13 Jan 1997 : Column 1
THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 27 APRIL 1992]
FORTY-FIFTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF
HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES
VOLUME 288
FIFTH VOLUME OF SESSION 1996-97
House of Commons
Monday 13 January 1997
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
TRANSPORT
Sea Empress
1. Mr. Ainger: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to publish the marine accident investigation branch report on the Sea Empress.[8785]
The Secretary of State for Transport (Sir George Young): The chief inspector has advised me that he hopes to complete his report and submit it to me as soon as possible. He has to consider comments made to him by those he has consulted under the marine accident investigation regulations and amend his draft report if he considers it appropriate to do so in the light of those comments. The report will be published after it has been submitted to me.
Mr. Ainger: Can the Secretary of State confirm that the inquiry will cover Lord Donaldson's recommendations, which were made some 20 months before the Sea Empress ran aground, and that the recommendations about the placing of a powerful tug in the western approaches were not implemented either by him or by his predecessor, the present chairman of the
13 Jan 1997 : Column 2
Conservative party? Can the Secretary of State also confirm that no Minister has been interviewed by the MAIB on those important issues? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree, bearing it in mind that we need a full and open investigation of those matters, that if Ministers are not held to account or questioned on those matters, the only conclusion can be that the part of the report covering ministerial responsibility will be a whitewash?
Sir George Young: On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, the inspector will of course cover everything that is relevant to the conduct of his inquiry into why the accident happened.
On the second point, it is the case that no Minister has been interviewed by the inspector.
On the third point, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will reconsider what he said. The inspector is carrying out an inquiry under procedures set out by the House of Commons. It is already clear that he will not refrain from criticising those whom he believes should be criticised, but it is a betrayal of natural justice for the hon. Gentleman to say in advance that, if the report does not produce the verdict that he prefers, the verdict is wrong.
Mr. Waterson:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is encouraging that the marine pollution control unit report concluded that the clean-up operation following the incident went well? Does he also agree that it is an elementary breach of natural justice that what was essentially a draft report has been leaked to the media?
Sir George Young:
On the first point, the MPCU report has just been published and it shows that, with the co-operation of many voluntary and statutory organisations, the damage done by that serious incident was minimised and that the impact on the tourism industry in Pembroke was not nearly as bad as had initially been feared.
13 Jan 1997 : Column 3
On my hon. Friend's second point, I take seriously the selective and inaccurate leaking of a chief inspector's draft report. That should be condemned, as should the leaking of any confidential document that may adversely affect the reputations of innocent parties.
Mr. Donald Anderson:
Does the Secretary of State agree that, amid all the environmental damage and the anguish to the hotel industry and fishermen in the area, one fact stands out: the exemplary way in which my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Ainger) has represented his constituents?
Sir George Young:
That may be for others to judge later this year. The hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Ainger) has been diligent about questioning Ministers, as have a number of other hon. Members on both sides of the House.
2. Mr. Soley:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what new proposals he has to improve safety on the road for cyclists.[8784]
The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. John Bowis):
A third fewer cyclists were killed or seriously injured on the roads in 1995 than in the 1981 to 1985 annual average. We will build on this improvement through the national cycling strategy by encouraging local authorities to provide for safe cycling in their transport policies and programmes.
Mr. Soley:
Is the Minister aware that, when I occasionally cycle from Shepherd's Bush to Westminster, I feel like a by-election waiting to happen? As I have no wish to be the person responsible for restoring the Government's majority, will the Minister bear in mind the fact that the majority of people who cycle feel unsafe and that is why the figures are so low? Will he publish a map of cycle routes--particularly in London--that are regarded as safe or can be protected? Will he take steps to restore the minor works budgets to local authorities? It is no good the Government saying that they are encouraging local authorities, when they are taking the grant away.
Mr. Bowis:
Let me not speculate on any absences from this House, temporary or permanent.
The hon. Gentleman knows that, for the first time, we have in place a national strategy for cycling and that we have put serious money into cycling, with some £42 million being spent on Sustrans for the national network. There is also the £4 million programme for the London cycling network this year, which we have extended for the coming year by another £4 million. The hon. Gentleman will also know that most boroughs produce maps of cycle routes. Some 50 local transport packages with a cycling element are planned for this year, with 65 packages planned for next year, and we are providing resources and advice for cycling networks. If our target is to increase cycling, it is important that it is done safely.
Mr. Simon Coombs:
Given that the level of cycling deaths is the lowest since records were first compiled in
13 Jan 1997 : Column 4
Mr. Bowis:
My hon. Friend highlights an important point. Safe cycling is enhanced by responsible cyclists. People who cycle through red lights--or cycle without lights or on the pavement--are not enhancing the good name of cycling and are doing nothing for their own safety or that of other people. It is important that we continue our training programmes for children, and it is good that some 40 per cent. of children now receive cycling training before the age of 12. We must continue our campaigns to improve the quality of cycling, and we are about to consult on the mandatory fitting of bells and lights to cycles at the point of sale.
Mrs. Dunwoody:
Would it not be a good way of ensuring that more mothers were confident about allowing their children to ride to school if we put money into research into safety, particularly of children? Perhaps we ought to look at the provision of cycle helmets on a mandatory basis. Before any decisions are taken, should we not assess the practical steps that the Government can take to keep children safe on the roads?
Mr. Bowis:
The hon. Lady is right. We are engaged in research and campaigns to encourage safer cycling by children, and our cycle safe campaign was very much geared towards the wearing of helmets. We can encourage safe cycling from an early age if schools continue to work with local authorities and road safety officers, and mothers can then have confidence that their children can cycle safely. The Department will continue to support local authorities that make sensible plans in that direction.
3. Mr. Jacques Arnold:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on Government support for the south Thamesside development route, phase 4.[8783]
The Minister for Railways and Roads (Mr. John Watts):
My hon. Friend is quite rightly a strong supporter of the south Thamesside development route, phase 4. We have undertaken to fund the scheme through transport supplementary grant, at an estimated cost of £14.1 million.
Mr. Arnold:
Will not this project be, in effect, the Northfleet town bypass? The town will have, on one side, the Thames tunnel of the channel tunnel rail link and, on the other, Ebbsfleet international station. During the construction of those large projects, heavy goods vehicles will rumble through the town, as there is currently no other route for them. Does my hon. Friend accept that the people of Northfleet are fed up to the back teeth with Kent county council, which has delayed the introduction of the project? Two years after the public exhibition, the council is now involved in an inspector's inquiry. Will my
13 Jan 1997 : Column 5
Mr. Watts:
We are waiting for Kent county council to contact us about suitable dates for the public inquiry. When it has done so, we shall make the arrangements for the inquiry as rapidly as possible and take the scheme through its statutory procedures without undue delay.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |