| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
10.28 am
Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield): I congratulate my very good friend the hon. Member for Luton, South (Sir G. Bright) on securing this important debate on air pollution by particulate matter. He advanced a great deal of detail, as did the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms Ruddock), who speaks for the Opposition. I am as concerned as the hon. Lady and my hon. Friend, but I regret the party political rhetoric that she introduced into the debate. My hon. Friend sought to tackle the problem constructively, giving the Government credit where credit was due, but being constructively critical--not party politically critical--where he believed that the Government could have done more.
Towards the end of her speech, the hon. Member for Deptford said that the overwhelming majority of local government was under socialist control. I am pleased to say that I come from one of the few parts of the United Kingdom where the Conservative party has overall control. I refer to Macclesfield borough council, whose leader is frequently praised by the Labour and Liberal Democrat leaders for the policies that the council pursues. Only recently, it received plaudits for being one of the most environmentally friendly councils in the country.
Although I accept a number of the points made by the hon. Lady, I will not accept her claim that only Labour can reduce pollution. I am not sure, for instance, that,
when buses were in the public sector, the companies involved made the investment in new vehicles and technology to which she referred.
Ms Ruddock:
It is a matter of record that the bus companies bought more new vehicles when they were publicly owned. Since privatisation, the rate of purchase and renewal has decreased, and as a consequence the aging vehicles are producing greater emissions. Moreover, maintenance has declined under the new regime of privatisation and deregulation.
Mr. Winterton:
I am not sure where the hon. Lady finds her facts and statistics. In my view, the age of a vehicle is sometimes less important than the way in which it is maintained. Having used public transport exclusively in the early part of my working life, I can assure the hon. Lady that buses used not to be maintained to the standard that she suggested.
My hon. Friend the Member for Luton, South represents a constituency in which motor vehicles, both domestic and commercial, are very important to the local economy. He has immense knowledge of the industry, and he has done the House a service by raising the subject. I support not only his views in general, but his suggestions as to how the Government can reduce air pollution. He said that he supported their modest fiscal measures relating to, for instance, diesel fuel and unleaded petrol, but felt that they should go further. I agree.
Some years ago, I formed the Manufacturing and Construction Industries Alliance. The last thing that I want is any Government measure that would further undermine or destroy our all too narrow manufacturing base. The Government owe it to the people, and to industry--which is the only source of non-inflationary sustainable economic growth--to help to reduce the pollution of our environment, and air pollution in particular.
I fervently believe that the Government, who have fiercely resisted a return to capital allowances, should consider that way of encouraging people to introduce new technology to reduce such pollution. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister, along with my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to consider introducing fiscal measures--I use the phrase in its widest sense--and capital allowances. That would make possible technological advances which, certainly in the case of commercial and domestic motor vehicles, could make a major contribution to the reduction of air pollution by particulate matter.
Unfortunately, there is an anti-roads lobby. I believe that bypasses and properly assessed road projects can in themselves contribute to the reduction of pollution. Most pollution caused by vehicles occurs when they are idling in traffic jams and then moving forward a few yards. Congestion is a major problem, especially in urban areas. I regret the dramatic cut in road projects which would often enable traffic to flow more smoothly, thereby reducing air pollution.
As an asthmatic, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, South is perhaps better qualified to speak about the subject than most of us--the hon. Member for Deptford paid tribute to him on those grounds--but he also has considerable knowledge of the subject. The House, and the Treasury in particular, should respect that knowledge.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister will respond positively, constructively and sympathetically, but I ask him not to pull his punches behind the scenes. He should urge the Treasury to introduce both fiscal measures and capital allowances, along with other measures to reduce air pollution.
My hon. Friend has done the House and the country a service by speaking as he has today.
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby):
I apologise for not being present at the beginning of the debate. I also apologise to the hon. Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Ms Ruddock) as I heard only half her speech.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield(Mr. Winterton) pointed out, this subject is important to everyone--not just those who endure air pollution in Westminster, where I live during the week. I am sorry that the hon. Member for Deptford spoke in party-political terms, because air pollution involves everyone in an apolitical sense. Public attitudes and public policy must be changed. Let us not pretend that every person who sits in a motor car jamming up The Mall, Millbank and Parliament square is a Labour or Conservative supporter; all those people are individuals, who have chosen to drive their cars. We need to change their attitudes. I travelled here by bicycle this morning, and I trust that the hon. Member for Deptford used public transport. She does not seem to be nodding, but I am sure that she uses public transport much more than her car. After all, this place is very well served by public transport.
The hon. Lady made two points. I do not wish to dwell on party-political matters, but she raised them. One was about local government, and how efficient it could be. I see that the hon. Member for Lewisham, East(Mrs. Prentice) is also present; she and I used to sit together on the back benches of Hammersmith and Fulham council. If I believed that that council used its funds efficiently when it was run by the Labour party, I might agree with more that the hon. Member for Deptford said, but in fact it was appallingly inefficient in those days. Money was spent on, for instance, a women's slide library and a women's bus, which--with a great fanfare--was bought for politically correct reasons and parked in the square. It travelled eight miles in a single year in order to be serviced.
Ms Ruddock:
According to the hon. Gentleman, party politics have no place in the debate.
Mr. Robathan:
I am replying to what the hon. Lady said. She made a party-political speech.
The hon. Lady also suggested that private enterprise and the market had no place in public transport and public policy issues. She particularly mentioned privatisation, and her approach sits ill with new Labour policies. I also see the way in which private enterprise drives matters such as transport much better than the old, dead hand of bureaucracy. I want a good transport system in this country, and such a system is not well driven by Government hand-outs, which have never worked. One has only to consider British Rail, which we shall be discussing this evening. When I was born, there were
15 stations in my constituency. Every one was closed by a nationalised British Rail, and one was reopened under a Conservative Government. Does the hon. Lady want to say more? No.
Ms Ruddock:
I in no way suggested that the private sector did not have a role to play. I paid tribute to parts of the private sector in the motor industry and others. I said that the policy of privatisation and deregulation has destroyed our public transport. That has happened in respect of buses. We have poorer and more expensive services and very much worse vehicles in general on our streets today than when the service was under public ownership. The same will happen with the railways, which are already in a dire state in the run-up to privatisation--and deliberately so, because of the Government's policies. The issue is party political because the Government--
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes):
Order. That was becoming a mini-speech rather than an intervention.
Mr. Robathan:
I ask the hon. Lady to defend the record of British Rail. Many excellent people have worked hard, but can she defend its record in closing all those stations? Perhaps in Lewisham, too, the hon. Lady can identify one or two old lines, the course of an old railway on the map, along which once upon a time people travelled before nationalisation.
10.36 am
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |