Road Transport Activities
Page 47
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IN PARLIAMENT
By Our Special Parliamentary Correspondent
THE QUESTION OF CHARGES FOR BUS STATIONS.
WHEN the Committee Stage of the Road Traffic Bill was resumed in the House of Lords, Lord Amulree moved to insert the following new clause:— For removing doubts it is hereby declared that the powers conferred on a local authority by sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 90 of the principal Act (which relate to the appointment of a parking place as a station for public service vehicles and confer amongst other powers a power to make certain charges) are in addition to and not in substitution for the powers conferred on a local authority by section 68 of the Public Heath Act, 1925 (which relate.s to the provision of parking places and confers amongst other powers a power to make regulations as to certain charges) and that the local authority shall have power to make reasonable charges for the use of a park-ing place as a station for public service vehicles in addition to the charges for accommodation referred to in paragraph (b) of cub-section (3) of Section 90 of the principal Act.
Lord Amulree said its object was to remove doubts as to the application of certain sections of the Public Health Act, 1925, and the Road Traffic Act, 1930, in regard to the use of a station adapted by a local authority for the pus-pose of receiving public-service vehicles.
Where a local authority had provided private lands as a parking place could they make any charge? It was obvious that they had no power under Section 90 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, to do so because a charge was only authorized for the use of waiting rooms, etc. It had been contended that there was power under the previous Act. On the other hand, it was contended that the only charge that could be made was for the use of a parking place as a place to wait and not as a station for picking up passengers. In these circumstances, where local authorities had gone to the expense of providing a station and public-service vehicles were using it, it was only reasonable that the local authority should make a charge.
SELECT COMMITTEE IN DOUBT.
THE Cardiff Corporation Bill, he continued, was before Parliament this Session, and the question arose there. It was contended that the existing provisions were sufficiently clear, and that there was no necessity to insert any special provision giving the Corporation power to make a charge, but after argument the Committee found there was sufficient doubt on the subject and they inserted a provision authorizing a charge to be made. The same point was raised by the present amendment, which he was moving on behalf of the Association of Municipal Corporations. The Government had put down an amendment to the proposed clause providing that a reasonable charge may be pia& for a parking place " not being part of the street."
Lord Mount Temple said there was a substantial reason why local authorities should not take money for private vehicles in a public parking place, because they might be liable for anything that was stolen from the cars.
The Earl of Plymouth moved to insert in the proposed clause after the words "parking place" the words " not being part of the street." He said the amendment which Lord Mount Temple had put down but had not moved was to prohibit a local authority from making a charge in respect of the use of a coach station by a coach which merely came into the station for the purpose of setting down and picking up passengers, and which did not remain in the station for any longer period than was necessary for that purpose.
He was advised that this power was inherent in the statutory provisions, as they stood, and the new declaratory clause was necessitated solely by the action of Parliament in inserting a special provision in this sense in the Cardiff Corporation Bill, which left some risk of its being interpreted that the powers. under the existing law, extended only to the making of a charge where a station was used as a parking place and not merely as a point for the picking up and setting down of passengers.
The amendment was agreed to and the new clause, so amended, was also agreed to.
VOCATIONAL LICENCES AND TRAILERS.
nN sub-section 12 of Clause 28, which 1.s/relates to special licences to drive heavy goods vehicles, including tractors and trailers and articulated machines, Lord de Clifford moved an amendment to make it clear that the special licence would be required when the complete outfit weighed over 4 tons, whilst, if it were less than that weight, it would rank in the light vehicle class.
The Earl of Plymouth said that the reason which led the Minister of Transport to require the driver of the light articulated vehicle to hold the vocational licence was that light-towing vehicles were used to-day to draw heavy loads, such as 1,000-gallon tanks, which weighed over 3 tons when filled. The driving of such a combination called for a special degree of skill. CLASSIFICATIONS NOT STEREOTYPED.
I T was not intended, he continued, that the present classification of vehicles for taxation and speed purposes was to be stereotyped for all time, and the Minister would, in future, give consideration to proposals of the industry for further modification of the schedules, or for their re-casting. He understood that the organizations representing the industry were considering the adoption of bases of classification different from the present bases, but that these proposals were at present in a preliminary stage. The Minister, therefore, could not adopt piecemeal amendments of existing classifications, which might run counter to these future proposals. In any case, they were dealing with a complicated and new problem, and it was therefore the more necessary to proceed cautiously. The amendment was withdrawn.
NO SECOND DRIVER FOR HEAVY MOTORCARS.
AN amendment was moved by Lord Strabolgi, the object of which was to require the ernployment!of a second man on heavy motorcars. He oaid he moved the amendment on behalf of the National Union of Railwaymen, 10,000 members of which were drivers of big motor lorries. In the past five years deaths caused by heavy commercial vehicles had increased by 23 per cent. and cases of injury by 65 per
cent. He believed this amendment would add something to the safety of these vehicles.
The Earl of Plymouth resisted the amendment on the ground that the whole matter was under consideration and might be dealt with comprehensively in the near future. The amendment was then negatived.
PROBLEM OF NOISE.
LORD ELTON moved an amendment making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or supply a motor vehicle with art inefficient silencer. The Earl of Plymouth pointed out that this matter was not so simple as it seemed. The Minister had taken steps to appoint jointly with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research a special committee' to investigate the question, and he was pressing for an early report by that committee, which would have at its disposal the facilities of the National Physical Laboratory. The present difficulty was largely due to the lack of practical means for quantitative measurement of noise.
So soon as definite specifications could be laid down, the Minister would not hesitate to include them in the regulations as to construction and use of motor vehicles. He hoped the amendment would not be pressed. Several Peers insisted upon the amendment, and it was agreed to without a division.
The Committee stage was completed and the Bill ordered to be reported. e29