House of Commons Hansard Debates for 15 Nov 1996 (pt 12)

12.34 pm

Mr. Toby Jessel (Twickenham): My constituents, like those of the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mr. Chidgey), use South West Trains. What they want is trains that are safe, punctual and pleasant, and they do not want their trains to be a financial burden on themselves and everyone else as taxpayers.

On punctuality, South West Trains, run by Stagecoach, are now more on time. The proportion arriving at Waterloo within five minutes of when they are due has gone up from 89 per cent. a year ago to 93 per cent. now. The frequency, by and large, with some exceptions, has not diminished. For example, at St. Margaret's, the frequency is still every half hour throughout the evening. That is just one of the eight stations in my constituency on the Waterloo line--the others being Fulwell, Hampton, Hampton Wick, Strawberry Hill, Teddington, Twickenham and Whitton.

I am worried about one thing and I should be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London would give his attention to this point. Under nationalisation, every time there was a freezing winter, the points seized up with ice, and the trains were delayed and were sometimes taken off altogether. It was as though the British were taken by surprise by the arrival of winter--in contrast with the Canadians, for example, who seem to expect cold weather and are able to cope with it each year. I should like to ask the Minister if he is willing

15 Nov 1996 : Column 642

to undertake to approach the privatised train companies and ask them what preparations they have made for a cold winter so that if that takes place--and winter is coming--the public, who need their trains to be more reliable in inclement weather, can be protected from the poor performance of the nationalised trains in the past in dealing with cold weather. I would hope that privatisation would be more efficient.

I went on the first privatised train of South West Trains. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport came to Twickenham one Sunday morning in February at about 5 o'clock in the morning and got on the first train from Twickenham to Waterloo. I may have been mad to get up and join that train at 4 or 5 o'clock on a Sunday morning, but that is what I did. I have kept the ticket. The train has run rather well ever since. Before privatisation, of course, there were scares galore, as my hon. Friend the Minister of State mentioned. Everyone was forecasting doom and gloom, irregular and infrequent services running late and often taken off, dirty carriages and no attention to the needs and wishes of customers; but every time there has been a privatisation, the Jeremiahs have been confounded, and they were on this occasion. That was so, too, for privatisation of British Airways, as has been mentioned, the airports, electricity, telephones, gas or any other industry: there have been ghastly forecasts of doom and gloom beforehand, with Opposition Members fomenting and stirring up people's fears and anxieties that the service might deteriorate, but it has hardly ever happened--indeed, I do not believe that it has happened at all. The privatisations have all been successful and are now broadly accepted. The same is true of the rail privatisation. We all had alarming letters six, nine and 12 months ago, but the complaints have all disappeared and there are hardly any at all now.

I happen to have been brought up in a nationalised industry, the Royal Navy, and I am perhaps less fanatical about privatisation than some of my colleagues. I have some reservations about it, but I think that I have been proved wrong as it has gone extremely well. I rather like having royal trains and the Royal Mail going by train, and making sure that the Queen's face is kept on our stamps and, even more importantly, on our bank notes. I regard myself as a subject and not as a citizen. I do not much care for the word "citizen", which reminds me of the French revolution--one of the worst things that ever happened in the history of the world.

There was great romance attached to railways. People loved the trains, the old Great Western Railway trains and Brunel's bridges and viaducts. Some of that romance seems to have gone as people now seem to see trains merely as a service, as though one were buying something in a shop; yet it is important, when buying a service, to get the results delivered, and that seems to be happening.

I wish to take up a few local matters and to ask my hon. Friend the Minister to raise these with Stagecoach and with South West Trains. First, I am very pleased about the coming renovation of Hampton Wick station. At Twickenham station, however, although I acknowledge some improvements, a waiting room has been turned into a buffet. This means that the waiting room facility is being curtailed and that after 9 pm on weekdays, 4 pm on Saturdays and all day on Sundays there will be no waiting room facility. That would be regrettable in such a large, important and well-used station. I hope that the company can be persuaded to take another look at that.

15 Nov 1996 : Column 643

Next, at Waterloo station, the cab rank is not efficient. This is because it is so extensively used. There is such a large number of passengers queuing for the taxis, and such a large number of taxis queuing for the passengers, that they are not married together nearly quickly enough. Typically, a person in the taxi queue has to wait five to eight minutes. It would increase the attraction of using trains rather than travelling by road if the cab rank could be duplicated--if there could be two lanes of it--or if at least the passengers queuing for the taxis and the taxis queuing for the passengers were not in contraflow so that, timidly, they marry up only one at a time, which results in very slow progress. I think that it is quite important that people who arrive by train and want to get a cab should be able to get one quickly. That is the whole point of getting a cab.

With that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as several of my colleagues are waiting to speak, I thank you and the House for hearing me and resume my seat.

12.43 pm

Mrs. Jane Kennedy (Liverpool, Broadgreen): It is always a genuine pleasure to be called immediately after the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Jessel). He is a unique Member of this place and I regard him as a rare and real treasure. I wanted to compliment two other speeches, but neither of the two Members who made them is in the Chamber. One was that of my hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody). I always learn a great deal whenever she contributes to a debate of this nature. The other was that of the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Norris), whom I especially wanted to congratulate. Had he spoken for one third of the time that he occupied, more of his hon. Friends would have had a hope of being called. Sadly, they are unlikely to have the opportunity to contribute to the debate, given the time that is available to us.

My hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Bradley), who spoke from the Opposition Front Bench, made an excellent contribution. I understand that it is his first outing as a shadow spokesman on transport. I look forward to hearing the full wit that my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Ms Jackson) will bring to the debate when she replies on behalf of the Opposition. She is also someone whom I like to hear.

The hon. Member for Colchester, North (Mr. Jenkin), in the opening banter that warmed up the House earlier, referred to the fact that I was in my place--I assume that he was referring to me. I am in the Chamber to raise a serious matter about which I have already written to the Secretary of State. I accept, of course, that safety has already been mentioned by other hon. Members. Sadly, there have been some happenings in my constituency and on Merseyside generally that I believe have been affected by the change in ownership and administration of the railways, and I want to bring them to the attention of the House. I believe that there are things that the companies can do to deal with safety problems that they are not doing now.

Over the past 18 months, 17 children have been killed on the railway on Merseyside. Two others have been seriously injured. In three weeks this autumn there were

15 Nov 1996 : Column 644

four serious accidents in which three children were killed, the youngest being five years of age. Peter Mee, aged 16, and his 13-year-old friend climbed down from a railway bridge into coal trucks at Edge Hill in my constituency. Both boys were electrocuted by the overhead cables, and Peter was killed. His friend received 20 per cent. burns. Eight-year-old Anthony Gill was involved in an accident at Maghull when he and his friends were playing on the railway line. Anthony accidentally touched the third rail, the live rail, and was killed. Andrew Hall, aged only five, was killed in Birkenhead.

The three incidents to which I have referred happened within just a few days. They caused great shock to the community on Merseyside, including my constituents. In four weeks, four families were devastated. The impact on staff was also enormous. Five separate crews were sent home after the trauma that they experienced in trying to save Anthony's life after he had been electrocuted. Drivers are scarred for life after their trains have been responsible for the deaths of children or adults. I do not seek to suggest to the House that such incidents have never happened before, or that they are happening only because of privatisation, but we need to examine what has happened and see whether the companies set up to administer our railways have been helped to deal with safety issues.

Let us consider the response of the companies and take that in the context of the debate. One's immediate reaction--this would be true of anyone--is enormous sympathy for the parents and families involved. There is a real sense of shock that so many incidents could occur in such a short time. Questions follow on from that. How did the accidents happen? What investigations are taking place? Were the children aware of the dangers? How aware are people living near our railways of how increasingly dangerous they have become as speeds have increased and there has been an extended use of electricity to power our trains?

What can we do as a community to prevent more accidents happening? I appreciate that such incidents are becoming fewer over the years, but we must constantly review what is happening to ascertain whether we can do more.

Following the incident at Edge Hill, I met the regional director of Railtrack. I also met representatives of the local rail company, Merseyrail Electric, which operates the local services throughout Merseyside. I accept that there has been a thorough investigation on every occasion. I accept also that there is a genuine understanding of the problem on the part of those managing the services. They made no attempt to hide their shock and concern that young lives had been lost and families devastated. They have genuine concern also for their staff. They said that in some cases members of staff have been robbed of their health as a result of their experiences when an accident happens. They also expressed a real and genuine concern about the impact of the incidents on their passengers and on their ability to run the services. So there were commercial as well human reasons for them to deal with the problems and to ensure that their response to such incidents was as appropriate and thorough as possible. I invite the Minister to investigate the situation on Merseyside because of the frequency of the incidents.

The first matter that should be re-examined is the schools programme and the education programme with which British Rail has been involved for many years.

15 Nov 1996 : Column 645

Formerly, the drivers who took part were drawn from a range of services, because there was no effective demarcation between the different services. Now, however, Merseyrail Electric has contracted to provide the service across Merseyside, and drivers and staff involved in the longer-haul trains--which have overhead cables rather than the third rail--are not involved in the service. That tranche of experience is therefore not available to schools, which appreciate the service that they receive from the railway workers who educate children about the dangers of playing on railway lines. That loss of expertise should be re-examined.

Staff concerned about reductions in the education service have passed to me a set of minutes. The representatives I met from both companies stressed the fact that they were committed to the service. Shortly after 14-year-old Stephen Judge was killed at Edge Hill last year, however, two debates occurred between local representatives of staff and their managers in Liverpool. On the first occasion--Monday 22 May 1995--the management minute stated:

"Staff side were concerned that these visits to local schools by a regular Driver had recently been stopped at a time when there had been two serious incidents involving young people coming into contact with Overhead Wires in the area.

Management Chairman stated that Railtrack . . . are now the custodian of these arrangements and that they therefore decide which schools will be visited and when.

Staff side noted but expressed their strong feelings about the withdrawal of these visits and hoped that safety was not being sacrificed for the sake of costs."

In July 1995, the concern was revisited. The minute states:

"The Staff Representatives wished to reiterate their concern regarding the withdrawal of these visits so far as Lime Street is concerned"--

the drivers who served my constituency and the Edge Hill area came from Lime Street--

"pointing out that Liverpool now have no Drivers carrying out these duties whereas Manchester has two, Chester one Driver still performing this important function."

I have talked to people at schools in my constituency, and they have stressed the value of the visits. There is a real need to review that service.

It is also worth noting the way in which one company would pass the buck of responsibility to another company. When I met managers, I did not detect a real attempt to duck responsibility, but in that type of routine meeting it becomes all too easy to say, "It is not our responsibility any more: we have noted what you said and you clearly have a legitimate concern, but it is the other company's responsibility now."

Local anxieties about the state of railway safety are such that the Liverpool Echo mounted a very successful campaign, the quality of which deserves congratulations. It produced posters with children to ensure that awareness is raised about the dangers of playing on railway lines. BBC Radio Merseyside should also be complimented for its work on the issue. The incidents have increased awareness in the area of the dangers, but the awareness may fade with time, as local media interest invariably moves on to more pressing issues. It is the responsibility of those administering the railways to ensure that on-going education is not reduced, but built on and increased.

15 Nov 1996 : Column 646

It is worth considering the responses that the companies sent to Mr. Judge--the father of Stephen, who died last year. The British Railways Board and Railtrack responded to him in October last year, around the time of the inquest into Stephen's death. I refer particularly to Railtrack, which said that it was

"committed to stamping out injuries to young people. In this connection, a good deal of money has been spent on fencing the Edge Hill Depot and equipping it with electronic gates prior to this incident. Despite this, fences were deliberately damaged and vehicles positioned in the depot subjected to vandalism and fire.

It is difficult to know what more we can do to deter young people intent on gaining access to railway property and causing damage."

I got the same response when I met a Railtrack manager. He expressed genuine concern and anxiety and a wish that such things did not happen, but he did not know what could be done to stop determined young people getting on to the tracks. I genuinely feel that that attitude is not good enough. We have to check continually that we are doing enough.