| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Bull Bars
28. Mr. Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to ban bull bars on vehicles used on public roads. [9376]
The Minister of Transport (Dr. Gavin Strang): Unfortunately, progress on the European initiative to control bull bars has been slow and we are therefore reviewing other available options to tackle the bull bar issue effectively. My noble Friend the Minister for Roads will be making an announcement on how we intend to take this forward.
Mr. Flynn: Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the major improvements in road safety in recent decades has been the redesign of vehicles, resulting in vehicles that absorb and reduce the shock of collisions by crumpling objects or by deflecting the objects or people that are hit? Bull bars reverse that trend and concentrate and multiply the force of a collision, often at the level of a child's head or vital organs. Was it not a disgrace that the previous Parliament and the former Minister for Transport in London talked out a Bill to reform and to ban bull bars, despite support for the Bill from 250 hon. Members on both sides of the House? When will this Government do better?
Dr. Strang: I agree with my hon. Friend that the redesign of vehicles has certainly enhanced driver and passenger safety. Furthermore, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend's determined campaign on this issue. We intend to ensure that it reaches a satisfactory conclusion--if we cannot get European action, we will take national action.
Miss McIntosh: On that point, is the Minister prepared to consult with the European Commission? Does he accept that unilateral action to ban bull bars in this country will be strictly illegal under the terms of the European treaty and our membership of the European Union?
Dr. Strang: No, I do not accept that. Of course we will maintain a dialogue with the European Commission. The hon. Lady will be aware that the previous Government had a rather long dialogue, not only with the European Commission but with other members of the Council. We are determined that action will be taken. Of course European action would be better and more effective, but if we cannot get it, we believe that there is scope for national action.
Crossrail
29. Mr. Gapes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans he has to revive the crossrail project. [9377]
The Minister for Transport in London (Ms Glenda Jackson): We are awaiting Railtrack's views on crossrail. We shall consider the project in the light of those views, once received, and of our own examination of transport priorities for London.
Mr. Gapes: Will my hon. Friend give urgent further consideration to the Montagu report on crossrail,
which concluded that crossrail was economically important and viable, and to the views of London Pride that an east-west rail link across London is the first priority needed to improve transport links?
Ms Jackson: I am aware of both the report and the representations made by London Pride on this issue. It is vital that we prioritise London's transport needs strategically. I am sure that my hon. Friend and the organisations he mentioned will welcome the publication today of our Green Paper on an assembly for London, which will include strategic responsibility for transport and traffic in London.
Mr. Pickles: Even given the Green Paper, crossrail will need, at a reasonable estimate, a guarantee of some £3.5 billion. How can the Minister square that with the idea that a London assembly will not have special fund-raising powers? Is she saying that, despite its needing £3.5 billion, crossrail will receive a high priority in an integrated transport policy?
Ms Jackson: How could the hon. Gentleman sit quietly by while the previous Government spent £150 million of taxpayers' money on a feasibility study for crossrail, £126 million of which was paid to consultants on a daily rate of pay for three and a half to four years? It is a little late for him to express concern about the overall cost of crossrail when the previous Government did nothing to bring it about.
Mr. Chope: Who would have the ultimate political responsibility for priority decisions on crossrail--the elected mayor, the assembly, or the Government? Or would it be a mixture of all three, which is exactly the same chaos that we have now?
Ms Jackson: The ultimate political responsibility rests with the people of London and whomever they vote for.
Birmingham Northern Relief Road
30. Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on his Department's proposals for the Birmingham northern relief road. [9378]
Dr. Strang: Before replying to my hon. Friend, may I refer to yesterday's written answer on this subject? It had been my clear intention that the material would be made available to hon. Members at 3.30 pm. Unfortunately, the arrangements failed and the material was late. I apologise to you, Madam Speaker, and to the House.
May I now respond to my hon. Friend's question? As she will know from the announcement that I made yesterday, we have decided to accept the recommendation of the public inquiry inspector to authorise the Birmingham northern relief road.
Dr. Jones:
As my right hon. Friend will know, I do not agree with his decision. Can we at least agree that the relief road will not solve the traffic problems in the area and that that can be done only by reducing the number of vehicle movements on the road? How does my right hon. Friend plan to do that?
Dr. Strang:
I agree with my hon. Friend that one private toll road in isolation will not solve the transport
Mr. John M. Taylor:
I never thought that I would hear myself say this, but I congratulate the Government and the Minister on their courageous and important decision, which will greatly benefit the north-west, the west midlands and the country. Many Conservative Members will back the Minister to the hilt in seeing the BNRR scheme through. It is about the most important thing that the Government could do in transport--well done.
Dr. Strang
rose--[Interruption.]
Madam Speaker:
Order. Time is passing and this matter is very important. The Minister may be terribly embarrassed, but he should try to reply.
Dr. Strang:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his remarks. I too believe that the importance of that strategic through route goes beyond the west midlands. It is important not only for the west midlands but for the north-west of England and Scotland.
Dr. Tony Wright:
I understand the difficulty that my right hon. Friend experienced in coming to his decision in this case. Even those who are in favour of the road are incensed by the previous Government's behaviour in pulling the plug on the previously publicly funded road. The road would now be open and operating if that had not happened.
When I asked a question a few weeks ago about the penalty clauses if it was decided not to proceed with the road, I was told that the risk lay with the concessionaire. What kind of risk is it if a private concessionaire can get a road, if it is developed, or get £30 million in compensation, if it is not developed? Is it not a disgrace to the planning process if roads are approved not on their merits but because of the cost involved in not approving them?
Dr. Strang:
I understand--[Interruption.] I am not sure how Opposition Members want to play it. This is an important matter, and I can tell that it is important to my hon. Friend. I understand the stand that he has taken, and he has identified a particularly important point. Obviously, the decision to go ahead with the road was based on strategic transport considerations, but my hon. Friend points out a failure on the part of the previous Administration. Risk was involved. Had the Government
Mrs. Spelman:
Will the Minister tell us whether the Government accept the principle of road tolling?
Dr. Strang:
That is an important issue. We will almost certainly want to consider it in the context of our important White Paper on an integrated transport strategy, which we shall publish next year.
Mr. Burden:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if it were possible for us to start with a blank sheet of paper, many Labour Members would not have come up with the proposed scheme for the road or the method of financing it? I agree that the importance of the Birmingham northern relief road goes well beyond the west midlands. Ninety per cent. of exports from the north-west travel through the west midlands. Although extra road capacity is not the complete solution to the problem, does my right hon. Friend agree that we need extra road capacity in that part of Birmingham in the west midlands?
Dr. Strang:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. As I believe the House understands, it is our policy to encourage the movement of more freight by rail, but the reality is that at present less than 10 per cent. of all freight in this country moves by rail; it is moved on the road.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |