| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Road Haulage Industry
9. Mr. Gareth Thomas (Clwyd, West): When he last discussed the problems facing the road haulage industry with representatives of the industry. [82788]
The Minister of Transport (Dr. John Reid): I frequently meet the road haulage industry associations. For instance, on 27 April, I met a number of individual hauliers and held informal talks with the director-general and president of the Freight Transport Association. On the same day, I met the director-general of the Road Haulage Association. I very much look forward to meeting the industry tonight as the guest of honour at the Road Haulage Association dinner.
Mr. Thomas: May I express support for my right hon. Friend's policy of promoting dialogue with the industry, rather than the confrontation pursued by certain groups within the industry, not to mention by the Conservative party? However, does he accept that the significant increases in fuel duty have imposed burdens, particularly on smaller road hauliers in more remote areas; including the successful company in my constituency, L. E. Jones International? Does he take those concerns to heart, and will he redress that problem?
Dr. Reid: One of the reasons why we have established the road haulage forum is to address issues such as those raised by my hon. Friend. We will be looking at all issues, particularly competitiveness and matters affecting it. As far as his support for dialogue rather than disruption is concerned, I fully support that, and I hope very much that that is shared by everyone attending tonight's dinner.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield): If the Minister met representatives of the road haulage industry in my constituency--I have some big road haulage companies which operate not only nationally, but internationally--one of the road projects that they would like to see included in a roads programme would be the Poynton bypass--[Interruption.]
Madam Speaker: Order. We are dealing with road haulage matters. I know that the hon. Gentleman tried to get in on an earlier question, and was not successful.
Mr. Winterton: The question refers to
- "the problems facing the road haulage industry"
Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is Chairman of the Procedure Committee, so I think that he knows better than that. Would the Minister like to answer about the road in that area, and not get on to Manchester airport?
Dr. Reid: I am deeply grateful to the hon. Gentleman for preparing me with that information for the Road
Haulage Association dinner that I shall attend later tonight, for any future aviation dinners and for any Conservative association dinners in his constituency.
Mr. Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne and Sheppey): Will my right hon. Friend also take into consideration hauliers in Kent, particularly in north and east Kent, who are suffering from the cheap costs of fuel in France? Will he give some thought to the fact that Customs and Excise has the right to charge fuel duty as drivers come into this country? Where is he with the current discussions with road hauliers?
Dr. Reid: The first meeting of the road haulage forum took place on Thursday 8 April. The Freight Transport Association said that it was
- "very impressed and encouraged by the will, intent and urgency of the Forum to get to grips with our industry's problems without delay."
It is doubtful whether all the industry's ills can be laid at the door of one or two particular aspects, but we take them all seriously and we will continue our fruitful discussions with the industry. I hope that the whole road haulage industry will accept that dialogue is the fruitful way forward--as everyone else agrees--rather than disruption and inflicting yet more punishment and inconvenience on the general public.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex):
It has been a privilege to serve under my right hon. Friend the Member for South-West Norfolk (Mrs. Shephard)--may I get that in first? May I also point out how welcome it is that the right hon. Gentleman has given up misusing the KPMG report on these occasions?
Following the Secretary of State's pitiful performance at the Freight Transport Association dinner last month, may I welcome the fact that it is the Minister of Transport who will be addressing the Road Haulage Association dinner this evening, not the Secretary of State? However, if the Minister wants dialogue and not disruption, will he tell the House what the road haulage forum is meant to achieve? Why the delay? When is the next meeting and what is the agenda?
Dr. Reid:
May I say in reciprocation that it is a great honour and privilege to serve under my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister? With all due respect to the right hon. Member for South-West Norfolk (Mrs. Shephard), I think that I have gained more from that experience than the hon. Gentleman has from his.
On the road haulage industry, two formal meetings of the forum, three meetings of officials, a separate meeting with the Freight Transport Association, plus another meeting 10 days ago with the Road Haulage Association--all in a period of six weeks--can be called many things, but it can hardly be called sluggish. The hon. Gentleman knows fine and well what is being discussed at the forum. We are covering the range of issues that the
hauliers themselves wish to raise to ascertain the facts pertaining to the competitiveness of the industry, and those factors that influence it.
We have made it plain that we are not going to unpick political decisions that have already been made because a gun is held to our head. The forum is part of the continuation of discussions that we have with road hauliers and the Freight Transport Association, but we have made it equally plain that, if we can come to some agreement on the facts of the case, that will be useful in informing the future decisions of all parties.
10. Mr. Mike Gapes (Ilford, South):
What representations he has received about the crossrail project. [82789]
The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. John Prescott):
We have received a number of representations from hon. Members and hon. Friends, mostly on behalf of individual constituents and local authorities.
Mr. Gapes:
I am grateful for that reply. Does my right hon. Friend agree that a fast rail link from east to west London, including Stratford to Paddington, would not only take a great deal of pressure off the underground system--the District, Circle, Metropolitan and Central lines--but greatly benefit those who live in one side of London, but work in the other, and the many millions of visitors to our capital city?
Mr. Prescott:
My hon. Friend makes a fair case for crossrail. However, we have not cancelled the project--although the previous Administration said that it should not proceed any further. The crossrail route has been protected, and we have taken all measures necessary to ensure that it is available when a decision is taken on the project. I should say that that decision is more likely to be made by the London mayor and assembly.
Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood):
Does not the prospect of road-user and workplace car-parking charges make it more important than ever that effective public transport links--from the west into London, and to the east--such as crossrail, be instituted? Is not the real problem that the Administration have been unable to build public-private partnerships in selling London Underground leases, so that its capital budget is so constrained that money is just not available?
Mr. Prescott:
Most people will recall that, under the previous Administration, an assessment of various transport links--to the north, south, east and west, and crossrail--was made, and that a good case was made for building all the links. However, a choice had to be made. The previous Administration chose to build the Jubilee line extension; we are choosing to create a public-private partnership for London Underground, and that programme is on time. We are currently in the pre-qualifying period and inviting bidders. We shall, by autumn 1999, issue invitations to tender, and those tenders should be returned by spring 2000. Progress on the programme is continuing, as stated to the House.
11. Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield):
If he will make a statement on the integration of road and canal transport. [82790]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Alan Meale):
A key message of the integrated transport White Paper is to ensure that all forms of transport, including waterways, work well together, and that each is able to make its maximum contribution.
Mr. Fabricant:
In practice, that "key message" is a load of old tosh. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, as planned, the Birmingham northern relief road would cut the Lichfield-Hatherton canal in half? Is he also aware that the Government inspector said that an overpass or underpass should be provided? Is he further aware that his boss--the two-Jag Secretary of State--overruled the inspector, so that work on the canal cannot go ahead, damaging prospects for canals in south Staffordshire? Does the hon. Gentleman think that that might have had something to do with the fact that both Lichfield district and city councils were won back by the Conservatives? Were not the Government's decisions a disaster, and what will they do in future to ensure that nothing like it ever happens again?
Mr. Meale:
Speaking of a load of tosh, I remind the hon. Gentleman that he seems to be at variance with both his Front-Bench colleagues and some of his Back-Bench colleagues, who, only a few moments ago, were supporting not only the road haulage industry, but new roads across the length and breadth of England. I remind him of the 15-month public inquiry on the relief road, at the end of which the Government, in the national interest, took a decision on it.
The hon. Gentleman seems to be at variance also with people in his own area, as the bodies supporting the legal challenge to the relief road have withdrawn their objections. As for the Government's plans, we shall very soon be publishing a daughter document that will take into account all the planning considerations, so that we do not again get into the type of mess that the previous Government left us in.
Mr. Fabricant:
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. That was a wholly unsatisfactory answer and I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.
Madam Speaker:
In that case, we must now move on to the next question.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |