| Home Page |
Column 611
House of Commons
Monday 25 November 1991
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker-- in the Chair ]
Oral Answers to Questions
TRANSPORT
Bus Deregulation
1. Mr. Fraser : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement about the deregulation of buses in London.
The Minister for Public Transport (Mr. Roger Freeman) : May I, on behalf of my colleagues, and the House, wish you, Mr. Speaker, a very happy birthday?
The Government intend to deregulate bus services in London and privatise London Buses Limited as soon as possible in the next Parliament. Free and fair competition is the best way to ensure that bus services are tailored to the needs of passengers.
Mr. Fraser : Does the Minister acknowledge that even London Transport is alarmed at the way in which-- [Interruption.] I use its words--the Government are handling, the deregulation? That alarm is shared by those who believe that deregulation will cause traffic chaos and will put in jeopardy concessionary fares and the travelcard scheme. Why does not the Minister abandon his ideological obsession with breaking up the London bus service and get on with the job of getting transport moving in London?
Mr. Freeman : I do not recognise the facts as the hon. Gentleman has presented them. First, the senior management of London Transport and the operators of the London bus subsidiaries are in favour of deregulation and privatisation. Secondly, we have no intention of jeopardising the concessionary fares and the travelcard, which are two essential forms of travel subsidy not only for the disabled and pensioners, but for those who want to use different modes of transport.
Mr. Evennett : Is my hon. Friend aware of the appalling bus service in south-east London and that improvements are necessary to benefit my constituents? I understand that my hon. Friend intends to propose a new London bus executive, which would ensure that socially desirable routes are maintained when deregulation takes place.
Mr. Freeman : I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has put his finger on the key advantage of deregulation. When privatised, the bus companies, including the London bus subsidiaries, will take the decision on when and where to
Column 612
run commercial services, but the London bus executive will, on behalf of the taxpayer, subsidise socially necessary services.Mr. Fearn : Would the Minister consider an extension of the franchising of the bus service? At the moment, one third of bus miles are on franchise in London, and that initiative seems to be working. Is not that a better way to proceed than deregulation, which seems to be a shambles?
Mr. Freeman : I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to tendering, which relates only to operating the service--successful tenderers do not keep the revenue. That initiative, welcome though it has been, has gone as far as it possibly can in benefiting London Transport. The next sensible step is deregulation, which will allow the London bus subsidiaries to run their own services.
Mr. Stanbrook : Is my hon. Friend aware that there are great advantages under the existing system and that tendering and licensing have served people in the peripheral areas of the metropolis, such as my own, very well? We hope that we will be not be exposed too much to the dogma of total deregulation.
Mr. Freeman : I am sure that my hon. Friend would want to see the private sector extend to the outer-London suburbs and offer a variety of additional services. That must be to the benefit of his constituents.
South Wales Rail Links
2. Mr. Hain : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement about plans to upgrade rail links to south Wales.
Mr. Freeman : I understand that British Rail is planning to improve the signalling on the Paddington to south Wales line. That will improve journey times. In the longer term, British Rail will consider electrification when the existing rolling stock needs to be replaced.
Mr. Hain : The longer term is not good enough. The Government's abysmal failure to upgrade the links with south Wales means that that part of the country is in danger of becoming a forgotten backwater of the new Europe. Does the Minister agree that British Rail should extend the channel tunnel link via Waterloo international terminal not just to Cardiff, but to Swansea and, if necessary, to Fishguard as well?
Does the Minister further agree that sleeper services to Brussels and Paris must be extended to Swansea, and that a new freight terminal must be built at Swansea so that business and inward investment are given that vital artery to the new Europe from south Wales?
Mr. Freeman : I am sure that the hon. Gentleman does not wish to talk down south Wales and the tremendous improvements and achievements in the south Wales economy. As for freight services, the hon. Gentleman will know of British Rail's plan to run channel tunnel freight from Pengam. He should be encouraging industries in south Wales to use that freight terminal, as I have done. If there is justification for another terminal, for example at Swansea, I am sure that British Rail will react positively.
Mr. Adley : Is not one of the main requirements of south Wales, and indeed south-west England, direct access to the channel tunnel preferably avoiding central London? At the
Column 613
risk of being tedious, may I again ask my hon. Friend to ask British Rail to re-examine the option of full utilisation of the Reading-Redhill-Tonbridge line, which was built last century specifically with the channel tunnel in mind?Mr. Freeman : Following my hon. Friend's advice I went to Redhill to determine the civil engineering works that would be required to carry freight further westwards, instead of through central London. Although the idea is interesting, it presents major planning and construction problems. However, I shall convey what my hon. Friend has said to British Rail.
Mr. Wigley : Is not the Minister aware that the quality of rolling stock on the south Wales line is already far from satisfactory? Substandard rolling stock is frequently being used and, partly as a consequence, trains are running late. British Rail needs to invest massively, not only on the line to Swansea, but on the one through to Fishguard to serve Ireland, and likewise on the Crewe to Holyhead line. Will my hon. Friend take up the issue with British Rail?
Mr. Freeman : British Rail is engaged in its largest investment programme for 30 years, led by Sir Bob Reid, in whom my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State and I have total confidence. This year, he and his board are leading an investment programme of £1.1 billion, and it is for them to make judgments about priorities. I recently visited Holyhead and rode on the railway line from Chester. British Rail is taking steps to improve journey times on the north Wales line.
M4 Widening
3. Mr. Simon Coombs : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on progress on the scheme to widen the M4.
The Minister for Roads and Traffic (Mr. Christopher Chope) : The three commissions to study the need and options for increasing capacity on the length of the M4 between the M25 and junction 15 are proceeding satisfactorily, so the proposals can be announced next spring.
Mr. Coombs : My hon. Friend will be pleased to hear that that report of good progress will be well received in Swindon and elsewhere along the length of the M4. He will be aware of the fact that seven of my constituents were killed in an horrendous accident on the M4 in the spring of this year. In that context, what can be done to improve road safety on the M4, especially in relation to fog warning signals, motorway lighting and central reservation barriers, which have proved ineffective in preventing cross-over accidents?
Mr. Chope : I welcome my hon. Friend's endorsement of the Government's strategy to continue to invest heavily in the motorway network and the plans for the M4, which involve expenditure of about £600 million. It is fair to say that the accident on the M4 to which my hon. Friend referred was caused not by a vehicle crossing over the central reservation, but by a vehicle bouncing back off the central reservation. At the inquest it came out clearly that many people involved in the accident were driving too fast and too close together for the prevailing weather conditions. Earlier this month I announced the introduction of motorway matrix signs on the M4 that can
Column 614
display a fog legend. I hope that that will further reinforce the message to road users during foggy weather that it is indeed foggy, although that should be self-evident to responsible motorists.Dr. Kim Howells : The Minister will be aware that the M4 corridor in South Wales has brought a welcome growth of new industries along it inside Wales, but to transport the manufactured products of Wales from that country, manufacturers have to pay to cross the Severn bridge, and will have to pay even more to cross the new bridge. Why should Welsh industries be penalised when the Government know that the bridge provides an artery to Europe and the great new future which they say companies will find there?
Mr. Chope : I thought that the hon. Gentleman's party was in favour of everything going by rail. His comments show that he recognises that to have a good road infrastructure is vital to the economy of England and Wales. That is why the Government are committed to investing heavily in that infrastructure.
Channel Tunnel
4. Mr. Dunn : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he has any plans to meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss the channel tunnel high-speed rail link ; and if he will make a statement.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Malcolm Rifkind) : I meet Sir Bob Reid regularly to discuss important railway issues, including the Channel tunnel rail link.
Mr. Dunn : When my right hon. and learned Friend meets the chairman, will he raise with him the placement of an international railway station in the north of Dartford and the extent to which he expects the private sector to be involved in that important project?
Mr. Rifkind : On the first point, British Rail will consider the precise provision of stations and other facilities as part of the work that it is currently doing. On the second point, I agree about the desirability of encouraging maximum private sector involvement in the project. I shall soon appoint a merchant bank to advise on private sector finance for the new line.
Mr. Tony Banks : What progress is being made in starting to run the environmental impact assessment which Mr. Ripa di Meana has ordered the Government to undertake? Is it true that up to 1,000 homes in the Stratford area could be subject to subsidence as a result of tunnel boring? It seems an alarmist story, but I am alarmed because I have one of those homes.
Mr. Rifkind : On the hon. Gentleman's first point, long before Mr. Ripa di Meana expressed any opinions on the subject, the Government announced that, of course, there would be an environmental impact assessment of the project. It will take place as soon as British Rail's current work on the details of the line is complete. That answer also covers the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question. The matter that he raises is covered by the present detailed examination.
Mr. Moate : Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that while British Rail is working on the details of
Column 615
the Arup route, there will be a great danger of a management vacuum in the project? Will British Rail always be the manager of the project? If not, whom will the merchant bank to which he referred advise? Is not it time to give some new management impetus to the programme?Mr. Rifkind : I agree with my hon. Friend, and the Government have made it clear that the project should be taken forward as a private sector project. In order that no time is wasted, it is appropriate that British Rail should continue its work on the detailed examination of the line and the environmental impact assessment. In the meantime, the merchant bank that I am soon to appoint will advise on private sector interest in becoming involved in the project. That will ensure that uninterrupted progress can be made.
5. Mrs. Dunwoody : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will hold talks with the chairman of British Rail about the provision of custom-built trains for the channel tunnel from the commencement of its opening.
Mr. Rifkind : The delivery of passenger trains authorised for channel tunnel services is a contractual matter between British Rail and its continental counterparts and the manufacturers. The chairman of British Rail keeps me informed of developments.
Mrs. Dunwoody : The Minister will know that he is in grave danger of finding himself opening a tunnel which, from the first day, has no trains to run in it. Trains are already being built before prototypes are finished. The Secretary of State will be aware of all the trouble that that inevitably causes. Is not it farcical that the combination of brilliant minds that are responsible for building the tunnel, all the staff, and all the work that has gone into the project may not succeed in getting trains running until perhaps as much as a year after the tunnel is opened?
Mr. Rifkind : The Government have given British Rail all the necessary authorisations. For inter-capital services, British Rail ordered the trains way back in 1989. There is a problem, which is the responsibility of the manufacturers, GEC Alsthom. I and Sir Bob Reid recently saw Lord Weinstock to impress on him that his company is expected to meet its contractual obligations. It will be supremely unfortunate if that company does not supply the trains on time. That has been drawn to Lord Weinstock's attention in the firmest possible way.
Mrs. Gorman : When my right hon. and learned Friend is considering the tunnel, will he not neglect the impact that it will have on the A13, which runs through my constituency? May I persuade him to meet me one night at the Blind Beggar on the Mile End road, where I will be pleased to show him some of the most appalling congestion on this two-lane trunk road--
Mr. Speaker : Order. But is it on the railway line?
Mrs. Gorman : It is related to it, Sir, because the railway line impinges on it.
Mr. Rifkind : I shall be happy to meet my hon. Friend at the Blind Beggar or elsewhere. I am sure that she will be able to convey to me any implications for her constituents of the channel tunnel provisions.
Mr. David Marshall : Will the Secretary of State confirm that British Rail has not even ordered the trains or the new
Column 616
sleeper coaches for the services through the tunnel that will go north of London? What hope then is there for any of the through services north of London to be operating when the tunnel opens? Is not that disgraceful, and what does he intend to do to change it?Mr. Rifkind : The hon. Gentleman is being uncharacteristically unfair to British Rail. British Rail is ready to take this forward, but it is not a single-company project. We are in negotiations with both French and Belgium railways because all three companies are involved in the very projects to which he has referred. It is only when agreement is reached on a basis acceptable to all three companies that the trains can be ordered.
The Government have given all the necessary approvals. I very much hope-- and so does British Rail--that the negotiations are brought to an early conclusion so as to allow the necessary contracts to be signed.
Mr. Fry : In view of my right hon. and learned Friend's reply, will he reflect on the fact that both the French and the Belgium railways are in the public sector? If there is to be this great new European co-operation, is not it time that the railway companies at least got together so that British Rail could order the sleeper trains and thus fulfil the contractual obligations into which it has entered?
Mr. Rifkind : Yes, my hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Both companies are in the public sector. When I last met the French Transport Minister, I drew to his attention the importance that we attach to the French Government's doing all within their power to ensure that these matters are accommodated as quickly and as conveniently as possible.
Mr. Tony Lloyd : Is the Secretary of State aware of how disgraceful his answer was? Everywhere north of Watford will be denied proper access to the tunnel, yet he stands up and tells Parliament that the Government have no role in that. He should get off his backside and get the companies together to ensure that we have the engines and coaches to allow the north of England and Scotland to benefit fully from the tunnel.
Mr. Rifkind : The Government certainly have a role to play and I have never suggested otherwise. That is why we have provided all the necessary resources that will go towards the £1.4 billion of investment that British Rail is already incurring in respect of these matters. I also met Lord Weinstock on two occasions in the past few months to impress on him the importance of his company's fulfilling its contractual obligations to British Rail and others involved in these projects.
Tilbury Port
6. Mr. Janman : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what progress has taken place under the Ports Act 1991 to privatise the port of Tilbury.
The Minister for Shipping (Mr. Patrick McLoughlin) : I am pleased to say that the Port of London authority has now advertised the port of Tilbury for sale, and thus begun the bidding process for it. The PLA's aim is to complete the sale of Tilbury by the end of February.
Mr. Janman : The overwhelming majority of employees at the port, who according to a recent survey said that they supported a management-employee buy-out and would
Column 617
buy shares in the newly privatised port, will want to congratulate my hon. Friend on the fast progress being made. Bearing in mind that the overriding priority is to privatise the port as soon as possible, can my hon. Friend assure me that he will give the fullest consideration to the concerns being expressed by the Port of London police authority as privatisation proceeds?Mr. McLoughlin : Indeed, the Port of London police authority has made representations through my hon. Friend the Member for Southend, East (Sir T. Taylor). I am urgently considering them and I hope to be able to make an announcement shortly.
It is quite obvious that the Labour party has been opposed to the privatisation scheme throughout, but the simple fact is that we will give those who work at Tilbury the opportunity to be part of the company. That is a welcome move, which is opposed by the Labour party.
Mr. Spearing : Can the Minister confirm that there is a major anomaly in the Act and in possible privatisation--the fact that the port of Tilbury is not defined geographically? Therefore, can he confirm that if that port obtains property in central or west London the property will become part of the port? Would not it be anomalous for the existing publicly owned Port of London police authority to become the police of a private company? Will the Minister resolve that as soon as possible?
Mr. McLoughlin : I suggest that the hon. Gentleman considers what happened to the Merseyside police force when the Mersey docks were privatised, because he will find no anomaly there. As I have said, we are currently considering the broader aspects of the matter. This is another example of the Labour party's total opposition to privatisation and to people playing a part in the company in which they work. It has not changed.
Sir Teddy Taylor : I hope that the Minister is successful in resolving the serious and real problems faced by the Port of London authority. It will be a major triumph for the Government if they pass an important Act of privatisation while still showing concern for the real needs of people who are affected by it.
Mr. McLoughlin : I take seriously my hon. Friend's point, which we are currently addressing. Just a few weeks ago my hon. Friend led a delegation to see me and the points raised at that meeting are being investigated.
Mr. Prescott : Is the Minister aware that the Port of London authority's chief executive, Mr. McNab, who was appointed by the Government and is responsible for the privatisation of the port, was found by a recent employment tribunal to have been untruthful in the evidence and not to have kept truthful board minutes? Does not the Minister accept that such an outright condemnation of the honesty and integrity of Mr. McNab makes him not a fit and proper person to carry out the privatisation of the port of Tilbury? The Minister should use his powers to remove him.
Mr. McLoughlin : The person who will make the recommendations to the Secretary of State is the chairman of the PLA, Sir Brian Kellnet, and not Dr. McNab as the hon. Gentleman suggests.
Column 618
Fishing Vessel Losses
7. Dr. Godman : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many United Kingdom-registered fishing vessels have been lost in each of the past three years ; and what was the number of fishermen who lost their lives in these founderings of their vessels.
Mr. McLoughlin : The number of United Kingdom fishing vessels lost in 1988, 1989 and 1990, were 22, 22 and 17 respectively. The number of fishermen who lost their lives as a result of accidents to fishing vessels for those years were 18, 16 and 22 respectively.
Dr. Godman : I acknowledge that occasionally fishing vessels, even the biggest freezer trawlers, can be overwhelmed by severe weather. Does the Minister agree that some of the sinkings to which he referred have been brought about by scandalously negligent watchkeeping on the merchant ships that have collided with the fishing vessels? That happened in a recent case in the Firth of Clyde because of negligent watchkeeping on a nuclear submarine. Perhaps men would have neither the time nor the opportunity to don survival suits, but will the Minister assure the House that he will support European Commission recommendations on the carriage of survival suits on our fishing vessels? If such a suit saves the life of only one fisherman in the next year, the Commission's recommendation will have been worthwhile.
Mr. McLoughlin : Any fishing disaster is a tragedy and there have been a number over the years, as hon. Members are sadly aware. Research is under way to establish the most effective type of in-water thermal protection for fishermen when they are working in exposed situations. It is not quite as easy as the hon. Gentleman suggests, because there is the problem of putting on the equipment and the suits in time when an incident occurs. The problem with wearing such equipment all the time is that it can restrict movement. I certainly take on board the serious points made by the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. David Martin : May I express upon my hon. Friend the continuing strength of feeling in Portsmouth about the Wilhemina J. tragedy, especially in view of the Zulfikar case in Cyprus? Will my hon. Friend address that with increasing urgency? Will he let me know when he expects to receive the marine accident investigation branch inquiry report on the matter and when its findings will be made known through his Department to the public, the relatives and advisers? Were there observers in Cyprus on behalf of his Department or the branch and, if so, what lessons were learnt from their observations?
Mr. McLoughlin : I can confirm that an observer from the Department was present at the trial to which my hon. Friend refers. The inspector is in the process of writing his report, which will be submitted to the chief inspector of marine accidents and then, in due course, to my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State. I am concerned about the length of time that it takes to get such reports published and I have asked the chief inspector and various other people to re-examine the time that is needed for consultation to see whether the bringing of these reports into the public domain can be speeded up. That would be in everybody's interests.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing : As reference has already been made to the tragic sinking of the Antares, can the Minister
Column 619
tell us what discussions the Department has held with the Ministry of Defence on this issue? Was there any input from the Ministry of Transport, as it has responsibility for safety at sea, and if not, why not?Mr. McLoughlin : There have been continuing talks with the Ministry of Defence following the Antares case and a number of suggestions have been made by both departments. I am waiting to publish the report from the marine accident investigation branch.
Mr. Harris : Is my hon. Friend aware of the deep and justifiable concern felt about the number of fishing boats that have been lost as a result of collisions with merchant vessels? An example of this was the accident involving the Margaret and William II, with the loss of two fishermen, in my constituency. Now that all these accidents are being investigated by the marine accident investigation branch, once my hon. Friend gets its report, will he conduct an overall review to examine root causes of the problem, including what I and many others regard as a defect in international maritime law and the inadequacy of watch keeping on merchant vessels?
Mr. McLoughlin : Yes. The chief inspector may make recommendations on these matters and if he does so, they will be seriously considered.
Ms. Walley : Does the Minister agree that the figures for the loss of fishing vessels that have been given to the House show that there is now cause for serious concern about safety implications? Will the Minister examine the competence of the marine accident investigation branch? The families concerned in Portsmouth and the people shocked by the revelations in the "World in Action" programme agree with Labour Members that what is needed is not just investigation of individual accidents, but a complete review of maritime safety and fishing activity in the channel and United Kingdom waters, extending to the whole of international maritime law.
Mr. McLoughlin : The simple point is that fishing accidents and losses are nothing new. They are tragic whenever they happen, and important lessons can be learnt from them. When we set up the marine accident investigation branch not long ago, the Opposition did not object to it. They did not call into question the competence of the senior officials who administer that organisation and I am sorry that they have started to do so today. When reports are published and recommendations are made, we need to look at them and act on them.
London Underground
8. Mr. Cox : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce the programme for improvements on London Underground following the increased funding announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Freeman : As well as the Jubilee line extension and completion of the Central line modernisation, London Underground's programme is likely to include improvements to stations at the southern end of the Northern line ; more refurbished trains starting with the Metropolitan and Piccadilly lines ; and the redevelopment of Waterloo underground station.
Column 620
Mr. Cox : I note that reply, but is the Minister aware that Londoners want improvements in the foreseeable future? How much of the money that we are told is available will achieve that? What real consultations will there be with the commuters who use London Underground? Will the improvements include some to the disgraceful service on the Northern line which goes through the constituencies of many hon. Members? Specifically, in my constituency, when will the escalators at Tooting Bec station, at last, work?
Mr. Freeman : As for the level of investment in the existing underground system, the hon. Gentleman will be pleased to hear that the recommendation of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, that about £700 million per annum should be spent on the existing railway, will be met in 1993. That represents a significant increase in investment, and that will help the hon. Gentleman's constituents.
Mr. Carrington : Is my hon. Friend aware that there is considerable disquiet about those people whose homes are above the proposed route for the east-west crossrail and over the Chelsea-Hackney line? There is concern about the effect of the noise and vibration from the trains that will run through the tunnels. Will my hon. Friend ensure that sufficient money is available in both of the projects to ensure that there is proper environmental protection for those who live above the tunnels?
Mr. Freeman : My hon. Friend will know that each of the three new major tube lines--the Jubilee line, crossrail and Chelsea-Hackney--will be subject to a rigorous environmental impact assessment. I give my hon. Friend the assurance that vibration on the ground is one of the factors that will be taken into account.
Ms. Ruddock : Is the Minister aware that one of the most frustrating experiences of Londoners travelling on the underground system is to find that lifts and escalators are not working? Is the hon. Gentleman aware also that the programme has been slowed down in the current year, with the consequence that only last month London Underground had to report that one in 10 of its lifts and escalators was out of order? Will he now prioritise the repair and refurbishment programme for London Underground's escalators and lifts? Will he back that priority by ring-fencing the money that is devoted to that programme? Will he also admit that there is no so-called new money for the refurbishment of the Northern line and the carriages on it?
Mr. Freeman : Over the next three years, the Government will provide London Underground with almost double the amount of grant that it has received for the past three years. That will go a long way to ensuring that the escalator modernisation programme is enhanced and accelerated. That is one of the purposes of the money. The hon. Lady talks about London Underground and makes criticism of it, but the criticisms are not matched by one extra penny being promised for it by the Labour party.
Rail Services (South-east)
9. Mr. David Shaw : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make a statement about Network SouthEast's achievement of its preformance targets in
Column 621
respect of passenger services ; and what requests he has received from British Rail for funds for further investment on the London-Dover route.Mr. Rifkind : While performance on average for Network SouthEast during the first half of this financial year has shown an improvement over last year, recent performance on the Kent coast lines has not been acceptable. On the Kent coast, an £86 million resignalling scheme is in progress, which should result in significant improvements.
Mr. Shaw : I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer. I assure him that he is correct that performance recently has not been good enough, and that it must be better. It is important that the Networker trains are brought forward and that we see reliable carriages and coaches on the line. My constituents are receiving better services from the public sector in health and education, and from competitive tendering in local authorities. Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that we want to see a better performance in the public sector from British Rail, or we must privatise it as soon as possible?
Mr. Rifkind : My hon. Friend has recognised the proper priorities. The Government have not yet received a formal investment submission from British Rail in repect of the Networkers. I am glad that the £86 million investment in signalling is going ahead. Recent performance deteriorated badly over the past month, and we hope that British Rail will take urgent action to ensure that the deterioration is rectified.
Mr. Prescott : Will the Secretary of State confirm that the autumn statement promised no new orders for the next three years for Network SouthEast? If new trains can be introduced in other parts of Europe by means of leasing arrangements, why is that system not used here so that there could be new trains instead of spending £50 million to bring up, as it were, old ones but still achieve only a poor standard of service?
Mr. Rifkind : The main difference between the Government's attitude towards British Rail and that of the Labour Government is that we have been increasing resources for it while the Labour Administration reduced them. As for the autumn statement, it is for British Rail to decide how it uses the resources that we are providing for it. British Rail has more resources now than at any time since before the days of Dr. Beeching, and that is something which the Labour Government could not begin to claim.
The hon. Gentleman talked about leasing. He should realise that unless the risk is transferred to the private sector the public sector will not be able to bear higher levels of expenditure. If the hon. Gentleman cannot understand that, it shows why he is unfit ever to be Secretary of State for Transport.
Dame Peggy Fenner : Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that despite that extra money for British Rail, the service that it offers the Medway towns is a disgrace? Commuters there know that they are on the worst line in the south-east. Will my right hon. and learned Friend please undertake a special investigation into that worst line?
Mr. Rifkind : My hon. Friend will know that she is in competition with others of my right hon. and hon. Friends
| Next Section
| Home Page |