House of Commons
Monday 28 October 1996
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
TRANSPORT
Bus Passenger Journeys
1. Mr. Hinchliffe: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many bus passenger journeys outside London were made in (a) 1994-95 and (b) 1985-86. [561]
The Minister for Railways and Roads (Mr. John Watts): There were 3.25 billion passenger journeys on local bus services outside London in 1994-95. The comparable figure for 1985-86 was just under 4.5 billion.
Mr. Hinchliffe: Do not those figures disguise the serious problems that affect many bus users in rural areas? Will the Minister consider the position in Denby Dale, between Wakefield and Huddersfield? A key service--No. 234--has been withdrawn from Upper Denby, as a result of which local pensioners cannot cash their pensions and cannot get to the doctor. Will he also consider the representations that I have received from Denby Dale parish council about that and about the behaviour of the bus operators, which chase passengers and block competitors' buses? Are not those activities a direct consequence of the Government's policies? What does the Minister intend to do about the problems?
Mr. Watts: If certain socially necessary services cannot be run commercially, county councils or, in metropolitan areas, borough and district councils, have the power to provide those services by competitive tender. We propose to introduce legislation to give parish councils powers to secure local transport.
Schoolchildren (Car Journeys)
2. Mr. Hutton: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what statistics he collates on the numbers of children travelling to school by car in 1995; and what were the figures in 1979. [562]
The Secretary of State for Transport (Sir George Young): On average, 2 million children aged five to 15--26 per cent. of the total--usually travelled to school by car during the period 1993 to 1995. Figures are not available for 1979, but the equivalent figure for 1975-76 was 1.1 million--12 per cent. of the total.
Mr. Hutton: Would it not make more sense in terms of the environment and road safety for the Government to
do considerably more to persuade parents, bus operators and local authorities to encourage children to travel to school on public transport? Are we not, yet again, being prevented from making any progress by the Government's dogma on those issues?
Sir George Young: I reject the premise on which that question was constructed. The circular on traffic policy and programme that we sent to local authorities emphasised the importance of measures to reduce over-dependence on the car by children going to school.
We have introduced a number of initiatives to promote safer routes to school. I visited a school in Hampshire where children, parents and teachers were finding safer ways of getting to school than by car. The Government want to work with local authorities, parents and teachers to reduce over-dependence and promote safe alternative routes to school.
Mr. Lidington:
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government's recently published document about reducing child pedestrian accidents addresses the problems that have been identified in those exchanges? Will the Department bear in mind the need to promote road safety when it considers bids from local authorities for transport supplementary grant?
Sir George Young:
Yes, of course. One of the aims of the safer routes to school campaign, which is being pioneered by many local authorities with Government support, is to make it safer for children to walk to school through the introduction of traffic restraint and traffic calming measures, and the promotion of routes that are well supervised by adults or shopkeepers. Children should be able to walk to school in groups knowing that the risk of being molested is sharply reduced because the route that they are taking is supervised by adults.
3. Mr. Welsh:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much public expenditure has been invested in replacing the London air traffic control centre with the new ATC centre at Swanwick, Southampton. [563]
Sir George Young:
The Civil Aviation Authority forecasts a capital spend of approximately £340 million for this project, of which £303 million has so far been spent.
Mr. Welsh:
Will the Minister acknowledge that the interests of public safety require more than one air traffic control centre in the United Kingdom? Will he guarantee that the new Scottish centre will be built at Prestwick as a public service for the public good?
Sir George Young:
The interests of safety must be paramount and there must be contingency arrangements to cope with any failure of one specific centre. As the hon. Gentleman and the House may know, Sir Malcolm Field, the newly appointed chairman of the CAA, is conducting a review of the two-centre strategy. He hopes to complete that review quickly and is well aware of the strong feelings in Scotland about the importance of Prestwick in any future strategy.
Mr. Wilkinson:
Why has the new centre near Southampton proved so late in coming into operation?
Sir George Young:
The delay was due to problems in integrating software sub-systems into the air traffic management system. More than 2 million lines of software code are involved. Of course we must try to introduce, where possible, tried and tested systems in preference to brand new ones. The review on which Sir Malcolm Field has embarked is due more to the need to revisit a strategy that was started some time in the 1990s and it is being carried out in the light of operational changes and technological advances.
Mr. Andrew Smith:
Will the Secretary of State confirm that air traffic control and the paramount need for public safety are, like national defence and policing, the prime responsibility of Government to secure? What views has he received from the Ministry of Defence about the Royal Air Force on the privatisation of the centres? Does he accept our argument that the two-centre strategy must proceed and that the new Scottish control centre must go ahead? For once, will he take some notice of the public, who are overwhelmingly opposed to the privatisation of those centres and see it as profoundly ill-judged dogma?
Sir George Young:
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to what I think is his first appearance as shadow Secretary of State for Transport. I know that he will bring with him the disciplines that he exerted as shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury in restraining any extravagant proposals by any of his Front-Bench colleagues. I hope that he will find time to welcome the introduction of a more regular service between London and Oxford which has been introduced by the recently privatised train operator.
I see no reason why the air traffic control service should not be adequately provided by the private sector. The air traffic service is already provided by private companies at a number of our airports. Serco provides such services at nine United Kingdom airports. Other countries in Europe have services that are not wholly provided by Government, so there is no reason why this service has to be provided exclusively by the Government. I wonder why the hon. Gentleman spent so much time abolishing clause lV when he resists proposals such as this for more to be done in the private sector. The best argument for putting the service in the private sector is that the industry is capital intensive. It needs access to private sector capital and should not be restrained by the disciplines of the public expenditure survey.
4. Mr. Rendel:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce his decision in relation to Government funding for the future transport requirements of Newbury and Thatcham. [564]
Mr. Watts:
I expect to announce details of the local transport capital settlement for 1997-98 in December.
Mr. Rendel:
Does the Minister agree that the plans that are being presented for traffic rearrangement in Newbury
Mr. Watts:
It would be wrong of me to pre-empt the decisions that still have to be made about transport policies and programme bids. However, I agree that the completion of the bypass will present an opportunity to return Newbury to its people and to resolve the current traffic management problems by taking through traffic away.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |