| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Social Housing
7. Mr. Adrian Sanders (Torbay): If he will make a statement on investment in social housing. [63571]
The Minister for London and Construction (Mr. Nick Raynsford): Over the life of this Parliament, we are making available nearly £5 billion extra for investment in housing, fulfilling our manifesto commitment to reinvest set-aside capital receipts from the sale of council housing to build new homes and to rehabilitate existing ones. Most of those resources will be invested in social housing.
Mr. Sanders: The Minister will remember a reply that he gave me on 14 December, which laid out expenditure by the previous Government of some £35 billion over the lifetime of that Government, and showed that the amount that was committed so far or predicted for 1999-2000 was £14 billion, leaving a shortfall of £20,766,000,000 in housing expenditure. Is the Minister saying that the amount that will be spent in the final two years of this Government's life will be less or more than £20 billion?
Mr. Raynsford: The hon. Gentleman clearly has difficulty with figures. May I, therefore, remind him of the truth about housing investment? Over the lifetime of the previous Government, there was a consistent and dramatic decline in housing investment. We inherited a budget of only £1.5 billion for capital investment. That has already been increased to almost £2 billion in the current year and it will rise to £3 billion by 2000-01. That is a doubling of the capital investment that we inherited. I am surprised that the Liberal Democrats do not welcome that.
Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow): Does the Minister agree that it is incontestable that the release of capital receipts has provided a huge boost for investment in social housing, but that that needs to be seen against the backdrop of the massive cut in social housing expenditure under the last Conservative Government; no area of public expenditure was cut as much? Therefore, as long as the Government remain in office--beyond the next general election, I hope--we need year-on-year, real-terms increases in social housing investment.
Mr. Raynsford: My hon. Friend makes a valid point. I am sorry only that the Liberal Democrats do not appreciate it. Following the dramatic cut in housing investment during the lifetime of the previous Parliament, we have begun the process of restoring decent levels of capital investment. Year on year, we are projecting increased investment, so that, by 2001-02, capital investment in housing will be double that which we inherited from the previous Government.
Mr. Anthony Steen (Totnes): As social housing can, I understand, be built in villages and outside villages and towns, even though the local plan forbids housing development beyond the plan, will the Minister comment
on whether he supports the passing by the Liberal Democrats in Devon of plans for 90,000 new houses in the countryside in Devon? Would he not want to give some incentive to building on brown-field sites in towns and some disincentive to building on green-field sites in the countryside?
Mr. Raynsford: The hon. Gentleman has obviously been asleep if he has not been aware of the emphasis that has been placed by the Government on increasing the focus on building on brown-field sites. At the beginning of last year, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister published an important paper that set out our proposals for increasing the proportion of housing to be built on brown-field sites. We will shortly publish an interim report from the urban taskforce which has been looking at the matter and many other initiatives are in hand, but, ultimately, it will be for individual local authorities to see how they can best meet the housing needs of their area and ensure that, within their area, the maximum possible, which will vary from area to area, is achieved on brown-field sites.
West Coast Main Line
8. Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West): What recent discussions he has had with train operating companies on the west coast main line; and if he will make a statement. [63572]
The Minister of Transport (Dr. John Reid): Madam Speaker, happy new year, by the way.
On 26 November, my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and I met all the train operating companies and Railtrack, to identify the problems and to begin to put in place some of the solutions to the lack of performance on the railway system. We are convinced that the action plan that we put in place at that time will begin to deliver enhancements this year.
Dr. Starkey:
I am sure that all the train-operating companies that serve my constituents will have made it clear to the Minister that they welcome the upgrading of the west coast main line and the positive effect that that will have on the reliability of their services. However, I am concerned--it is a concern shared by the Midland Rail Users Consultative Committee--about the effect--[Hon. Members: "Reading."] I am reading the report. I am concerned about the effect that the passenger upgrade on the fast line may have on the capacity for services on the slow line. My particular concern is that, in my constituency, as well as in central Milton Keynes, the stations at Wolverton and Bletchley are served largely by stopping services. I know that the train operating companies, Silverlink and Connex, are concerned that there will be insufficient capacity on the slow line for them to accommodate the current service frequencies as well as the freight that uses that line. They wish to be assured that they will be able to expand on those lines. Will the Minister take that up with the rail regulator and ensure that he makes sure that services can expand on the slow line so that all my constituents benefit from the west coast main line upgrade?
Dr. Reid:
My hon. Friend will know that the form and timing of the freight upgrade is a matter for discussion.
Mr. Tim Boswell (Daventry):
Will the Minister accept that a west coast main line upgrade will be welcome to my constituents who access that line at Milton Keynes or Rugby, but that what has been said is a matter of concern, particularly in relation to slower services to Northampton and to the provision of rail freight services? Will the Minister ensure that it is watched most carefully so that the upgrade takes place but with the various interests being properly balanced?
Dr. Reid:
As I said in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes, South-West (Dr. Starkey), the regulator has obliged Railtrack to take that into account when looking at the passenger upgrade. No formal proposals have yet been received on the freight upgrade, but hon. Members will be aware of the fact that, although there will be major advantages in various forms as a result of the freight upgrade, there may also be various drawbacks in terms of interruption to all passenger services, not just the slow passenger services. Those are important matters, but the major issue is that the House will welcome--I hope in a non-partisan fashion--the fact that, after 18 years of damn all investment on the west coast main line, this Government are doing something.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is now quite exciting to travel on the west coast main line, especially at the weekends? For the first time ever, no printed timetable has been issued to passengers, on the somewhat spurious basis that, as Railtrack is doing so much work, nobody can really say when the trains will be running. Would my right hon. Friend care to point out to the train companies that, if the passengers have to guess when the trains are running, they might also like to guess which train companies they would like to have running the service after the next franchising round?
Dr. Reid:
My hon. Friend has amply illustrated one of the reasons why there are few more exciting journeys than travelling with her on the west coast main line, which I have done on a number of occasions. My hon. Friend has made a valid point and she will be pleased to hear that the subject was raised by me, and, more importantly, by the Deputy Prime Minister at the meeting on 26 November and in writing thereafter. Passengers should not be expected to wander blindly, as my hon. Friend said, guessing the times of trains. It is bad enough trying to find the way through the complexities of some of the differentiated and compartmentalised train timetables now that we have 25 train operating companies, without those companies deciding not to issue timetables in the first place.
Mr. Christopher Gill (Ludlow):
Is the Minister aware of the regular inconvenience caused to passengers on the
Dr. Reid:
The hon. Gentleman has a cheek. I am not fully aware of the minutiae of the mechanisms of the escalator to which he referred, but I have no doubt about why it does not work: it is part of the £8,000 million backlog of underinvestment in the underground by the previous Government. The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that, as in so many other areas, we intend to remedy that situation through a public-private partnership, which we are currently delivering. In addition, we have made short-term enhancements through our action plan for the rest of the railways, including 800 new drivers, 500 new units of rolling stock to be delivered this year, a task force on railway congestion blackspots, a shadow strategic rail authority and more investment in the railways than ever before. I understand the hon. Gentleman's complaint about one escalator, but I hope that he recognises that that problem, along with the destruction of many other aspects of Britain's social fabric, is a direct result of the negligence of his Government for 18 years.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |