| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Atkinson: Given the wide discrepancy between my constituent's recollection of his experience at Porton Down and what my hon. Friend has told the House about his experience as recorded there, is there not a case for further investigation?
Mr. Soames: I shall come to that point later because I have a helpful suggestion for my hon. Friend.
The nature of the information recorded with regard to the volunteer programme has also developed over the years. Details held on those who participate in studies at present are kept in paper folders that include the volunteer's entry and exit medical reports, a copy of their consent to participate and many other detailed records. That level of information is felt to be comprehensive by modern standards. Sadly, such information is not available for many of our former volunteers, and many of the remaining records are incomplete. Unfortunately, in some cases it is impossible to provide any further elucidation beyond confirming the dates of attendance and the general type of activity.
In Mr. Paynter's case, we have now found a fair amount of information, although as we have admitted to my hon. Friend, we had some difficulties in identifying that Mr. Paynter participated in the London smog trials, principally because of the nature of the records now held. We have made all the relevant facts available and provided my hon. Friend and Mr. Paynter with considerable detail.
I understand that in addition to details of the studies in which he participated, staff at Porton Down have provided Mr. Paynter with copies of technical papers believed to relate to the studies in which he took part. They have also offered to meet him to talk through the results discussed in the papers. Such a meeting, which he has yet to arrange, would be very helpful in addressing any other major concerns regarding his experience and would be a fruitful route to pursue in respect of the further inquiries to which my hon. Friend referred. I shall be happy to follow up the result of that meeting.
I wish to close by thanking my hon. Friend for bringing Mr. Paynter's case to the attention of the House. My Department is grateful to Mr. Paynter and all the others for their participation in the work of Porton Down. Without the involvement of human subjects, it would be impossible to evaluate the effects of wearing the equipment developed at Porton Down on the ability of the armed forces to carry out normal military tasks in hazardous environments. That was well demonstrated by the equipment and kit used by British armed forces in the Gulf, where there was a real threat of the use of chemical or biological weapons. The Ministry of Defence is very grateful to all those who through their participation in studies at Porton Down have contributed to providing the UK with safe and effective protection.
I profoundly sympathise with Mr. Paynter's concerns about his ill health, and we have tried to deal with his questions openly and honestly and to the full extent of the information that is now available. I hope that my hon. Friend will accept my reassurance and further urge his constituent to meet officials at Porton Down, if necessary with my hon. Friend's attendance, to discuss any further ideas that Mr. Paynter may have about how we can help him.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones (Ynys Mon):
I begin by telling the House of the deep sense of anger and betrayal felt by my constituents at the Welsh Office's announcement on 10 July 1996 about the A5-A55 improvements in Anglesey that private funding was being sought for the project and that the starting date was to be put back 18 months at least.
We are angry that the announcement was made in a reply to a parliamentary question from the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Sweeney). This is the first time that any announcement on the A5 has been made in that way without consultation or prior notice. We feel betrayed by the content of the statement. Three "Roads in Wales" publications, a departmental report, a reply to a Select Committee report, a budget statement, ministerial statements and countless letters, up to 24 May this year, had made it clear that the Welsh Office regarded the improvements as a high priority to be paid for from public funds.
Those feelings are shared across the island of Anglesey--by the local authority, community councils, businesses and all who believe that the road improvements are crucial for the economic future of our communities. The anger and betrayal are felt most deeply by those who live on the route of the current A5. The residents of Caerwen, Gwalchmai, Bryngwran, Caergeiliog, Valley and Holyhead have to put up day after day and night after night with movements of traffic such a scale that their lives are becoming intolerable. According to a local authority report,
The road safety aspect is significant. In 1988, Gwynedd county council--the then highway authority--published an analysis of accidents on the A5. It found a concentration of accidents in the five villages on the route, and particularly along London road in Holyhead. Indeed, the A5 through Holyhead--one and a quarter miles of the 18-mile section in Anglesey--accounted for one fifth of all injury accidents. It is estimated that completing the road would reduce accidents by 70 per cent.
Then there are the economic arguments. The current situation, with long tailbacks at peak periods and heavy traffic during most of the day, is causing havoc for businesses that rely on good transport facilities. Successful businesses cannot tolerate such long delays on the major road artery serving the island. They all speak of the need to start the road programme as quickly as possible. I shall quote later in my speech from some of the letters that I have received. I have already received letters from more than half the community councils on the island, as well as more than 50 letters from businesses and organisations. I know that there are more to come.
Let me try to put the scale of the traffic into perspective. The second road crossing on to the island and the dual carriageway bypassing Llanfairpwll were
completed in the early 1980s. In 1981, 22,465 freight units were going by road to Holyhead and a total of 123,764 cars and coaches. In 1995, the totals were 69,697 freight units and 408,474 cars and coaches--increases of 210 per cent. and 230 per cent. respectively. Those staggering figures do not take into account the increase in local traffic, the impact of the HSS vessel introduced by Stena this year or the new Irish Ferries super-ferry, said to be the largest in north-west Europe, which is due to come into service in Holyhead in 1997.
Let me recap on the story to date. The first significant development occurred on 13 April 1988, when I led a local authority delegation to the Welsh Office and met the then Minister, the right hon. Member for Conwy (Sir W. Roberts). After we had pressed our case, he declared that the Welsh Office had decided to dual the section from Llanfairpwll to Turnpike Nant.
Naturally, the delegation was pleased with the announcement as far as it went. I pressed the Minister not to close his mind to completing the dualling of the road all the way to Holyhead. I asked him to receive further evidence, and he readily agreed. Shortly afterwards, I supplied him with a memorandum setting out the case to deal with the whole section. I have re-read that memorandum in preparation for today's debate. The figures that I quoted on the increase in traffic to Holyhead proved remarkably accurate.
The Minister's announcement about dualling part of the section was confirmed in "Roads in Wales, Progress and Plans for the 1990s", published in 1989, which stated that the section to Turnpike Nant was included in the road building programme. It also said:
We knew that our campaign to dual the whole road to Holyhead had been successful when the document entitled "The A55: The Road of Opportunity" was published late in 1989. There was a palpable sense of relief on the island that the case for the completion of the whole road to Holyhead had been won.
Our efforts were then directed to securing a timetable for the work. No indication came until the publication of the "Roads in Wales" 1992 supplement. It specified that stage 1, from Llanfairpwll to Turnpike Nant, was expected to start between April 1995 and March 1988. Stage 2, from Turnpike Nant to west of Bryngwran, was expected to start within the same period. Stage 3, from west of Bryngwran to Ty Mawr Holyhead, was expected to start after March 1998. The Holyhead relief road was expected to start before April 1995. None of those works has yet been started.
In its response to the report of the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs in March 1992, the Welsh Office said:
The next step was the publication of "Roads in Wales: 1994 Review", published in July of that year. The document contained no firm timetable, but it made several
key statements on Government policy. A number of road schemes were deferred or taken out of the programme, while others were given priority status. The document said:
The people of Anglesey were still concerned by the lack of a firm timetable for the building of the road. We had seen the dates slip, with promises of starts in 1994-95 and in 1996 failing to materialise. The first sign of a proper programme came in a letter sent by the then Secretary of State dated 15 May 1995. In view of its importance to the debate, I want to quote the relevant paragraph in full. He said:
Given those assurances, the people of Anglesey felt that further pressure should be applied to bring the starting date forward. At least we knew that the Treasury had earmarked funds for the project, which was clearly shown as part of the Government's expenditure plans.
A meeting was held on 31 October 1995 with the current Minister with responsibility for transport in Wales, the hon. Member for Cardiff, North (Mr. Jones), at which he received a deputation, which I again led. We pressed him hard on the dates and we came away with the view that the first section could be started in the financial year 1996-97, and the second section would follow 12 months later. The 1995 public expenditure statement confirmed our view. On 13 December 1995, the Secretary of State said:
The Under-Secretary wrote to a number of people to confirm the timetable. He wrote to Ynys Mon county council on 24 May and said:
That announcement marked the first time that I was not given any warning about an announcement concerning the A5 in Anglesey. On previous occasions, I was always given at least a couple of days' prior warning, and rightly so, because it is a major issue in my constituency. Why choose to make the announcement in an answer to a question from the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan? What possible interest could he have in the A5 in Anglesey?
The sense of anger and betrayal to which I referred now has to be channelled into a campaign to demand that the Welsh Office keeps its promise to the people of Anglesey. I have received an overwhelming response to my request for support, and I should like to quote from some of the letters I have received. Beaumaris town council's letter is typical of many. It states:
1.29 pm
"the nuisance they suffer relates to noise, vibration, poor air quality, severance by traffic, road safety problems and visual intrusion."
In many cases, they also suffer from structural damage to their properties.
"The case for upgrading the remainder of the road across Anglesey is being considered".
The work was scheduled to commence not before 1994-95 and we were told informally that it could well start during that financial year.
"The specific objectives of completing the M4 and dualling the A55 will be completed by the mid 1990s".
We are now coming towards the end of the 1990s.
"High priority is attached to extending the A55 across Anglesey to Holyhead. This road will be designated the A55. It is planned to publish draft orders for the Holyhead relief road"--
which was by then late--
"and the stage from Llanfairpwllgwyngyll to Nant Turnpike during 1994".
The report confirmed that the road was to be built in four sections, as outlined in 1992. However, that was to change. The scheme was later reduced from four sections to two.
"I can assure you that I attach high priority to extending the A55 dual carriageway across Anglesey. This is reflected in the plans I announced on 9 March in the 'Departmental Report 1995--The Government's Expenditure Plans 1995-96 to 1997-98' (Cm 2815). A copy of the Major Scheme Forward Trunk Road Programme is enclosed for your information. You will see from this that two schemes--A55 Llanfair PG-west of Bryngwran and A55 west of Bryngwran-Holyhead--costing over £120 million are included in the highest programmed category, i.e. planned to start before April 1998. I am afraid that it is not possible to give a more precise start of work date at this stage."
The letter also confirmed the road's strategic importance in European terms.
"the A55 improvements across Anglesey are important, and I plan to start the first stage of those improvements next year."--[Official Report, 13 December 1995; Vol. 268, c. 1004.]
Subsequently, he explained that next year meant the next financial year, ending 31 March 1997. I know that the Welsh Office has said to the local authority that there is reference in the statement to the use of private finance. Let me make it perfectly clear that that is a misleading statement, because that refers to other projects and not to the A55. The reference to the A55 in that document cites that public funds would be used.
"work on the new road is scheduled to begin in the spring of 1997, demonstrating the commitment to the extension of the A55 across Anglesey."
16 Oct 1996 : Column 796
The local community had worked hard to secure those commitments. We were now being assured by the Welsh Office that the building of the road was a priority; that work on the first section would start in spring 1997; that work on the second section would start in the following year; and that public funds would be used. Little wonder then that the announcement made on 10 July caused such anger and outrage. It came only eight weeks after the Minister's final letter confirming the previous plans. It was made near the end of the summer session. It was made without consultation with the highway authority and on the day when the LG announcement was made. The Government were no doubt hoping to bury the bad news with the good--perhaps the link between the two is closer than we might imagine.
"Dear Mr. Jones
A representative of Tref Alaw community council wrote:
A5-A55 improvement
Thank you for your letter of the 13 September which I have read to my council. As a consequence I am asked to reply, and say my council is 100 per cent. behind your cause and wishes you well in your efforts to improve the situation on Anglesey."
"The new road is already years behind schedule, without mentioning the further delay."
Businesses have been equally forthright. A representative of Anglesey Aluminium has written:
"The poor capacity of the existing A5 has been a deterrent to several aluminium use intensive businesses from locating near the smelter."
Many businesses have written to say that the condition of the A5 is a disincentive to inward investors, and some report that it is difficult to find suppliers who will deliver to the island. Even more alarming is the news that some might relocate unless the road programme moves ahead quickly. One business man wrote
"To bring the road to our doorstep then stop is an insult."
The two companies that operate ferry services from Holyhead have been strong in their condemnation of the Welsh Office decision. Stena's ship and port manager said:
"Stena Line has invested £46 million in redeveloping the Port of Holyhead . . . Both companies have committed large new ferries . . . There is no doubt that we are fast approaching the stage where the growth in business needed to justify the massive investments by the ferry companies and port authority is being stifled by the inadequate access routes."
16 Oct 1996 : Column 797
The managing director of Irish Ferries, Gerry Hickey, wrote:
"The arrival of the new superferry in May 1995 has dramatically increased the traffic through the port, and this has been summarised on the accompanying table, with projections for 1997.
He also sounds a warning that unless we get our act together, the port of Liverpool with its excellent motorway connections threatens to take business away from Holyhead.
Since announcing plans regarding investment in this route in 1993, Irish Ferries has kept all its promises, and to date we have had little support from the Welsh Office".
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |