contributions towards parking.

The Bill is (kw for third reading next Tuesday.

resting Stations Under Fire Again in Lords Debate

Page 83

Tags