AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Plan to License Abnormal Loads Withdrawn

25th February 1955
Page 27
Page 27, 25th February 1955 — Plan to License Abnormal Loads Withdrawn
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?

VHEN the committee stage of the Road Traffic Bill was resumed in the 1-louse of Lords on Tuesday, Lord Lucas moved an amendment deal with abnormal loads. He proposed that no load larger than that ncified in the regulations should be carried without a licence to be

sued by the Minister of Transport, and that a fee should be paid to xomperise local authorities and the police.

t present, said Lord Lucas, loads ip to 20 ft. wide and 150 tons in Ott were allowed on thc road withanyone's permission having to be ;ht. He produced a newspaper t a picture of a ship's propeller cluing from London to the Clyde road. The propeller weighed tons and was 14 ft. in diameter. ould have been taken by sea.

there were a regulation like the he proposed, it could have been a Jition that the propeller should have carried vertically, and this could been done with a low-loader. Stop some of the nonsense with :h we have to put up in our overvded streets." he appealed.

Too Big for Rail

ord Mancroft said the propeller was the " Empress of Britain:' and it most important that the shipyard's dule should be maintained. The teller was too big to go by rail there would have been an unacceptdelay if it had gone by sea.

We cannot afford to penalize ile who wish to use the roads of counto for highly important goods his kind." he said.

:tween 10,000 and 20.000 loads of kind Lord Lucas proposed to lee were carried every year. The ister was carrying out an inquiry the whole question of abnormal s. In due course he hoped to have ilution to go some way towards ting this difficulty.

le amendment was withdrawn.

Controlling Dogs

nother amendment moved by Lord is was to make it an offence to w a dog to be on the highway in a built-up area unless it was :r proper control. A fine of up to would be allowed after summAy Fiction. That he said, was the same as the Government suggested Id be imposed on a pedestrian who red the signal of a policeman. There are three times as many lefts caused by dogs on the highas there arc drunks driving cars," Lord Lucas.

)rd Mancroft agreed that dogs were

• infernal nuisance," but it was not dogs who caused the accidents but

• owners. It was no good putting w into effect that would not be :cted. Such a law as was proposed Id be difficult to enforce and would e hard feeling. The solution was ducate dog owners.

The amendment was then withdrawn.

Lord Brabazon moved a clause to give the Minister power to allow certain motor races on the highway. Lord Selkirk suggested that a Private Bill to this effect be promoted.

Earlier proceedings are reported on pages 102-103.

CHESTERFIELD NEEDS 125,000

FARE increases designed to yield an extra £25,000 in revenue are recommended by Chesterfield Transport Committee. The proposal is that IA. he added to the 21d.-4d. faro.

The general manager has been asked to report on the estimated effect of lower fares during off-peak periods. and the introduction of through fares on certain routes.

The decision was taken after the committee had considered the effects of higher wages and material costs. [Other news of applications for higher fares appears on page 94.1

Tags

People: Lucas
Locations: London

comments powered by Disqus