---

Right to Buy

Mr. Love: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions how many tenants exercised the right-to-buy their property in (a) Enfield, (b) Greater London and (c) Great Britain in each of the last five years; and in each case what was the cost to public funds of the discounts. [92018]

Mr. Raynsford: The table presents the latest information on the number of sales of council dwellings reported by local authorities in England. Not all authorities have provided full returns so the figures for Greater London and England are estimates to take account of missing returns.

23 Jul 1999 : Column: 712

Sales of council dwellings

	Enfield	Greater London	England
1994-95	176	6,363	43,336
1995-96	110	4,641	31,512
1996-97	118	5,220	33,206
1997-98	172	7,123	41,329
1998-99	163	n/a	n/a

A typical right-to-buy sale results in a net loss of around £10,000 in "net present value" terms. This includes the loss of rent and the need to eventually replace rented housing sold under the scheme. The net loss is largely due to the discount to which a tenant is entitled. Our consultation paper "Secure tenants' right to buy" published on 28 July 1998 (in particular paragraphs 8-10) set this out in detail, together with our proposals to reduce the cost by changing the discount rules. These proposals were implemented on 11 February. A copy of the paper is in the Library of the House.

Public Transport

Mr. Pearson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the amount of Government capital investment in public transport in (a) the West Midlands and (b) London in each year since 1992; and what forecast he has made of investment levels for each year of the planning period. [92133]

Ms Glenda Jackson: The information is not available in the form requested.

The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions' Departmental Investment Strategy, published in April 1999, set out the major elements of public sector investment anticipated as a result of the resources allocated to the Department following the comprehensive spending review. The following table illustrates expected capital investment generated through and related to DETR programmes and policies for railways and local transport in all areas, and London Transport. Investment prior to 1998-99 is given as an average figure.

£ million cash

	Railways(13)	Local transport (14)	Local transport (15)
Average 1993-94 to 1997-98	n/a	894	1,041
1998-99	1,900	623	794
1999-2000	2,894	641	844
2000-01	2,612	724	775
2001-02	2,555	1,016	243

(13) Includes PPP/PFI generated investment.

(14) Total figures for England: not allocated to particular regions.

(15) Includes PFI investment. Does not include investment by the private sector in London Underground as part of the PPP.

Transport Plan Appraisals

Mr. Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if major schemes in local transport plans will require appraisal of alternatives using the New Approach to Appraisal. [92213]

Ms Glenda Jackson: Our guidance on provisional local transport plans requires the appraisal of the whole provisional plan using a simplified Appraisal Summary Table (AST). The simplified AST is derived from the

23 Jul 1999 : Column: 713

New Approach to Appraisal. Where the provisional local transport plan includes a major road or public transport scheme simplified ASTs are also required for an alternative strategy without the major scheme. This process identifies the contribution of the major scheme to the overall plan.

Simplified ASTs will also be required to show the impact on the plan of any additional alternative strategies that are tested.

In addition to the appraisal of the impact on the provisional plan, the major transport scheme itself will also be subject to scrutiny. For provisional plans, major road schemes will be assessed using the existing New Approach to Appraisal. Major public transport schemes will be appraised using current Section 56 requirements. We intend to have a multi-modal version of the New Approach to Appraisal in place in time for the assessment of full local transport plans next year.

A1

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans he has to increase the capacity of the A1 Newcastle Western bypass from the Gateshead Metrocentre Interchange to the Ponteland Road Interchange. [92226]

Ms Glenda Jackson: I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Mr. Lawrie Haynes, to write to my hon. Friend.

Letter from Peter Nutt to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 23 July 1999:

The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Lawrie Haynes, to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question. You asked "What plans he has to increase the capacity of the A1 Newcastle Western Bypass from the Gateshead Metrocentre Interchange to the Ponteland Road Interchange." I am replying in Lawrie's absence from the office.

In advance of any recommendations from the Tyneside Area Study announced in 'A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England', the Highways Agency is looking at a variety of measures aimed at improving safety and reducing congestion on Gateshead and Newcastle Western Bypasses. These could include, variable message signs to warn drivers of problems ahead, closed circuit television cameras to monitor conditions, variable speed limits to improve the flow of traffic at busy times and rapid response breakdown vehicles to prevent, as far as possible, congestion from building up following an incident. We are pursuing the banning of certain slow moving vehicles at peak times.

We will be developing a rolling programme of worthwhile measures to be carried out in the next few years.

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he plans to dispose of land held for the widening of the A1 between Scotch Corner and the junction with the A1/M1 Link; when such land disposal was approved; and if he will state the total area of land involved. [92227]

Ms Glenda Jackson: The Highways Agency currently owns 10 pieces of land or property bought in connection with the proposed widening of the A1 between Scotch Corner and the junction with the A1/M1 Link.

It is currently seeking to sell five of these plots, bought for the A1(M) Dishforth to Leeming and the A1(M) Bramham to Wetherby schemes. These schemes were

23 Jul 1999 : Column: 714

withdrawn from the trunk road programme in 1996; and the decision to sell was taken shortly after that, when route protection was withdrawn.

The Highways Agency is also selling one plot that was bought in connection with the A1(M) Walshford to Dishforth improvement but was not required for the scheme. The decision to sell was taken in 1997 following completion of the road works in that area.

The other four plots, bought in connection with the A1(M) Leeming to Scotch Corner scheme, are being retained because they are directly affected by the extant Orders for that scheme.

The total area of land involved is about 52 acres, of which around 49 acres are being sold.

Northern Development Area

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions for what reasons the Highways Agency has agreed to support the plans for the Northern Development Area at the Inquiry called by the Secretary of State; and if he will estimate the Agency's costs of taking part in the Inquiry. [92229]

Ms Glenda Jackson: I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Mr. Lawrie Haynes to write to my hon. Friend.

Letter from Peter Nutt to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 23 July 1999:

The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Lawrie Haynes, to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question. You asked "For what reasons the Highway Agency has agreed to support the plans for the Northern Development Area at the Inquiry called by the Secretary of State; and if he will estimate the Agency's costs of taking part in the Inquiry." I am replying in Lawrie's absence from the office.

I must make it clear that the Highways Agency will not be appearing at the Public Inquiry in order to advance a case in support of the grant of permission for the Northern Development Area. We have been called to appear before the Public Inquiry to address just one issue--the implications of the traffic generation from the proposed development, with particular reference to the effects of the A1 trunk road and the local highway network.

The Highways Agency's position is that the Northern Development Area will have a significant impact on the operation of the trunk road. However, prior to the Public Inquiry being arranged, the Highways Agency discussed with the developer what improvements to the trunk road would be needed to mitigate the effects of the development. Provided those agreed works are carried out, the Highways Agency has no reason to argue for the withholding of planning permission for the development.

On the subject of costs, the Agency has so far spent £26,750 on legal and consultants' fees. We anticipate spending a further £25,000 on such fees by the time the Inquiry is complete.

I hope this information is sufficient for your purposes.

---