---

Mr. Hill : I do not know whether the story was true or not, but that is what was reported. Anyone can say, several months later--

Mr. Prescott : The hon. Gentleman must know from his local paper that I corrected the story in a letter to the paper

---

Column 1202

and in a letter to the council. I said that the reporter had got it wrong and the paper accepted that. As the hon. Gentleman must know, a statement was put in the press.

Mr. Hill : Indeed, I wrote a letter about the accusation against the hon. Gentleman. I knew that what he was basically saying was good socialist policy and he cannot deny it. It is good socialist policy to say that small railways do not pay, so we should subsidise them. That is what he was really saying at the conference.

We have heard a lot about finance. Whether the railway is subsidised is neither here nor there. We have been told that there will be some big investors. The local authority led us right up the garden path by telling us that Peter de Savary who, at that time, had just bought Eastleigh airport was going to provide a railway into Southampton to meet up with the people mover. Most of us know Peter de Savary pretty well. If he does not get planning permission, he moves on. In this case he received planning permission for Eastleigh and made a great business success of it.

Mr. Colvin : Then he moved on.

Mr. Hill : As my hon. Friend says, he moved on.

I wondered who would be the biggest investor in Southampton to think of taking on part or even the whole of the project. I asked the port manager of Associated British Ports Holdings about that and he in turn got in touch with Sir Keith Stuart. A letter was sent to me on 14 January 1991 which stated :

"Dear James, You asked me to let you know ABP's position so far as the proposed Southampton rapid transit project is concerned. It would seem that the project has quite some way to go"--

I agree with that wholeheartedly--

"before achieving tangible support from those organisations who might have a direct interest. ABP would be indirectly affected by the proposed rapid transit system but we do not have any significant involvement with the project at this time."

Again, that is a bit of a smokescreen.

My hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside talked about drawing up a prospectus. The local authority has drawn up a prospectus. It has tried to get money from investors, but it has failed abysmally. It has about £60,000 to do a little project. If people in the market place were considering putting money on the prospectus that Southampton city council has put forward, they would be well advised to go to their solicitors immediately because there is no security in this venture.

The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) has just arrived, on time as always. I hope that he will not try

Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover) : One thing is certain. I have not come out of the Bar as I can tell that the hon. Gentleman has, with his red face.

Mr. Hill : You, Mr. Deputy Speaker, will protect me from the accusation that I have come out of the Bar. I have been here all evening from 7 pm.

Mr. Colvin : It is not possible in law to write a prospectus without having secured the passage of a Bill through Parliament. That means that any so-called prospectus is not worth the paper on which it is written and cannot be judged as a prospectus.

Mr. Hill : My hon. Friend has pointed out, as he did before, that no prospectus can be written until the passage of the Bill has been secured. But that has not stopped the

---

Column 1203

council trying to obtain money from almost everyone. When I first discussed the financial structure and all the various people clinging to it and sucking the substance out of it, it occurred to me that Arthur Daley might describe the scheme as "a nice little earner". It has been just that. Some £750,000 has been spent, much of it in officers' time. I believe that £33,000 has gone to a public relations firm, and a tremendous amount--more than £200,000-- has gone to consultants. The whole thing is a mess of pottage. We must try to get shot of it tonight.

This is the first occasion on which we have debated the present Bill, but the more I read of what the local authority does, the more disturbed I become. I was born in the city of Southampton, and for two or three generations my family has admired that city. It is a terrible thing to see what the local council has done to it. I even asked the other day whether we should get the Prince of Wales down as a consultant to look at what is happening to our city. In architectural language, it is the big shed syndrome, and every big shed in Southampton looks as though it will not be there in 20 years' time. There is no planning as such.

The council has pushed ahead with the railway scheme. The difficulty is that it was allowed to get its way because there did not seem to be anyone who could stop it while it was telling half-truths. Now we are getting down to the nitty gritty. We have heard a lot of truth tonight.

Most hon. Members present will think that this is a parochial issue with which they should not get involved. I am grateful to my hon. Friends for supporting me tonight. It is as well that we are to vote on the matter shortly, and I thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for allowing us to go a little wider than is usual on a debate on a revival motion.

Mr. Richard Holt (Langbaurgh) : I know that my hon. Friend is concerned with Southampton and with the Bill, but it may interest him to know that the county of Cleveland has already spent more than £750,000 in respect of a similar project in Teesside which has not even got as far as the project that we are discussing. That shows how community charge payers' money is being squandered the length and breadth of the land.

Mr. Hill : I thank my hon. Friend.

I suppose that, in the end, every politician--whether he is elected by 25 per cent. of the electors or by 70 to 75 per cent., as is usual for most Members of Parliament--must safeguard the financial interests of those who put him here. If I were called upon to defend what I have done this evening, I would have to say that I have done it specifically to protect my constituents who pay the community charge.

9.53 pm

Mr. Peter Fry (Wellingborough) : As I explained in an intervention earlier, I am a member of the Select Committee that has been examining the whole question of light rail schemes, which will shortly be producing a report. Obviously I cannot say what will be in that report as that would be most improper. However, a great deal of the evidence has been made public, and I wish to place on record what I consider to be a fundamental point.

In an intervention I pointed out that light rail schemes are now being produced because they are the flavour of the month. Absolutely no regard is being paid to the amount of public money that is being poured out to consultants

---

Column 1204

and others in order to produce schemes without ascertaining whether they are the right schemes for the area in question.

Far more important in relation to the House is the fact that, if we are to have every local authority producing its scheme and trying to promote its Bill, that will make it increasingly difficult for those authorities that have schemes that will work and be accepted to find the time to go through the parliamentary process.

So, in my submission, those who recklessly bring forward proposals such as this are doing no service to public transport in this country, to light rail schemes or to community charge payers. In effect, they are wasting Parliament's time when we might be concerning ourselves with much more important matters.

Question put :--

The House divided : Ayes 49, Noes 138.

Division No. 55] [9.55 pm

AYES

Allen, Graham

Barron, Kevin

Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)

Bottomley, Peter

Boyes, Roland

Campbell-Savours, D. N.

Clwyd, Mrs Ann

Cook, Robin (Livingston)

Cousins, Jim

Cryer, Bob

Dewar, Donald

Dixon, Don

Dobson, Frank

Field, Frank (Birkenhead)

Foster, Derek

Fraser, John

Garrett, John (Norwich South)

Godman, Dr Norman A.

Golding, Mrs Llin

Gould, Bryan

Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)

Grocott, Bruce

Haynes, Frank

Heal, Mrs Sylvia

Hoey, Ms Kate (Vauxhall)

Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)

Ingram, Adam

Lamond, James

McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)

McNamara, Kevin

Madden, Max

Marek, Dr John

Meacher, Michael

Michael, Alun

Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)

O'Neill, Martin

Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

Prescott, John

Quin, Ms Joyce

Richardson, Jo

Rogers, Allan

Ruddock, Joan

Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)

Snape, Peter

Soley, Clive

Spearing, Nigel

Walley, Joan

Wilson, Brian

Tellers for the Ayes :

Mr. Harry Barnes and

Mr. Dennis Skinner.

NOES

Alexander, Richard

Amess, David

Arbuthnot, James

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Arnold, Sir Thomas

Ashby, David

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)

Beggs, Roy

Bellingham, Henry

Bellotti, David

Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)

Body, Sir Richard

Boswell, Tim

Bottomley, Mrs Virginia

Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)

Bowis, John

Brandon-Bravo, Martin

Brazier, Julian

Burns, Simon

Butterfill, John

Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

Carrington, Matthew

Carttiss, Michael

Cash, William

Chapman, Sydney

Chope, Christopher

Clark, Rt Hon Sir William

Colvin, Michael

Conway, Derek

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Cope, Rt Hon John

Currie, Mrs Edwina

Curry, David

Davis, David (Boothferry)

Dorrell, Stephen

Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James

Durant, Sir Anthony

Eggar, Tim

Emery, Sir Peter

Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)

Fallon, Michael

Favell, Tony

Fishburn, John Dudley

Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

Forth, Eric

Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman

Fry, Peter

Gale, Roger

Gill, Christopher

Glyn, Dr Sir Alan

Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)

Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)

Greenway, John (Ryedale)

---