| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11.14 am
Mr. Martin Linton (Battersea): I, too, welcome the announcement made yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister of a private-public partnership in which London Underground and Railtrack will together examine ways in which the surface railway system and the London underground can be linked. My right hon. Friend has been a long-term advocate of such a linkage between tube and rail in London, which, in a useful
phrase, he described yesterday as "joined-up London". He also mentioned some of the major schemes that could flow from that linking: for example, the five airports around London and the channel tunnel rail link could all be linked into the same railway system, thus enabling swift communication between them.
In a debate such as this, we can focus closely on London and consider in detail the possibilities opened up by that statement. One scheme that is explicitly included in the discussions between London Underground and Railtrack is the East London line extensions, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Canning Town (Mr. Fitzpatrick) referred. I am sure that the northern extension, which would link the East London line to the North London line will be mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore), just as my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, Deptford (Joan Ruddock) will refer to the southern link that will link the East London line to the line into Croydon. That will enable tubes to be run from Highgate down to Croydon and Wimbledon and give the first tube interchange for the Croydon tramlink, about which my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, Central (Mr. Davies) is so enthusiastic.
I shall concentrate on another possibility, which is that of running trains from Highgate around to Clapham Junction, via either Brixton or Streatham Common. The important thing is the link to Clapham Junction. The reason for my interest in the scheme and for my having asked many questions about the East London line, which lies many miles from my constituency, is that my constituency contains Clapham Junction, which is one of the oldest and most famous large stations in London. It was built in 1863 and, many years ago, it became the busiest station in the United Kingdom--indeed, the busiest in Europe, and it still has signs that advertise that claim. Its name has become famous world wide: Harold Macmillan used the phrase, the "Clapham Junction of politics" to mean a place that everyone has to go through; and, in a music book, I even discovered a description of the chord of the diminished seventh as the "Clapham Junction of music", because it is the chord from which one can go anywhere.
Clapham Junction has entered popular currency in many different ways, yet it is not on the tube system. That omission is a long-standing and keenly felt grievance of the people of Battersea, and it needs to be put right. My reasons are not purely parochial; there are many reasons why that link should be made. Many commuters do not want to go to a central London terminus, but to some other part of London. Entering London from any direction other than the south or south-west, they are able to get off the train and on to the tube system before they reach a terminus; but that is not possible coming from the south or south-west, because Clapham Junction is not on the tube. More important, a scheme such as the London orbital would allow access to the tube system by many communities in London that do not currently have such access.
Quite apart from linking up with the East London and South London lines, the network would lead to a link to the West London line, which goes from Clapham Junction up to Willesden Junction. It is sorely underused by rail passengers--few even know of its existence. Until recently, there was only one stop on the line between the two junctions, at Kensington Olympia, but last month
another stop was opened at West Brompton. Apart from those two stops, the line passes without stopping through the rest of Battersea, through Sands End in Fulham and through a station in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Regent's Park and Kensington, North (Ms Buck) which is intriguingly named North Pole--it was closed many years ago, but I believe that it should be reopened. At Willesden Junction the line joins the North London line, completing the London orbital route that we are seeking.
That orbital route has long been dreamed of. It was suggested many years ago by the Greater London council. The Railway Development Society and Transport 2000 have campaigned for it under the name Outer Circle. The story is rather like Frobisher's search for the north-west passage. Only since yesterday have we been able to say that it can be done, because only when the two missing links in the East London line are joined up does the orbital route become possible.
That creates three important possibilities for travellers in London. One is for commuters going to Docklands or north London rather than the terminus who want to avoid the hassle of going through the centre of London. They will be able to make a direct connection with an orbital route. Another important use is for through London passengers. Many people have no business in central London and come to the capital only because the railway system is so centred on it. Given the option of an orbital route they might well get off at Clapham Junction, go to Willesden Junction and get on a train in another direction. A few people do that already, but not many because there is not a regular orbital train. I am convinced that many people would happily get off at stations such as Highbury and Islington or Willesden Junction, which are two or three miles from the terminus, and change to another line if they could.
However, the most important issue for inner London Members is that many communities in inner London are disfranchised from the tube system. A London orbital line would correct an ancient injustice. Large parts of south London were bypassed by the tube system, as were Hackney and some parts of north London. That happened partly for geological reasons. When the system was built it was thought to be impossible to tunnel through clay. A tunnelling expert today would say that clay was the best material through which to tunnel. There were also historical reasons that the train services in north London were longer distance lines that were less inclined to build up commuter services, so the tube was relied on for that, whereas the south London train lines developed as commuter lines.
As a result, south London, which has nearly 40 per cent. of the population of London, has only 11 per cent. of the tube stations. More insidious than that is the fact that many lines have far fewer trains per hour, which means that access from the south London suburbs--or, indeed, from Hackney--to central London is often much more difficult. It is possible to get to the centre of London quickly from Bromley, Croydon or Clapham Junction. The system is handy for those who work near the terminus, but it is not conducive for those who want to travel to any other part of London or join in London as a metropolis. That contributes to south London's reputation
for having quiet suburbs with people who do their job in the City and go home at half past five, whereas north London has a more raffish, cosmopolitan atmosphere.
Joan Ruddock (Lewisham, Deptford):
Not true.
Mr. Linton:
South London has changed. The train system built with that in mind is now inappropriate. Thousands of students and young people who come to work in the capital and live in south London want to be able to travel around London until late at night. They do not just want to go to work and go back home. The tourism industry in south London suffers inordinately from the fact that the area does not exist on the tube map. Millions of tourists come to London under the impression that it is almost entirely north of the Thames. Tourist attractions, as Battersea power station will become, find it difficult to persuade tourists that south London exists.
The entertainment industry suffers from the same problem. I am president of Battersea arts centre. Even though it is often the Time Out pick of the month, it is surprisingly difficult to persuade people from north London that they can catch what used to be called a British Rail train to Clapham Junction, get off, walk five minutes and find an arts centre. It is much closer than many of the arts centres that they frequently go to in north London, but it seems far less accessible. That is a problem for the parts of London not touched by the tube system.
Those in inner south London suburbs such as mine, close to the centre but far away in travel time, suffer most. My constituency is criss-crossed with hundreds of railway lines. It probably has a greater concentration of railway lines than any other constituency, even though acres upon acres of goods yards have been closed. However, it is like the ancient myth of Tantalus. We have all the railway lines, but after one stop people have to change to a different mode of transport. A two or three-mile journey to central London can often take an hour.
We should try to use the enormous possibilities that the public-private partnership opens up to revert to the original concept of the London underground. It was not built to take people to central London and dump them there. The concept was that trains would continue underground from the terminus to take people to different parts of London. That is why the Metropolitan line tunnels are wide enough to take large steam trains, although they have never been used for that. The concept of linking tube and railway lines will make it possible for the first time for people from outside London to travel in and have the advantage of being taken not just to Waterloo, but to several stations in inner London.
No other capital scheme could be started during this Parliament. Indeed, it could be completed early in the next if approval is given to the extensions later this year. At perhaps £150 million--my hon. Friend the Minister may be able to give us a better idea of the cost--it will be only one twentieth of the £3 billion that a new tube line would cost.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |