| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Prescott: Under any Government?
Mr. Day: Under any Government. The Deputy Prime Minister knows full well--better, perhaps, than anyone else in the Government--that however much he, personally, may be committed to expenditure, the Treasury decides that the money is not available. The dead hand of the Treasury stopped investment in the British Rail network for years. That investment is now coming about because of privatisation.
Mr. Miller: I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's comments about my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Martlew). However, if the hon. Gentleman believes
that a policy introduced by the previous Administration will deliver to the west coast main line the results that he saw in Milan, will he be voting for our amendment, rather than the original motion, which says that there are
- "no policies to increase . . . rail capacity"?
The west coast main line is the busiest route not just in the United Kingdom but in Europe, so it is essential that it is modernised to the extent announced. With investment from Railtrack, Virgin Trains and Angel Trains, which is buying the lease for the trains from the Fiat-Alstom consortium--all major private companies--the long overdue improvements in the service on the line, which my constituents and those from Euston to the west of Glasgow have a right to expect, will ultimately be made.
Mr. Norman Baker (Lewes):
Of course I acknowledge the need to modernise the west coast main line, but does the hon. Gentleman accept that such modernisation has been rather over-hyped by Railtrack and that it is dressing up the renewal of basic infrastructure as new investment? In fact, on some stretches of the line, the maximum speed limit will not increase.
Mr. Day:
If the hon. Gentleman knows anything about the west coast main line he will know that many of the current delays are caused by the use of old rolling stock, which Virgin is still running. Many of the trains are ex-British Rail--30 years old and some. There will be improvement with new rolling stock, which will obviously be able to travel faster, but only when the line is straightened and the signalling system is upgraded. Today's Railtrack press statement sets out clearly that the bulk of the £35 million contract will be spent on new signalling and points systems at various places on the track which cause delays and bottlenecks outside stations such as Euston.
All that is as a result of privatisation. If privatisation had not happened, we would not be seeing the improvements that, thank goodness, we are beginning to witness. There has been criticism of Virgin--I would be the first to say that much of it has been valid--but at least the company and its partners on the west coast main line project have the guts to put the money up front that will eventually bring about much needed improvements.
I accept readily that, in trying to reduce traffic congestion on motorways and roads, it is sensible to encourage people to use trains. Anybody with any common sense realises that, but we should not destroy alternative ways of solving such problems or force people out of their cars. The attitude that there are too many cars on the road, so people must be stopped from driving and travelling to out-of-town shopping centres in which people want to shop, is shared by old and new Labour. It is not surprising that the Deputy Prime Minister fronts the policy.
There is no question that the congestion difficulties that out-of-town shopping centres have undoubtedly brought about must be dealt with. But the answer for new Labour is to tell people that they cannot shop in such places. It says, "That is wrong, bad. Do as you are told. Do as I say, not as I do." That is not the answer to Britain's transport problems.
On the M6 in Staffordshire--[Interruption.] I want the Deputy Prime Minister to listen for a second, if that is possible. There is a minor problem but a great irritant caused by congestion on the M6 in Staffordshire as a result of necessary work--I do not dispute that--to improve lane signalling, which is being carried out by the right hon. Gentleman's Department.
There are logjams on that section of the motorway when the road is busy; traffic often comes to a halt in any case. With two-mile gaps between seven or eight sets of roadworks, there are 50-mile an hour speed limit signs. Therefore, even when the road is reasonably empty, traffic slows. It is not as though the work is going on throughout Staffordshire. One drives for miles and miles at a restricted speed limit, and what does one see? One sees three men and a digger at the side of the road. That infuriates drivers. I want the Deputy Prime Minister to ask his Department whether it is necessary to restrictthe speed limit on almost all the M6 throughout Staffordshire--these works are to continue until March next year.
Mr. Gordon Prentice:
Next point.
Mr. Day:
Many of the hon. Gentleman's constituents drive on that stretch of road every day. I hope that they take note of his comments. He obviously has no interest in the concerns expressed by his constituents who use that stretch of motorway.
My constituents are being failed dramatically by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the Government on a number of issues. The cancelled bypass around Manchester airport is only one of them. Many of my constituents live on the flight path to Manchester airport. The flight path is no great detriment to the lives of the majority of my constituents, many of whom--myself included--are proud of the airport.
In order to deal with congestion in the sky, the airport authorities have for many years asked for the power to fine aircraft that stray from the flight path over my densely populated constituency. Despite the fact that the Government agree with that principle, and that about 18 months before the election the previous Government agreed also, the airport authorities are still waiting for the regulations to be brought before the House. I simply appeal to the Deputy Prime Minister to do something for my constituency. One thing would be to enact what the Government claim they support and allow airports the power to fine airlines who stray from flight paths. Will he seriously consider that?
Mr. Prescott:
I have not found the best way of doing it.
Mr. Day:
Such sedentary comments give me the impression that the Deputy Prime Minister is very flippant about the matter. I hope that he takes it seriously because, for many of my constituents, it is a major issue. I simply
Up and down the country, towns and villages are awaiting one development to rid their communities of pollution: bypasses. This Deputy Prime Minister and this Government have cancelled their one hope of being saved from pollution. Bypasses are the one way in which communities that suffer dense traffic may be relieved in the short term and for the future, yet the resolution of their problems has been taken away from under their noses. [Interruption.] The Deputy Prime Minister will hear about this whether he likes it or not.
The bypass to which I shall refer is a third part built. Nevertheless, the remaining two parts--the Poynton bypass and the western section of the Manchester airport eastern link road--have been cancelled. That is a joke. The proposed road has always been known as the Manchester airport eastern link road, yet the Government have cancelled the building of the part that links the road to the airport. It is unbelievable.
Mr. Prescott:
It is not the only road to the airport.
Mr. Day:
I would like the Deputy Prime Minister to visit my constituency. He and his Ministers have been asked on many occasions to see it for themselves so that I can prove to them that what I am saying is true. I would like to see the Deputy Prime Minister walk down Woodford road between Bramall and Woodford and see the reaction that he received. I advise him to take his Jaguar so that he can make a quick getaway. I would like to see him walk along Finney way in Heald Green, where the missing section of the link road should be. It has no apparent chance of being built with this Government's attitude.
Mr. Jenkin:
Will my hon. Friend remind his constituents that the Deputy Prime Minister found £63 million to improve the road in his own constituency?
Mr. Day:
My constituents would be surprised, but I doubt whether they would be shocked by that.
I must impress on Ministers on the Treasury Bench that my constituents in Cheadle, Bramall, Heald Green and Woodford desperately want the bypass. Seven thousand signatures were collected, but not by people going round knocking on doors and presenting petitions. The petitions were simply left in local post offices, and within two months, 7,000 signatures were collected from people who wanted the bypass. Despite the fact that the previous Government had given a starting date for the completion of the bypass, the present Government cancelled it.
The story of Cheadle's missing bypass is not uncommon. The only thing that sets it apart from instances in other parts of the country is that in our case, part of the bypass already exists. That is the nonsense that my constituents will never understand.
I also do not understand why the Government do not see the logic of completing the bypass, especially as the same Government gave permission for the second runway at Manchester, which will dramatically increase the traffic
flows to Manchester airport. Manchester airport admits that even though it is providing for extra rail links and other services and forms of transport to get to the airport, the majority of the increased journeys to the airport through my constituency will be by road.
The bypass must be finished. It is beyond belief that a Government who gave permission for the second runway have cancelled the road link to the airport that is meant to service it. The entire issue needs to be thought through carefully, because it affects a wider area than the Manchester airport eastern link road. It affects the Poynton area in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) and the constituency of the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Mr. Stunell), because of the eastern section of the MAELR, known as the Poynton bypass, which has been cancelled, and the Hazel Grove A6(M) bypass. The three motorway projects together are supposed to link up to the M60 and provide the necessary relief for the whole of what is known as the south-east quadrant of Greater Manchester.
All that my constituents have seen as a result of the Government's green policy is their one chance of escape from pollution being taken away from them. That is the only change that they have seen. In its place is a promised study into the transport difficulties of the south-east quadrant of Greater Manchester. What a mouthful. I do not know precisely what that means, but on behalf of my constituents I shall raise one or two points with Ministers.
First, I thank the Department for including at long last--it was not the original intention--Stockport metropolitan borough council in the steering committee that is to be set up to appoint consultants for the study of the south-east quadrant of Greater Manchester.
Secondly, when the study gets under way, will it deal with the issue of the bypasses that have been cancelled, or will its aim be purely to find what the Government would call alternatives to those bypasses? I seek an assurance, as does the council in Stockport, that in the course of that study, the consultants will examine all aspects of transport policy, including the cancelled bypasses, and that the issue of roads will not be ignored.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |