"Alternative Services" Plan Refused
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
APLANNED development of the road haulage and passenger transport system would have to be made at the same time as the railways were being cut back: this forecast came from Lord Shepherd, who wondered, during a Lords debate this week on the Transport Bill, whether the 150,000 vehicles under A and B licences would be sufficient to take up the load that would he released by big railway closures.
He pointed out that B.R.S. were restricted to 16,000 haulage vehicles and said there was no repeal of this in the Bill.
Lord Shepherd said there was no mention of co-ordination within the Bill for this railway retraction and road expansion, unless it was with the Minister. An amendment which he was about to move would ensure that it was the Minister who would be responsible for seeing that there was an adequate service, whether by rail or road, for industry, agriculture and the general public.
The Minister should be given the power and the duty to see that where railway closures took place an alternative service adequate for the public should be provided, he said.
Lord Mills, Minister Without Portfolio, replied that there was power in the Bill for each case to be properly considered and to be dealt with if necessary. The objects of the Bill were clear and straightforward and should not be " conditioned " by a clause such as was suggested. The amendment was rejected by 61 votes to 27.
An amendment giving the Railway Board power to carry passengers or goods by road, not only when a railway service had been temporarily interrupted but also when it had been discontinued, was moved—and later withdrawn—by Lord Stonham.
Opposing the move, Lord Chesham. Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, noted the provision which could be made for alternative bus services. So far as goods were
concerned, he said, road haulage facilities would be easily available from what already existed to cater for that need.
If there were rail closures and railheads disappeared it would be perfectly possible to continue the railway collection and delivery services, went on Lord Chesham. even though the new railhead was considerably farther away than was the one they were accustomed to use.
What the Railways Board ought not to be free to do was to build up a large, general road haulage system operated by themselves in substitution for discontinued railway services. Noting that the nationalized road haulage activities were to come under the Holding Company he said it would not be right that a rival fleet should operate under the Railways Board.
Lord Lindgren said, the Opposition would have been happier if there had been much greater co-ordination between B.R.S. and the railways.
Among the many amendments still for Report stage discussion are two re-tabled from the Committee stage covering the proposed partnership between the Holding Company and the Tilling. B.E.T. and Scottish bus companies.