Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Ms Glenda Jackson): I congratulate the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon (Dr. Harris) on his persistence in securing this debate and in presenting the concerns of his constituents ever since he was returned to this House. He kindly took me on what was virtually a three-part journey down the A34, and he displayed in some detail the road's significant impact on his constituents who live so close to it, and on the neighbouring community of North Hinksey.
The hon. Gentleman rightly highlighted the fact that the considerations being undertaken by the ombudsman on the difficulties experienced on the first part of our journey down the A34 are not ones upon which I may comment. I would like to thank him for highlighting the work undertaken by the now Minister for Employment,
Welfare to Work and Equal Opportunities, my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith), before the general election on noise pollution. That campaign has produced a policy on the part of the Labour Government. I will touch on that issue in more detail later.
I would like to take the House not down the A34, but back in time. The A34 originally formed the Winchester to Preston trunk road and, with the A33 to the south of Winchester, formed a strategic link between the port of Southampton, the midlands and the north-west. It was not, however, purpose built, being predominately a single carriageway, passing through the centres of many towns and cities along its route, including Oxford.
The current route of the A34 through Botley was built in the early 1960s as part of an extensive programme of improvements, primarily to take long-distance through traffic out of Oxford city centre. However, it also forms part of the city's ring road, aiding local traffic movement around Oxford. It follows the western edge of the valley cut by the River Thames and its tributaries, and there is no obvious alternative route.
At the time it was built, there were few, if any, concerns regarding the long-term consequences of traffic growth. We now know that the old "predict-and-provide" method of road planning was flawed, as it took little or no account of the fact that improving the road network itself generates traffic growth. By then, the M40 had been built, as had the Peartree hill to Wendlebury section of the A34; with one notable exception, this completed the upgrade of the A34 into a high-speed dual carriageway route--a fact borne out by the subsequent unexpectedly high levels of traffic growth along the A34, resulting in a large number of lorries driving through Botley and North Hinksey. I know that some of the hon. Gentleman's constituents fear that the recent opening of the Newbury bypass to the south will have a similar impact.
In effect, what we have heard from the hon. Gentleman is a microcosm of a problem that can be replicated across the whole of the UK as a direct result of the failure of previous Administrations to tackle the issue of how we create a properly integrated transport system and how we make the best use of our existing infrastructure. There was a failure to move away from expecting our roads to be the main movers of people and goods. That is why the Government have introduced an integrated transport strategy.
In this instance, the hon. Gentleman is concerned with what can be done to improve conditions for his constituents. Much of the problem has resulted from the way in which our transport system was allowed to grow in such an ad hoc and unregulated way. This is something that we are determined to address.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind the House of one or two aspects which are relevant to the situation which was so graphically detailed by the hon. Gentleman. The situation on the relevant part of the A34 has resulted from the high levels of traffic growth experienced in recent years, as the A34 provides a vital link between the Hampshire ports and our industrial heartland, giving access to the single European market and our other trading partners.
It is the Government's aim to move more of our goods by rail. Central to that aim will be the establishment of a strategic rail authority, which will have the remit of
bringing coherence to the railway system, ensuring that it meets the needs of the passengers and freight customers whom it serves, and encouraging the shift towards the use of rail freight, but much freight will still need to travel by road. We aim to publish proposals to improve the efficiency of our lorry fleet and, on a local level, to encourage co-operation between the freight operators and local authorities on lorry routing and delivery hours.
Our transport White Paper and the associated paper, "A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England", also contain proposals to deal with the more immediate problems associated with living close to a busy road.
On the second part of our journey down the A34, the hon. Gentleman highlighted the difficulties caused by recent road works on the A34 north of Botley. It is my understanding that, under health and safety legislation, the Highways Agency is required to provide a safe working environment and to ensure the safety of the travelling public. With older dual carriageways such as the A34, it is not possible to achieve that without closing one carriageway fully.
I assure the hon. Gentleman that the agency does not close one carriageway of a busy road without an in-depth consideration of the consequences and consultation with the police. The hon. Gentleman said that the work could have been done more quickly, and the debate in the Oxford newspapers centred, I understand, around the time taken to reconstruct the Seacourt stream bridge, but it overlooked the fact that the contract length was determined by the need to rebuild large sections of the carriageway. I will certainly raise with the Highways Agency the issue of the failure to consult adequately or in sufficient time.
I understand that, at the hon. Gentleman's request, Michael Ford, the Highways Agency's area manager for the A34, visited last May the area that constituted the third part of our journey, and discussed these issues with the parish council and other interested parties. Following that meeting, the Highways Agency commissioned its managing agents, P. B. Kennedy and Donkin Ltd., to carry out two studies to investigate what improvements could be made.
The first study will consider safety-related issues, such as the improvements to the north-facing slip roads at the Botley interchange and safer access to the various minor roads that join the A34 in the area. The second will concentrate on environmental aspects, such as the replacement of the chain-link fence between Westminster way and the A34. Depending on those studies, which are expected to be completed later this year, the agency will consider a package of improvement measures.
Noise is perhaps the most frequent cause of complaint from people living alongside trunk roads. We have announced that we will tackle the problem on several fronts. Much work has been done in recent years on developing road surfaces, and the newest quieter surfaces can reduce noise by the same amount as halving the traffic flow. We have instructed the Highways Agency to specify that noise-reducing surfacing will be considered when carrying out resurfacing works in noise-sensitive areas.
Indeed, as the hon. Gentleman said, that work has already been done on the northbound carriageway of
the A34 through Botley, and I know that his constituents appreciate the resultant reduction in traffic noise. The southbound carriageway does not at present need resurfacing, but I can assure him that, when it does, the most appropriate noise-reducing surface will be used.
The hon. Gentleman has asked the Department about porous asphalt, although he did not mention it tonight. It is true that using that material would bring a further reduction in traffic noise. However, that material cannot be used when merely resurfacing the road. The nature of the material requires special drainage. It needs to be laid in a relatively thick layer compared with the more recently developed quieter surfaces and that often means that additional works are required. For example, the central reserve safety fencing may need to be raised and there can be problems in maintaining headroom. Those factors dramatically increase costs and the length of time needed
for the work. Using porous asphalt is really only an option with a new road, or where a road is being completely rebuilt.
Index | Home Page |