| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Clause 3
1.14 pm
Mr. Mark Robinson (Somerton and Frome): I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 30, at beginning insert
'Subject to subsection (4) below,'.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse): With this, it will be convenient to discuss also amendmentNo. 2, in page 2, line 31, at end insert--
'(4) References in this section to records do not include references to records which are public records within the meaning of the Public Records Act 1958.'.
Mr. Robinson: I received representations to the effect that the Bill as drafted could lead to confusion if records with which it deals are already covered by the Public Records Act 1958. I gave notice in Committee that I would table these amendments on Report. Without them, there would be unnecessary duplication of bureaucracy, which I am sure hon. Members would want to avoid and which could only lead to confusion.
I believe that public records are adequately protected without providing the Railway Heritage Committee with the power to designate them. I am pleased that the committee agrees with that proposition, and I urge the House to support the amendments, which are purely technical.
Mr. Michael Stern (Bristol, North-West):
Will my hon. Friend explain briefly the sort of records that would not be designated? I do not object to the amendments--he flagged the issue in Committee--but it would be helpful to have one or two examples of the type of record involved.
Mr. Robinson:
We are talking about things that are a matter of public record and which are therefore classified as public records. There are a host of them, but I do not have a specific example in mind. The point is that the power to designate already exists, so to write that power into the Bill would simply provide two systems of designation whereas only one is needed.
The Minister of State, Department of National Heritage (Mr. Iain Sproat):
The Government agree entirely with my hon. Friend and support the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment made: No. 2, in page 2, line 31, at end insert--
Order for Third Reading read.
Mr. Mark Robinson:
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
I begin by thanking all those who have helped to bring the Bill to Third Reading. I especially thank my hon. Friend the Minister for Railways and Roads for his support and advice. He has explained why he is unable to be here this afternoon, but the Government are well represented by my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department of National Heritage, whose Department has an interest in the Bill.
It is also appropriate to mention Sir Gordon Higginson, the chairman of the Railway Heritage Committee, his colleagues on that committee, and the British Railways Board, because they, too, have been instrumental in supporting the Bill. Indeed, the Bill's success in progressing towards the statute book required all-party consensus, and I am grateful to hon. Members on both sides of the House who served on the Standing Committee and who brought with them a wide range of specialist interest in, and knowledge of, our railways.
My task was not as difficult as that described byF. S. Williams, a Nottinghamshire clergyman, in his book entitled "Our Iron Roads", which was published in the 1870s and republished 100 years later. In it, he describes the tortuous business of getting on the statute book legislation necessary to build our railways, a process that has been reflected in the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Bill. My Bill has had a relatively smooth passage, for which I am grateful. I know that people interested in the railways are equally appreciative.
I shall deal now with the substance of the Bill. It will ensure that railway artefacts and records of historic interest continue to be preserved for posterity. It will strengthen the position of the Railway Heritage Committee, which was set up under the Railways Act 1993, by bringing items now in the private sector back within its remit. Previous legislation had been confined to public sector bodies, which would be virtually meaningless post privatisation.
There has for a long time been all-party support for the aim of preserving the railway heritage of the nation. Section 144 of the Transport Act 1968 transferred responsibility for the British Railways Board's historical artefacts and certain of its records to the Department of Education and Science. In 1975, the national railway museum was established in York. I am sure that the hon. Member for York (Mr. Bayley) and my hon. Friend the Minister would wish to join me in praising the excellent work that the museum has done since then. Railway heritage was taken into account in the Railways Act 1993. I am also grateful to the hon. Member for York for his support during my work on the Bill.
Section 125 of the Railways Act 1993 extended the protection of railway artefacts and records to those owned by the new public sector bodies set up under that Act. Under that section, the Railway Heritage Committee was created in 1994, with the functions of designating artefacts and records as worthy of preservation and ensuring that they went to the appropriate collecting institutions at the end of their working lives. The committee is composed of highly respected figures in the working railway and railway heritage communities, and is chaired by the former vice-chancellor of the University of Southampton, Sir Gordon Higginson. It has already undertaken some worthwhile work, to which I pay tribute.
The committee has designated more than 7,000 engineering drawings from the Brunel era, many of which bear the signature of Isambard Kingdom Brunel. That is particularly gratifying to me, because I was born in Bristol and spent much of my childhood there. IKB is therefore a part of my culture. I am pleased to see that my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. Stern) is in the Chamber, as he and I are aware of the tremendous contribution that Brunel made to the history of that great city. In addition, I am glad that Bristol is once again governed as a city and is no longer burdened with the county of Avon. Perhaps that is a little outside the remit of the Bill.
I have been asked to give examples of items that might be designated for preservation. They include working drawings, including drawings of stations or rolling stock; publications such as rulebooks, timetables or instruction manuals; paintings of railway subjects; posters and publicity material; small artefacts marked with the monogram of the owning company, such as crockery and furniture; and items of signalling equipment, such as block instruments, signal repeaters or early electro-mechanical relays. Larger items, such as signals, lever frames and even a complete signal box could also be included. I have been told that, because it is able to be dismantled, the Forth rail bridge might be included as an artefact. Some track components, such as rail supports, chairs or point-blocking mechanisms, and of course our much treasured and valuable rolling stock, might also be designated.
The designations will not be confined to historic items; modern items such as solid state interlocking signalling systems, which have been developed in Britain and are now exported worldwide, are also worthy of consideration. Another example might be the high-speed diesel train, the InterCity 125, used on the great western line, the midland main line, the north Wales line and some cross-country services. The class 158 diesel train used on the Bristol, Frome, Yeovil and Weymouth line may also be included. That line commands great affection from my constituents in Frome, and the rail users group in Frome is anxious that it should continue to operate successfully. I am glad that it has been included in the franchising director's timetabling proposals.
The powers of the Railway Heritage Committee would be under threat without this Bill. As companies pass into the private sector, their historic records and artefacts cease to be covered by the committee's powers. As the flotation of Railtrack will soon be upon us--Railtrack is one of the principal owners of railway records--this is a matter of pressing concern. The problem was foreseen when the Railways Bill was in another place. Ministers undertook to cover the private sector through a voluntary scheme, but it was later found that that was not a workable option. That is why I am now promoting this Bill. It will ensure the protection of those artefacts and records which leave the protection of section 125 of the Railways Act 1993 as their owners are privatised.
The Bill deals with artefacts and records. There was considerable discussion in Committee about the precise meaning of "artefact" and whether it included buildings but, of course, buildings and permanent structures are protected by planning legislation. A good example of that is the grade I listed engine sheds at Bristol Temple Meads. Many hon. Members, notably the hon. Member for West
Bromwich, East (Mr. Snape), will be aware of the Railway Heritage Trust's excellent work in funding and carrying out preservation work on those engine sheds.
'(4) References in this section to records do not include references to records which are public records within the meaning of the Public Records Act 1958.'.--[Mr. Mark Robinson.]
1.16 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |