| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
London Underground
Dr. Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many journeys (a) he and (b) Ministers in his Department made on the London Underground in the last six months. [71913]
Ms Glenda Jackson: Although records are not kept of the methods of transport used on official visits, Ministers have used London Underground on a number of occasions over the last six months, as well as buses, taxis and walking.
In addition to using London Underground for their official duties, Ministers in my Department use it regularly in their private lives.
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 617
Mr. Cox:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what discussions he has had with London borough councils on the development of cycle lanes within their boroughs; and if he will make a statement. [72774]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
In the Transport Policies and Programme settlement for 1999-2000, announced on 17 December last year, authorities were advised on the priorities for developing the London Cycle Network. In the coming year they should continue to take a more strategic approach, with the overall aim of encouraging more people to cycle in London.
All the London Boroughs have been involved with the development of the LCN, with the Royal London Borough of Kingston upon Thames acting as the overall co-ordinating authority. Through TPP funding good progress has been made on the LCN, with over 1000km of cycle routes already available for use.
The intention is to produce an initial network by April 2000--to be launched alongside the London part of the Thames Cycle Route--that will be of a standard to facilitate cycling in London and provide a satisfactory base for taking forward and completing the LCN in future years.
Advice on the prioritisation of cycling provisions was also included in the guidance recently issued to Local Authorities in London, on the preparation of their Interim Transport Plans, for the 2000-01 bidding round.
I have consistently raised the issue of cycle provisions during visits to various London Boroughs over the last 18 months, and my officials will continue to attend regular meetings of the London Cycle Network steering group, and of the Borough Cycling Officers' Group. Progress reports, including information monitoring the usage on newly completed cycle routes, will be discussed with the boroughs.
Mr. MacShane:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will instruct local authorities in London to create trial cycle lanes along main thoroughfares. [73473]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
My right hon. Friend does not have the power to issue such an instruction. The London Boroughs are responsible for deciding whether cycle lanes or other measures should be provided on their local roads.
My Department publishes Traffic Advisory Leaflets on the results of research projects carried out into traffic management issues--including facilities to encourage cycling. In addition, there already exists a design manual, produced by the LCN lead authority, to encourage good practice in the establishment of cycle lanes and other cycling measures.
Mrs. Dunwoody:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans the Government have to create additional passenger transport executives. [73172]
Dr. Reid:
The power to establish PTEs was removed under s57 of The Transport Act 1985. The need for more PTA/Es was considered in the lead-up to the White Paper.
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 618
PTA/Es were established because of the heavy reliance on public transport in the metropolitan conurbations outside London. They have co-operated closely with the metropolitan district councils (the highway authorities) to produce joint local transport strategies under the package approach.
Shires and Unitary Authorities have the same public transport powers as PTA/Es (except for the special duty which PTEs have for local rail services which reflects the high number of local rail services in the metropolitan areas). Shires and Unitaries are, therefore, ideally placed to produce integrated local transport plans for their areas.
The creation of additional Passenger Transport Executives would require primary legislation. The Government have no plans for any such legislation.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what representations his Department has received in the past six months from (a) Communities Against Nuclear Transport and (b) other community groups concerning the safety of the rail transport of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear wastes. [72964]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
This Department has received (a) one letter from Communities Against Nuclear Transport (Brent Terrace Residents Association) and (b) eight letters from other community groups on these subjects.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many times the selection panel for the Commission for Integrated Transport has met. [73505]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
The selection panels for the Commission for Integrated Transport have met three times in total so far.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will place in the Library the criteria for appointments to the Commission for Integrated Transport. [73621]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
I have today arranged for a copy of the criteria for appointments to the Commission to be placed in the House Library.
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many names were considered by the selection panel for the Commission for Integrated Transport. [73509]
Ms Glenda Jackson:
The Department received 262 applications for the posts of Chair and Vice Chair to the Commission for Integrated Transport and 290 expressions of interest in membership. The selection panels considered all these names during the sift process.
Mr. Maclean:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the British Government's policy in respect of the CITES negotiations on the ivory ban. [73305]
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 619
Mr. Meacher:
The 1997 CITES Conference decided by a two thirds majority to transfer the elephants of Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe from Appendix I to Appendix II of the Convention. The Conference also agreed a one-off experimental export of stockpiled ivory to Japan to raise revenue for conservation and community development projects in the African countries concerned, provided that the CITES Standing Committee, which the UK now chairs, was content that strict conditions had been met.
At its 41st meeting last month, the Standing Committee examined a report prepared by the CITES Secretariat on verification missions made to each of the four countries concerned. The report concluded that the conditions had been met by all the countries except Botswana. After careful consideration of the report, the Standing Committee endorsed the CITES Secretariat's conclusions and agreed that Namibia and Zimbabwe should be authorised to sell and ship 13.8 and 20 tonnes of ivory respectively to Japan on or after 18 March 1999. The proceeds from the sales must be directed towards conservation and community development projects. Botswana cannot participate until full compliance has been verified by the CITES Secretariat.
The resumption of commercial trade is limited to this one-off trial shipment. There is no possibility of further shipments being made without the express permission of a future Conference of CITES Parties. The shipments themselves will be closely monitored by the CITES Secretariat who will ensure compliance with marking and registering requirements.
As part of the agreement, the CITES Secretariat had already established a reporting and monitoring procedure to assess illegal hunting and trade in elephants and elephant products. At the February meeting, the Standing Committee endorsed new measures, which the Government fully supported, to build on this by providing two new elephant monitoring systems. The United Kingdom has already offered to provide the first year's funding for the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) which will monitor legal and illegal trading in ivory. At the meeting, the European Union, United States and Japan pledged substantial funding towards the second part of the system, MIKE, (Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants), which will involve tracking, analysis and assessment of illegal killing and trends in poaching on a representative sample of sites across Africa and south Asia.
In addition, the Standing Committee agreed a mechanism to reinstate the elephant populations currently listed on Appendix II, to Appendix I of CITES if there is evidence of increased poaching or failure by any of the Parties concerned to comply with the conditions set by the 1997 Conference.
The Government believe that the proper implementation of the new pan-African and Asian elephant trade and poaching monitoring systems, together with the early warning system agreed at the meeting, should protect the elephant against the risk of any escalation in poaching caused by the very limited ivory trade agreed by CITES Parties. As Chair of the CITES Standing Committee, we will, along with the CITES Secretariat and others, continue to monitor the situation in Africa closely.
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 620
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |