| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
New Deal for Communities
11. Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East): What assessment he has made of the implementation of the new deal for communities. [73423]
16. Ms Margaret Moran (Luton, South):
What assessment he has made of the implementation of the new deal for communities. [73428]
The Minister for Local Government and Housing (Ms Hilary Armstrong):
We are delighted that people living in 17 of the most deprived neighbourhoods in England have seized the opportunity presented by our new deal for communities to confront the problems that they face. Across Government and across the country, we will continue to work closely with communities as they develop plans to deliver lasting change.
Mr. Connarty:
Is my hon. Friend aware that communities welcome in particular the move from the short-term projects of the previous Government to the sustainable improvements of this Government? She will recall that the document that launched the scheme talked about Britain and drew from good practice throughout the UK, including Scotland. Will she ensure that lessons learned from the new deal for communities will play a part in continuing dialogue with the Scottish Office and the Scottish Parliament, to ensure that we work together throughout Britain to deal with the scourge of social exclusion?
Ms Armstrong:
My hon. Friend is right. There is great support out there for a more long-term, strategic approach to the problems, involving local people identifying problems and finding solutions to them. I can assure my hon. Friend that we are determined to learn the lessons, and we will do that for the whole country--including Scotland. I am in discussions with right hon. and hon. Friends at the Scottish Office so that we can all learn the lessons from the early round, and make sure that every deprived community in Britain benefits from those lessons.
Ms Moran:
What plans does my hon. Friend have to integrate the new deal for communities with other Government programmes? She may be aware that my constituency benefits under the Labour Government--unlike under the previous Government--from several programmes, including the new deal for regeneration; single regeneration budget 4 and, we hope, 5; and a health action zone. Will she assure us that we will have joined-up government programmes, so that the community in Luton can get maximum value from all of them?
Ms Armstrong:
My hon. Friend is right: it is very important that not only the additional money going to an area, but the mainstream money works effectively to tackle the problems that communities and citizens face. We will take careful steps to ensure that we know what is going on, and that people locally can know and
Mr. Andrew Rowe (Faversham and Mid-Kent):
Does the Minister accept that, over the past 30 years, progress in community development strategies in this country has been pathetic, whereas it has been remarkably effective overseas? Will she ensure that the lessons that have been learned all over the world are repatriated here so that we can make some serious progress?
Ms Armstrong:
I have to be careful, because I used to be a community worker and I do not want anyone to think that I am seeking to gain advantage from the Government's recognition that we cannot change communities without working effectively with the people in them. We have lessons to learn from elsewhere. We want to learn them and to ensure that people in the communities with which we are working have the opportunity to learn from others, share experiences and get the very best deal.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham):
I recognise that the new deal for communities is designed to tackle the problem of urban blight, which so many rotten Labour authorities have caused over such a long period, but what guarantee can the Minister offer us that there will be no slippage whatever in the timetable, and that the pathfinder partnerships that have submitted bids will be told whether they are successful in July 1999?
Ms Armstrong:
I invite the hon. Gentleman to read the report of the social exclusion unit on the most deprived communities in our country. The report acknowledges that Government, both nationally and locally, have sometimes been part of the problem, not the solution. The Conservative Government were massively part of the problem.
13. Dr. Doug Naysmith (Bristol, North-West):
What response he has received from British Waterways to the recent announcement of increased resources; and what indication British Waterways has given him of how those resources will be used. [73425]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Alan Meale):
British Waterways has enthusiastically welcomed the Government's extra investment, which will enable it to reduce its £90 million backlog of urgent safety-related maintenance.
Dr. Naysmith:
Does my hon. Friend believe, as I do, that the South West regional development agency will have a part to play in encouraging the use of inland waterways?
Mr. Meale:
I know that my hon. Friend has a long history of interest in British canals and waterways. I agree that the economic strategy for our waterways needs to be tied into the strategy of the regional development
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield):
That answer will cut no ice with canal users in Staffordshire. Does the Minister realise that his boss, the Deputy Prime Minister--who, I understand, is currently scuba diving in the Seychelles--has overridden an inspector's report so that the Birmingham northern relief road will cut straight across the Lichfield-Hatherton canal? Will he call on the right hon. Gentleman to return from his holiday and do something about that?
Mr. Meale:
Once again, the hon. Gentleman is wrong. Ministers had a telephone conversation this morning with the Deputy Prime Minister and he is still in India. I assure the hon. Gentleman that due regard was paid to proper procedure during the consultation that was carried out on the Birmingham northern relief road, and a judicial inquiry was held. People from British Waterways, especially those in Staffordshire and elsewhere, are enthusiastic about the Government's recent announcements and we have letters to prove that.
14. Mr. Tony Clarke (Northampton, South):
When he expects to set up the proposed strategic rail authority; and if he will make a statement. [73426]
The Minister of Transport (Dr. John Reid):
The shadow strategic rail authority will be operative from 1 April, under the leadership of Sir Alastair Morton. The Bill to set up the strategic rail authority proper will be introduced as soon as legislative time allows.
Mr. Clarke:
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that response; my hon. Friends and I believe that the sooner we have the SRA the better. Will my right hon. Friend comment on the role that the SRA, its shadow and his Department can play in strategic planning and, in particular, in protecting access to the main line for local services? In my constituency, Silverlink Trains is concerned that access to the west coast main line, following its modernisation, could be restricted by main line operators trying to seize as much track time as possible.
Dr. Reid:
As my hon. Friend will realise, and as I said earlier, one of the grave problems caused by privatisation of the railways is the fragmentation of the system. The strategic rail authority, in its shadow form, and later in its proper form, under Sir Alastair Morton will be responsible for establishing a network-wide strategic vision and implementing policies on the ground that will contribute to the network nature of our railway system. Whatever benefits have derived from privatisation, the vast majority of people are well aware of the problems with punctuality and reliability, and the fragmentation of the network that has been a serious impediment to the sort of railway system that we want to build. The SRA will have a crucial role in rebuilding the system.
Mr. Tim Boswell (Daventry):
While various investments and some co-ordination may be desirable, how much extra investment will derive from the creation of the SRA?
Dr. Reid:
The hon. Gentleman will be aware that it is not the purpose of the SRA to invest yet more taxpayers' money. The level of subsidy that we currently give is tolerable, but it is due to reduce. Enough taxpayers' money was wasted by the previous Government when they sold off Railtrack at a rock-bottom price, thus losing almost £2 billion. The purpose of the SRA is to bring back some network-wide capacity to our railway system, and to give some long-term strategic vision to it. That will be a primary role for the SRA and I am sure that it will be one of its successes.
Dr. Reid:
The answer is in the short, medium and long term. We have now engaged with the railway companies and with Railtrack. We will see year-on-year improvements in performance and we will be back every year to see that improvements are delivered for the passengers.
Dr. Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test):
Given that 86 per cent. of Railtrack's income comes from carriage charges, does my right hon. Friend intend to ask the SRA, when it has been set up, to examine the present system of subsidy, under which £1.5 billion goes to the rail operating companies, which then pay Railtrack, which does not invest in our rail system? Does my right hon. Friend accept that it might be simpler to give the money to Railtrack with strong investment incentives attached?
Dr. Reid:
As my hon. Friend will know, that is a matter for the regulator, whom we have asked to consider the way in which public money is put into our railways through Railtrack. We want to ensure that the blame culture, the history lessons and the transposition of blame from Railtrack to the companies and vice versa come to an end. Passengers want a decent, affordable, accessible, safe and secure railway system. The House wants that too, and the packed House I see around me is surely a testament to how seriously we all take the problem of our railways.
Mr. Matthew Taylor (Truro and St. Austell):
It was widely reported in the autumn that the Deputy Prime Minister had won the backing of his Cabinet colleagues for a strategic rail Bill this year, if there was progress with the House of Lords Bill. That progress has happened, but there is still no strategic authority Bill. When will it be introduced, and may we continue to imagine that it will happen during this Parliament?
Dr. Reid:
The hon. Gentleman is quite right to say that the Deputy Prime Minister was so persuasive that his colleagues agreed to add to the six Bills that he already had in the Queen's Speech. Should the House of Lords and, in particular, the Opposition prove sensible in finding
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |