Part of the debate – in the House of Commons am 10:25 pm ar 19 Tachwedd 1991.
I am most grateful to have the opportunity to develop once again on the Adjournment the problems associated with trunk roads in Leicestershire. I am especially grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for Roads and Traffic, who has paid particular attention to the problem over recent months to try to get things right.
As my hon. Friend may know, three problems concern us. The first is what is known as the EDDR—the eastern district distributor road. The second problem is the new proposed Leicester eastern bypass and the third, which concerns me very much, is one of the most important east-west roads in the county—the A427 which runs from Loughborough to Market Harborough.
The eastern district distributor road is part of the relief road system round the city of Leicester. My hon. Friend, who has been courteous and kind in meeting delegations led by me and by other hon. Members to discuss the problem, has pointed out from time to time that the scheme is the responsibility of the county council.
The county council started the EDDR almost 50 years ago and it is still not finished. My hon. Friend was kind enough to tell me in answer to a question on the third problem, asking him whether he would make the east-west A427 a trunk road, that it came under the county council's responsibility for bypasses. Yet in the 20 or so years during which we have been associated with processions and demonstrations about the A427, not a single bypass has been built.
The EDDR was planned and begun more than 50 years ago under the aegis of the county council. The House and the public at large are entitled to study the performance, or lack of it, of the county council in that respect after 50 years. From the results on the ground, it seems that there is a great deal left to be desired. At the present speed of work on the EDDR—when it is finished it will provide much relief for traffic going round the city—the road is unlikely to be completed this millenium. In other words, it is unlikely to be completed before the year 2000.
The part of the Leicester relief road known as the SDDR—the southern district distributor road—is already discharging traffic on to the A6 at Oadby, a borough in my constituency, to the south of the city. In fact, the SDDR, upon which work has progressed well and speedily—it is all part of the relief road system round the city—has started to discharge traffic at a great rate on to the A6 at Oadby, which is seeking to percolate further south on the A6 or further east towards the A47.
When the traffic reaches the end of the SDDR at Oadby, there is nowhere else for it to go. As far as I can see, there is not likely to be anywhere for it to go for the next five or 10 years, except east on the A47 or south on the A6. There is no connecting link. Part of the EDDR is missing and that leaves a gap of two or three miles. As I have said, that stretch of road is not likely to be completed this millenium.
Most of my constituents find it amazing that that part of the road is missing, given that it is a planned and agreed eastern relief road for city traffic. I say planned and agreed, because, as my hon. Friend the Minister knows, more than one public inquiry has taken place and the go-ahead has been given after all the proper formalities have been gone through. The EDDR, which is causing so much concern among my constituents, is the last piece of the Leicester ring road. Nine tenths of the Leicester ring road is finished and has been for some years. But the remaining tenth, on the eastern side of the city, running from Humberstone to the A6 at Oadby is still held up.
My hon. Friends and I feel justified in asking for a special debate to call attention to the ridiculous fact that, at Humberstone, which is part of the EDDR route, a mile of new road costing £1·5 million has stood finished and unopened for over a year, while the county and city councils argue about a proposed route by the side of the clinic on Scraptoft lane through a recreation area which happens to be owned by the city council. Meanwhile, the sealed-off stretch is being vandalised while it stands idle.
I find it extraordinary that the EDDR, planned for over 50 years, has been blocked by the city council. The council built 120 new houses on Goodwood road, which, in my view, should be demolished forthwith. Many people feel that that constituted a deliberate attempt by the city council to block Goodwood road, even though the council knew that it was part of the long-planned eastern relief road. That was an ill-advised planning decision by the city council, and questions could well be asked about the considerable waste of public money involved in building the new houses in Goodwood road.
Most Conservatives in the county, and many in the city, feel that the EDDR must go ahead, and must still follow the Goodwood road route, even if the houses there have to be soundproofed. Colchester road is also part of the planned route: it is already dual carriageway and presents no problems.
As I said a moment ago, I have carefully considered the problems that I have tried to outline tonight. I have written to my hon. Friend the Minister and recently he was kind enough to meet a delegation of Conservative Leicestershire county councillors, Oadby and Wigston borough councillors and Harborough district councillors. The united view of the delegation was that the EDDR must forge ahead on the agreed route along Goodwood road soon and on the planned route to the A6 to relieve traffic at Oadby.
When we raised those points at the meeting, the Minister made the perfectly valid point that the responsibility for the EDDR was not his. He said that it was the responsibility of the county council. However, the county council's engineer said that, while the council is acting as the Department's agent, no money can be spent on speeding up the EDDR without the Minister's specific consent. Some of us hope tonight to persuade the Minister that the county council should be authorised to speed up completion of the EDDR before the most unimaginable chaos occurs in Oadby in my constituency.
My next point concerns the Leicester eastern bypass. I want to place on record my appreciation of the Minister's kind and careful attention to the views of the delegation consisting of Conservative county councillors, borough councillors and district councillors. One of the reasons for tonight's debate is to try to persuade my hon. Friend the Minister that the points raised by the delegation should at least be considered before the Leicester eastern bypass is proceeded with.
We were united when we asked the Minister why Leicestershire county council, Oadby and Wigston borough council and Harborough district council were not consulted. None of them was informed about the bypass. Even hon. Members were not asked for an opinion. That is regrettable, because if the Minister had taken the trouble to consult some of his colleagues in the House, he would have been told not to hurry over the bypass.
A solution is being sought today to a problem that many of us feel will not arise until the end of the century provided that the link—the EDDR—is made to work. It is essential to get that working like a clock and if that is achieved, the need for an eastern bypass will recede into the mists of next century. There is no hurry. The EDDR should be sorted out and a much more relaxed programme for an eastern bypass could then be adopted.
Another important point that I raised with the Minister when we met him—it was a point of which I should have given him notice—continues to recur relates to the name of the consultants that he has appointed for the new Leicester eastern bypass. We raised that subject at the meeting at the Department the other day. We said that we were unhappy with Travers Morgan, which had been appointed as agent for the Leicester eastern bypass, as it was the agent employed by the Co-operative Wholesale Society for its Stretton Magna scheme, which involves urbanising up to 5,000 acres in my constituency near Oadby with golf courses, business parks—the lot.
That organisation certainly was engaged in a study at the request of the CWS. Of course, the CWS farms to a great degree in Leicestershire. Travers Morgan, at the time of the submission of the CWS project a year or two ago, did the work for the CWS proposed link road, which it was going to throw in as a sweetener, between the A47 and the A6.
So far, I have been on ground which the Minister cannot challenge, because I am quite exact in my information. However, there is a question mark over the impartiality of Travis Morgan. If Travis Morgan had already done a good deal of the work for the proposed Leicester eastern bypass, as employee and having been paid a fee by the CWS to do the work only a year or two ago, surely it was able to use that recently acquired knowledge to submit to the Department a tender which was probably unfairly competitive because the organisation had already done a great deal of the ground work as a paid agent of the CWS.
The House is entitled to know the actual tender figures for the new Leicester eastern bypass and by how much did Travers Morgan win the contract. If the gap was large, did it represent best practice? With that organisation's previous knowledge, paid for by the CWS, it would seem that, to put it mildly, that was, questionable. As my hon. Friend the Minister knows, in such matters of public concern, everything must be seen to be absolutely above board.
I have been asked about the presence of Travers Morgan in preparing for the Minister's Department a scheme for much of the work which it had already carried out. When Travers Morgan quoted, were the other tendering companies aware of Travers Morgan's previous involvement? What would their feelings be? Can my hon. Friend the Minister assure me that they were informed, as they should have been, in the public interest? If they were not informed and if there was anything—I will not say "underhand"; not as open as it should have been—would not it be best, to restore public confidence to the issue, for Travers Morgan to be dropped as consultants for the Leicester eastern bypass and for fresh consultants to be appointed?
The A427 from Lutterworth to Market Harborough is also a county council road. Quite rightly, in answer to questions that I have tabled in the past couple of weeks, my hon. Friend the Minister has said that he is not responsible and that it is a matter for the county council. The county council has again written to me to say that, as far as Leicester is concerned, only three bypasses can be funded annually in the county, simply because the Minister quite properly keeps his fingers on the till. Three bypasses a year in Leicestershire means that plans for bypasses that are badly needed on the A427 at towns such as Theddingworth fade away into the dim and distant future.
The A427 runs from Lutterworth to Market Harborough. Only recently there was a march by protesters along the whole length of the road. Some had endearing messages for me and some had not so endearing messages for the Government. It is all recorded on film. The A427 is an important little road. It is the main southern east-west road running through the county. The whole lot needs improving.