ROAD TRANSPORT MATTERS IN PARLIAMENT.
Page 10
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Suggestions Made Regarding Motor Driving Licences. The Question of Traffic Obstruction. The Import Duties on Motor Vehicles. Inadequate Rear Lights Discussed. The Charing Cross Scheme.
By-Our Special Parliamentary Correspondent.
TN the continued debate on the motion to leave out of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill the London Traffic Act, Captain Garro-Jones called attention to the increase of horse-drawn traffic in London and said he was afraid the Minister of Transport was not fully alive to the total extent of the delay caused by this form of traffic. The delay was not confined to single lines of traffic, but where there were double lines the horse-drawn vehicles forced the 10-to-15miles-per-hour lorries into the other line of traffic and thus held up fast traffic. The delay was cumulative and mounted up at the busiest hours.
He was afraid too much attention was paid to the interests of owners of horse-drawn vehicles— chiefly brewers and railway companies. He also referred to street accidents, pointing out that of the thousands of fatalities in London every year more than 50 per cent, were caused in connection with vehicles proceeding at less than 10 miles per hour. Sir Henry Maybury, before the Royal Commission, had stated that there were steps which could be taken to diminish the accidents, yet the Minister had not, so far as he (Captain Garro-Jones) knew, taken any of these steps. The Ministry of Transport required a type of man of great energy and determination to overrule conflicting interests and petty objections.
The next point he raised was that whilst every railway had its maximum charging powers settled by a tribunal after a full public inquiry, this was not so with the London traffic combine. He also complained that the Minister had done nothing with the recommendations of the London Traffic Advisory Committee regarding a common management and common fund for London passenger traffic and the effective control of the combine. London traffic in a very few years was going to be in a much worse state than it was to-day, unless it was tackled firmly now.
Mr. Barnes made reference to the proposed retention of Sir Henry Maybury on the Advisory Committee after his retirement from the Ministry of Transport, and maintained that a serious precedent' was being established. It had been suggested that Sir Henry Maybury might obtain a directorship on one of the bodies connected with London traffic.
Colonel Ashley's Reply.
COLONEL ASHLEY interposed with the remark that, in that case, he would automatically have to resign. Later on, replying to the discussion, the Minister said that the maximum fares on the Underground lines were fixed by statute and it was not correct to say that there was no control. He could not be held responsible for Acts of Parliament passed years ago.
With regard to co-ordination of transport, he was as anxious as anyone that something should be done and he wished to see a better provision of transport by tube, or otherwise, for the eastern and northeastern suburbs of London. The difficulty was to find Parliamentary time.
Whatever sympathy he had for the labours and the recommendations of the Traffic Advisory Committee, the lack of Parliamentary time was an in superable bar to anything being done. He hoped that the Bills to he brought forward by the London County Council and by the combine for a voluntary common management and common fund would con e26 tam n provisions which would go towards a just solution of the traffic problem.
With regazd to Sir Henry Maybury, he adhered to his intention to appoint him as the Minister's nominee to the Advisory Committee. At present he was not a member, because he happened to be an officer of the Department. There was no obligation on the Minister to appoint an officer of his department. Sir Henry had been chosen in the past to represent the Department because he was obviously the most qualified person to be on the Committee. His name was a household word in road transportation. He was liked by all the local authorities and he was known as an expert in traffie everywhere. From conversations he had had with him and from knowledge of Sir Henry's character, he knew that if he undertook any work which would in the slightest degree conflict with his presence on. the Traffic Committee, he would resign long before he (Colonel Ashley) heard anything about it.
He thought they were fortunate if they induced Sir Henry Maybury to take up this honorary and very responsible post of the Minister's nominee on the Committee.
London Trains and Politics.
SIR GEORGE HUME said he thought the Minister did not quite realize the serious consequences of not having the courage to try and get better conditions for London traffic on his own behalf instead of through private legislation. He deplored the tendency to fight the question of London traffic and the trains on political lines.
Mr. Briant maintained that all the arguments left out of account the main consideration which was that, if the traffic of London was to be properly managed, it must be in the hands of an elected body and not of a body nominated by other bodies. At present all they had was an advisory committee, all of whose recommendations might pass for nothing if the Minister did not endorse them.
A matter so largely affecting the interests of 9,000,000 people should not rest in the hands of any Minister and an advisory committee composed partly of those who had definite interests in certain branches of traffic in London. So long as the London Traffic Act remained on the Statute Book they would be handicapped in dealing with the problem. The whole business should be placed in the hands of the L.C.C.
The amendment to leave out the Act was rejected by 155 votes to 92.
Motor Drivers' Licences.
MR. R. MORRISON having submitted a suggestion that persons taking out motor drivers' licences should have the option of taking them out for one, two, three or four-year periods, Colonel 'Ashley said a somewhat similar suggestion had already been considered and he was advised that its adoption would require legislation.
The chief value of the driving licence was as a means of identifying and tracing the holder. If it remained valid for a period of years, changes of address and other similar accidents would render it, in many cases, entirely valueless for this purpose. Under the existing system an applicant had to furnish his name and address year by year on renewal of the licence, under a penalty of making a false declaration.
The proposals contained in the draft Road Traffic Bill that an applicant for a driving licence should make a declaration as to his physical fitness, if adopted, would render it still more important that the application should be renewed year by year. The holder of a long-period licence might well incur some physical disability which would render it dangerous for him to continue driving. For these reasons he was not prepared to recommend the introduction of the necessary legislation.
Obstruction to Traffic.
T"question of slow-moving traffic causing obstruction by proceeding in the middle of the roadway was brought up by Sir Frederick Hall, who desired to know how many prosecutions had taken place in London during 1927 for breach of the by-law requiring such traffic to keep near the kerb.
Sir Vivian Henderson, tinder Secretary for Home Affairs, said the by-law had been in force since March 12th, 1914, and during 1927 there were three prosecutions under it, with two convictions and one tlismissal. There were 20 cases under the analogous provision, Section 78 of the Highway Act, 1835, leading to 15 convictions. Sir F. Hall suggested that instructions be given to regulate slow-going traffic in such a way as to enable the rate of other traffic in the London streets to be increased. The UnderSecretary promised that the matter would be considered.
Import Duty on Cars.
OMMANDER BELLAIRS called attention to the L./disparity between the works invoice price of a foreign imported car or the chassis and parts ultimately reassembled in this country on which the import duty was levied and the retail price of the car. He asked on what price the duty was levied in the ease of a number of foreign cars which he specified.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that the statutory value on which duty was charged in the case of a motorcar or chassis or component parts of a motorcar was the price which an importer would give for the article if it were delivered, freight and insurance paid, in bond at the port of Importation. Many factors which were irrelevant ta this statutory value might come into play in connection with the retail selling price of the article in this country, and it was especially difficult to draw any deduction as to the true import value from this price in the case of motorcars which were imported largely in the form of unassembled units and of which components were in some cases_ manufactured in this country. In any case, it would be improper to disclose the figures of duty paid in individual cases, but the Customs had this matter under constant observation in order to secure that the duty was charged according to the full statutory value of the article imported, whether a car, chassis or component.
Mr. Wedgwood Fenn asked why the retail price had increased by the amount of the duty if it was the foreigner who paid the tax, and Mr. Churchill replied that he rather apprehended that upon the whole the price of motorcars had gone down.
Highway Administration Reforms.
IN the course of the debate on the Local Government Bill last week Colonel Ashley made a statement regarding the proposals as they affect highway administration. The necessity of widening of the area of highway administration and finance, he said, was incontrovertible. In 1921, 874,000 motor vehicles were registered in this country and last year the number was 1,900,000. This large increase made it necessary to treat the highways quite differently from what was done 10 years or 15 years
ago. Small local authorities were not now able to pay for the repair and improvement of the roads. The increase of highway expenditure was enormous. • In 1910-11 it was 117,000,000. In 1925-26 it had risen to 160,000,000.
There were 1,856 independent highway authorities in England and Wales. That was too large a number for efficiency and economy. Great inequalities existed between one district and another, a few fields between two districts making a difference of many pounds in the highway rate that a farmer might have to pay. He had received deputations from the smaller local authorities, who pointed out that they could not possibly carry on and that unless they got greater assistance from the Road Fund they would have to allow the standard of maintenance and improvement of their roads to deteriorate. The only remedy for the existing conditions was that the responsibility for highway maintenance should go to the larger administrative units of local government.
The Government's Proposals. '
'TO change was proposed in regard to county boroughs and metropolitan boroughs. They would carry on as heretofore. Rural district councils would cease to be highway authorities and the county councils would become the highway authorities in their place, but a rural district council might, within three months of the passing of the Act, apply to the county council for the delegation to them, as agents, of some or all of the work.
Increased Grants for Roads.
A s to finance, classification grants from the Road 1-.Fund of Class I and Class II roads in London boroughs and county boroughs and for unclassified scheduled roads in country districts would be discontinued and merged in the block grant. They were practically doubling the money for the next five years which local authorities were now getting from the Road Fund. Of the 12,637,000 (the proportion of 13,000,000 provided for both England and Scotland), a sum of 1537,000 represents the amount paid into the Local Taxation Account from the motor licence duties. This will no longer be diverted from the Road Fund. He thought the proposals would enable the new authorities to deal with their roads efficiently and economically.
Roundabout in London Squares.
TEE suggestion that the roundabout system should be used in every London square as a regular rule of the road has been turned down on the ground that each case for the institution of the system needs to be considered on its merits and with the most careful consideration of its own special characteristics.
Drivers' Hours.
REFERENCE has again been made to the necessity of protecting the public against dangers arising from alleged excessive hours of labour worked by drivers of motor vehicles, but the Minister of Transport points out that he had no powers to regulate the hours of labour worked by drivers.
Test for Drivers.
MEurall3ginEgRtShoofo Farsltitaymeonft dartr.everpsersistsesnintg not
thorough test before being licensed, in view of the ever-increasing number of motor accidents, but Colonel Ashley can only repeat what he has said before. He has no power to make applicants submit to a driving test. So far a§ lie is aware. there is no evidence to show that any substantial proportion of motor accidents are due to any want of capacity on the part of the drivers, such as would he disclosed by a test of this kind.