| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Paterson: In that case, will the hon. Lady impress upon her Front-Bench colleagues that the fuel escalator should cease next year?
Miss Smith: The fuel escalator was introduced by the hon. Gentleman's party. It did not do the Conservatives much good, as they lost the last general election. It was not a popular policy, but then not many of the policies that the Conservative Government were proclaiming at that stage were popular with the British people.
My purpose tonight is to ask the Government to reflect carefully and to think about the vast majority of people in this country who drive cars and who need to be persuaded to use public transport. Transport needs to be in place for them to be able to use it.
Mr. Paterson:
Will the hon. Lady do the House the courtesy of answering my question? Will she propose that the Government do not extend the fuel escalator next year?
Miss Smith:
I was winding up. I told you that the fuel escalator was unpopular for your--
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Order. The hon. Lady does not tell me anything.
Miss Smith:
I apologise, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I was telling the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Mr. Paterson) that I did not think that the fuel escalator was a popular policy for the Conservative Government. If that policy is continued and the price of petrol increases dramatically, it will not be a popular policy for this Government, either. That is why I ask them to think carefully and why I am speaking tonight.
9.19 pm
Mr. David Tredinnick (Bosworth): I am grateful for being called to speak, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I noted that my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Mr. Paterson) was winding up the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Miss Smith) as she tried to wind up her speech.
I am grateful to have a few minutes and I will confine my remarks to my Leicestershire constituency, to consider the problems of the development in Hinckley and the need to upgrade the A5 between the M1-M69 roundabout and the Longshoot junction at Nuneaton.
Earlier, the Deputy Prime Minister said that it was a mistake to link planning and transport. I want to demonstrate that if we do not consider transport in relation
to the A5, Watling street and Hinckley, development in Hinckley will not take place in line with his inspector's recommendations on the local structure plan. As soon as those proposed developments are approved by the borough council, the Highways Agency will reject them on the ground that the trunk road does not have the capacity. I commend the Highways Agency and my local council--Hinckley and Bosworth borough council--for getting together to try to solve that problem sensibly.
In my rural constituency of 100 square miles, there has been tremendous concern among car owners about tax increases. My hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire also referred to that matter. There has been particular concern in the more rural parts of my constituency, but firms such as Crowfoots, in the main town of Hinckley, are extremely worried about the hike in diesel costs. That has caused great hardship.
There would be anxiety about any proposed bus lanes in the midlands. My right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) referred to the bus lane experiment on the M4. We should be most concerned about any proposed bus lanes on the M1 and the M69.
The Secretary of State has failed to set up the much-vaunted Strategic Rail Authority; we should be interested to know when that will be done. It was one of his flagship proposals. The chaos on the Circle line reflects badly on the Labour Administration, too.
In Hinckley, there will be no development on the main local sites--such as grass plots, Nutts lane, Coventry road housing estate or the area off Wolvey road, unless the Government are able to help us. There can be no development in line with the Government's proposed increase in house building in Hinckley and the rest of Leicestershire unless improvements are made to theA5--an important trunk road. It is nonsense that we are unable to expand Hinckley, which is a most important town in the midlands.
The right hon. Gentleman can help us. The proposals are for a private-public partnership and will be introduced over five or six years. A few years ago, a small development took place on a section of the road from the Coventry road roundabout to Longshoot, which eased traffic enormously. We now need to extend that development. That could be done if the DETR, through the Highways Agency, looks kindly on the proposals. They have been well thought out and will cost about £9 million. If a railway bridge in the area is raised or lowered, the cost may increase by about 10 per cent to 20 per cent. If the Deputy Prime Minister supports the scheme, there will be huge benefits for the nation, because when the M6 is clogged up, the A5--the main arterial road running from London to the north-west--comes into play. I appeal to him to take note of that local initiative.
During the past fortnight, there have been two fatal accidents on that part of the road and there have been four fatal accidents in almost as many months. We need black-spot and warning signs on that section, and we need markings on the roundabouts. We need immediate action. I appeal to the Deputy Prime Minister to consider the matter.
Jacqui Smith:
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he is arguing for traffic calming measures, such as those opposed by Members on the Conservative Front Bench during the opening comments of the debate?
Mr. Tredinnick:
The hon. Lady must have misunderstood me; I thought that I was arguing for improvements on the road itself--a dual carriageway, three lanes and some roundabouts. That was the principal thrust of my argument.
Mr. Tredinnick:
Does my hon. Friend want to intervene?
Mr. Paterson:
I merely wanted to say that the hon. Member for Redditch (Jacqui Smith) shamefully misinterprets my hon. Friend's arguments.
Mr. Tredinnick:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend.
Ms Rosie Winterton (Doncaster, Central):
I am glad to have an opportunity to speak in the debate, because transport has an enormous effect on the quality of life of all of us and of our constituents.
In a voluntary capacity, I am a member of the RAC's public policy committee, so I know how important it is to motorists that we do something to reduce congestion on our roads. The RAC Foundation for Motoring recently surveyed RAC members, and the results show that 78 per cent. of motorists are concerned about traffic congestion. That motorists are concerned about the costs of motoring is to be expected, but they also know that congestion is costly to business and in health terms. Motorists know that, not only because they are car drivers and car users, but because they are also pedestrians, cyclists and rail users.
The survey shows that everyone knows that maintaining the status quo is not an option; people want change. The Government are delivering change, by providing an extra £1.8 billion for public transport, developing local transport plans with local authorities, providing an extra £170 million for rural buses, and increasing road maintenance. Those measures are making a real difference in improving public transport.
Although congestion charging has not yet started, local authorities will be able to establish local transport plans that will, as my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Miss Smith) said, help to persuade people to leave their car at home. If bus lanes, park-and-ride facilities, bypasses and ring roads are available, funded through local transport plans, the motorists will be offered a choice and, as the RAC says, that is the way to ensure that people believe that they can leave the car at home.
Mr. Fraser:
Will the hon. Lady give way?
Ms Winterton:
No--I am sorry, but I have very little time.
The RAC survey showed that the majority of motorists said that, if the money derived from congestion charging went back--at local level--into improving transport, providing better roads and better public transport,
they would support charging. That is why the link with hypothecation is so important to the Government's aims. The survey also showed that 49 per cent. of motorists said that, if charging were introduced, they would try to car share; and, of those, 94 per cent. said that they thought that that could be achieved.
That survey was only of motorists--it did not take into account the views of those who do not have cars. In my constituency, 40 per cent. of people do not have a car--[Interruption.]
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
Order. There are private conversations going on in the Chamber. It is bad manners to talk though the hon. Lady's contribution to the debate.
Ms Winterton:
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |