| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Chidgey (Eastleigh): Can the Minister confirm that the promoter's intention is still to complete all the works that she mentioned without further recourse to public funds?
Ms Jackson: It is my understanding, given the contract into which the operator has entered with the Government, that there will be no further call on public funds.
Dr. John Marek (Wrexham): Will the Minister expand on that answer? What will happen if the firm goes into liquidation? Do Ministers have any contingency plans to ensure that works, once they are half begun, are completed, so that the project comes to fruition?
Ms Jackson: With respect to my hon. Friend, he has asked a hypothetical question. I repeat: the operator entered into a commercial, binding contract with the Government. We do not foresee any reason for it to break that contract.
The Department received 59 objections to or representations about the proposed works, copies of which have been placed in the Library. I will, however, summarise the main points raised.
There is concern that the station will cause excessive traffic on the surrounding road network and that inadequate provision is proposed for public transport and cyclists at the station. There is concern also about possible adverse environmental effects on the Bully Point nature reserve, on the River Lea, and about the loss without replacement of garden allotments, recreational amenities and metropolitan open land in the Lea valley, near Stratford.
Some statutory undertakers and local businesses have objected to the adverse effects of the proposed compulsory acquisition powers associated with the works or to the effects of the works on access to businesses by road and rail. Concerns have been expressed also about the adequacy of the design of the proposed pedestrian link at Stratford station. More generally, a few objectors have questioned the demand for a station at Stratford.
The London boroughs of Hackney and Islington have challenged the adequacy of the environmental statement in its assessment of some of the local environmental effects--particularly impacts on local traffic and transport--and the implications of operating additional channel tunnel services for local services on the north London line. Finally, the London borough of Newham has sought certain changes to the proposed planning conditions.
What is the Government's assessment of the proposals? If Parliament approves the resolutions, the Secretary of State would have a duty to decide whether the order should be made. His mind must remain open on that decision, and, in making it, he must specifically have regard to the inspector's report, after detailed consideration of the proposals and objections to them at a public inquiry. The issue for the House to decide today is whether, in principle, the proposals are worthy of proceeding to that more detailed examination. The Government have no doubt that they are worthy.
The objectors have raised a number of issues concerning the perceived adverse local impacts of the scheme on traffic levels, the environment and businesses. Those are matters that, quite properly, must be considered carefully before the order is determined. It will be open to the Secretary of State to amend provisions in the draft order or to change the planning conditions attaching to any deemed planning permission after considering any recommendations by the inquiry inspector. It would be for the promoter of the order to defend the adequacy of the environmental statement and to provide more information for the inquiry, if so requested by the inspector.
The Secretary of State is under a statutory obligation to consider the environmental statement in determining whether to make the order. In the Government's view, the objections do not raise fundamental issues that might dent our confidence in the proposals' overall merits. We are satisfied that the grounds of the objections to the application are of a nature that would be best considered at an inquiry.
We think that the proposed works are desirable in principle. They have the potential to create significant transport benefits by encouraging greater railway use, especially for travel to Europe. A new station at Stratford would also help to achieve a more integrated transport system in London. For local communities in the east Thames corridor, the works offer a real prospect of substantial benefits, with more jobs and much-needed urban regeneration.
The Government therefore have no hesitation in inviting the House to pass the order.
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire):
The Opposition welcome the order. We give it our full support, and we are grateful to the Minister for her explanation of it.
Debates on the channel tunnel rail link and on Stratford international station have, on the whole, been friendly occasions, involving a small and familiar cast--most of whom I see in the Chamber today, although their places seem to have changed a bit. We will especially miss one player--the Under-Secretary of State for National Heritage, the hon. Member for West Ham (Mr. Banks)--who took part in every debate on the matter. To use
a draughts analogy, however, he has reached the end of the board and helped himself to a crown. Understandably, he will not speak in today's debate.
I am delighted that the new Government are proceeding with the previous Government's policy on construction of a high-speed link, thereby harnessing the energy of the private sector in a major private finance initiative, routing the line through east London to achieve the regeneration benefits mentioned by the Minister and making it easier and quicker for passengers to travel from France to regions other than the south-east. I was delighted to hear that the Government will support the order under the Transport and Works Act 1992, thereby making necessary amendments to the original legislation.
The Minister described the effects of the measure, but I have a few questions. The briefing on the order states that construction of the station at Stratford will create jobs and "act as a catalyst" for east London. She mentioned those effects in her speech. At some point, however, I should like to know how the Government plan to reinforce her comments by proceeding with our Thames gateway strategy, which proposes more privately funded river crossings. Our strategy would build on proposals for a Stratford station by further improving transport infrastructure in east London and unlocking some of the large sites on either side of the river.
On road links, which are mentioned in the order, the Minister recently answered a parliamentary question from me, stating:
There are 56 objections to the works--mostly from organisations preserving their negotiating position--which I know that London and Continental Railways would like to resolve amicably. I should like to know whether any agencies or quangos for which the Minister's Department has responsibility is among the objectors.
In schedule 2, the order also refers to "compulsory purchase and compensation". The Minister will know that two reviews on compensation were in progress at the end of the previous Parliament. One of those--its members were the ombudsman and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration Select Committee--was narrowly and specifically focused on the relatively small number of households that would be affected by the channel tunnel rail link. It would be helpful if at some point, although not necessarily today, we knew what was happening with that review.
There was also a much broader review of compensation generally, involving a number of Government Departments. Again, it would be helpful to have at some point a timetable and details of the Government's approach to that overall review of compensation.
The Minister referred to one of the objections, which related to the provisions for buses and taxis. The Department's briefing note states that there is provision for 2,000 cars. I am sure that there will also be provision for buses and taxis, as the hon. Lady spoke about an
integrated transport policy. I very much hope that the promoter will make it possible for people who arrive by bus and taxi to do so as conveniently as those who arrive by car.
4.45 pm
"no new starts on national schemes are planned for this financial year."--[Official Report, 9 June 1997; Vol. 295, c. 318.]
I should like confirmation that her Department will play its part in building the roads that are necessary not only to make the station a success but to proceed with the regeneration of east London.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |