Vice-Admiral John Hughes Hallett:

It is in no spirit of levity that I call attention to the plight of cycling in the United Kingdom. It is not a light matter that a famous British industry should find itself in dire straits. It is not a light matter that over 3,000 people should be out of work in Birmingham, and that the great factories at Nottingham should be reduced to a four-day week. It is not a light matter that the country should be faced with the loss of a traditional export market while the whole of this industry works at less than 50 per cent. of its capacity.

Yet I did not seek for this debate primarily from the industrial point of view, important though that is. I have neither a personal nor a Constituency interest in the cycle industry—there are other hon. Members who are much better qualified to argue that angle. Indeed, it was as a result of listening to their pleas for relief for this industry from Purchase Tax that the idea occurred to me that it might be useful to consider for a few minutes the wider aspect of cycling in this country.

I do not question, of course, that some fiscal assistance might not be helpful. On the other hand, I doubt whether the total abolition of Purchase Tax would prove a radical remedy for the industry's difficulty. Surely, the basic trouble is the declining number of people who regularly cycle. Let me start therefore, by saying a word about the extent of this decline.

Unfortunately, there are no accurate figures, but it is estimated by the trade that there are about 9 million cycles in use today, and it is known that rather over 3 million of these are used by children under 15. It is further estimated that these figures represent a decline of about 3 million in the number of adult cyclists compared with 20 years ago. Against this, the figures for child cyclists are tending to rise, and clubs like the Cyclists Touring Club are doing their utmost to encourage youngsters to join, and to co-operate with the National Cycling Proficiency Scheme. In that connection, I am pleased to note that Croydon, apparently, leads the country, no fewer than 5,733 children having gained the certificate up to last week.

As I have said, the number of adult cyclists appears to have declined by at least 3 million since pre-war days. Most, although by no means all, of this decline has been brought about by fewer people cycling to and from their work. There has also been a heavy—but, again, unknown—decline in the number of people who go for so-called "club runs" at weekends. Anyone who uses the roads today, and can remember the 'thirties will have noticed the change. Curiously enough, the membership of the older clubs—which keep accurate records—has not declined very much since 1938. I understand that they have about 100,000 members today, although it is true that they went through a phase, rising to about a quarter of a million members in the early post-war years.

In the 'thirties there were innumerable office cycle clubs, and cycle sections of boys' clubs which, taken together, made cycling perhaps the greatest recreational and social movement of that time. Today, all that is very much reduced.

I turn now to the causes of the decline. Here also we enter into the realm of speculation. The most popular explanation is that people who used to cycle to work can now afford to use motor transport. Indeed, compared with 1938 there are almost exactly one million more motor cycles of all kinds on the roads. That would indicate that perhaps upward of two million people mostly use public transport. Perhaps some of them have private cars and go to work that way. This fact would go a long way to explain the embarrassing rise in the peak loads from which so many public transport undertakings are suffering.

Again, there is the mistaken fear that cycling is unduly dangerous. In point of fact—anyhow, in point of statistical fact—one's chances of being involved in an accident are four times as great in a motor car and ten times as great on a motor cycle as they are on a pedal cycle. Yet although one can still survive on a pedal bicycle, I must admit that the pleasure of cycling, at any rate on the main roads and in towns, grows less with every year that passes.

Constant vigilance and sustained concentration are now necessary. One is continually near-missed by a veritable whirlwind of desperately driven cars—or, at least, that is the way it seems to the cyclist. Indeed, some drivers openly resent the presence of cyclists on the main roads and expect them to get out of their way. If the worst happens and they do not get out of their way, motorists rely very often on the fact that there will probably be a Majority of fellow-motorists on the jury.

When we consider the consequences of the decline in cycling, we come to firmer ground. It spells greater demands on public transport, higher living costs and no regular fresh air and exercise for a growing proportion of the population. The decline in club cycling means that there is so much less healthy social life and less healthy exercise for the rising generation, and0 so much more hanging about with consequent temptation to get into mischief.

To my mind, the most serious consequence of the decline in cycling is that it was once the principal means whereby the population kept fit. So far as I can see, no increase in playing fields could possibly take its place. I hope, therefore, that the Wolfenden Committee on Sport will take note of the magnitude of the contribution which a revival of cycling could make towards national fitness. I hope that educational authorities will make sure that the importance of regular exercise—anyhow, regular exercise to the average person—is carefully explained. I know that there are many hon. Members who take no exercise, and glory in the fact and seem to remain quite well but then, I think you will agree, Mr. Speaker, hon. Members as a body are perhaps not representative of the average man. I repeat, therefore, that it is necessary to the average person's health and happiness to be reasonably fit.

With the approaching end of National Service and with the ever-rising proportion of the population who are employed on sedentary or static work, this ability to keep fit and take healthy exercise will depend more and more upon sport. Potentially, cycling can be the cheapest sport for the greatest number, and that is why I view its decline with so much concern. The House may be interested to know that the American authorities have already reached this conclusion. With the support, I understand, of the President himself, the President's Council on Youth Fitness has been sponsoring a considerable propaganda campaign in support of cycling, for the last year.

What then can we do here? No doubt, it would pay the Ministry of Health to sponsor a similar campaign in this country. No doubt, a certain amount of selective help to those hostels which cater especially for young touring cyclists and a certain amount of help to bodies which organise continental cycling tours would be useful. However, I see that my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation is to reply to this debate, so I should, perhaps, close with one or two suggestions about what his Ministry might be able to do to help.

At the risk of making myself unpopular, I wish to advocate the far more extensive construction of cycle tracks. Segregation of different types of road user is, surely, the means to both safety and comfort. I know that the cycling clubs have consistently boycotted the tracks, and, for that matter, so has the long-distance, fast cyclist. To be fair to these people, however, the surface of the existing tracks is not really safe for a light-weight bicycle ridden fast. Nevertheless, I understand it to be the opinion of the police, contrary to popular opinion, that the great majority of cyclists always use tracks when they can.

A great deal of special pleading has been deployed against the tracks. For example, most ingenious statistics have been cooked up to show that it is as dangerous to cycle along a track as it is to cycle on the carriageway. It all depends, of course, on the kind of accident one has in mind. However, the true case for cycle tracks rests, I should say, far more on comfort than on safety. I myself always use a cycle track when there is one. The use of a cycle track enables the rider to relax and look at the scenery; indeed, one can even compose one's next oration while riding along.

Provided that the tracks were reasonably wide and well maintained, I do not myself believe that there would be nearly as much Opposition to making them compulsory on the trunk roads as is sometimes supposed. In passing, Mr. Speaker, I will point out that that would not require legislation. The existing powers are sufficient for that to be done. Of course, in built-up, urban areas segregation is not possible.

This leads me to my second and even less popular suggestion, I suggest that, in the interests not only of cyclists but, incidentally, of pedestrians as well, the time has really come when serious consideration should be given to enforcing the 30 miles-an-hour speed limit, at least during those times of the day when large numbers of people are going to work or returning home after work. I recognise that a great number of drivers already observe the limits, but the existence of even a few cars which overtake at 50 miles an hour in a crowded street imposes a very great strain on the cyclist.

It would be easy to go on suggesting ways and means of encouraging cycling, but time will not permit. I wish to leave my hon. Friend with the thought that a revival of cycling in this country is, indeed, in the national interest, and I appeal to his Ministry to make a conscious effort to foster it.