| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington): I thank the Home Secretary for his statement and join him in
thanking the emergency services for forgoing time with their family and friends during this important celebration. I also thank him for being on call himself during that period.The Home Secretary's statement prompts various questions. First, has he had any discussions with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions about Southern Aviation of Zambia and Gulf Air which, last Thursday, were the two airlines that had failed to provide any information about their millennium compliance?
Secondly, will the Home Secretary confirm whether the £50 million cost of the policing arrangements that were listed in The Times on Saturday is correct? If so, where will that £50 million, which is significantly more than the £35 million that has so far been set aside for the 5,000 new officers, come from?
Thirdly, what discussions has the Home Secretary had with the train operating companies in the last couple of days? He will have seen the Evening Standard and know that Connex has said that it will not provide the millennium service. What is he going to do to make sure that it does? What will he do about contingency arrangements if party-poopers decide to pull the plug on that service at the last moment?
Finally, will the Home Secretary be giving anyone a mobile phone at Christmas? If so, what advice will he give about using that phone on new year's eve or new year's day?
Mr. Straw: I understand that Gulf Air has been accepted as safe, and the Zambian airline to which the hon. Gentleman referred is not flying in or out of the United Kingdom.
It is difficult to make a precise assessment of the policing costs of the millennium. We have made a special allocation to the Metropolitan police for this year, but it is in the nature of things that we will not know the full costs until after the event.
I have had no personal conversations with the train operating companies--in particular, Connex--although I did see the Evening Standard yesterday. I have read and digested an excellent publication from London Transport and the train operating companies called "Seeing in the New Millennium" which gives details of every train service in and out of London before new year's eve and on new year's day. I am sure that any changes to that will be announced.
Earlier, the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) said that only 60 access and egress points would be available for the zone and that gridlock could occur. Of course there may be traffic jams around the zone. However, if the hon. Gentleman looks at the zone, he will see that there are not more than 60 access and egress points in any event--only about 60 streets usually give access to the whole of the zone.
The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) asked me to disclose the nature of my Christmas presents. These are a secret between myself and Father Christmas.
Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Inverclyde): I take it that the safety needs of those employed in the
maritime industry have not been overlooked, as seafarers will be going about their work during the millennium period.My right hon. Friend sensibly encourages people to use public transport to attend the huge events in Glasgow, Edinburgh, London and, presumably, Blackburn and Greenock. Might not it make good sense to waive fares between 7 pm on new year's eve and 7 am on new year's day? The city of Sydney has followed such a policy for many years, and it works exceedingly well, especially by positively deterring car drivers from coming into the city.
Mr. Straw: Maritime safety is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and Regions. Clearly, arrangements have been put in place.
Given his anxieties about the matter, my hon. Friend may wish to know that special arrangements have been tested in respect of safety on the Thames. There will be 32 patrol boats from the police, the Port of London authority and others patrolling the river, instead of the usual handful. Other boat traffic will cease for the key period, and cruise operators and others have been informed of what is expected of them. There has been an independent risk audit and five exercises involving the police, fire and ambulance services, the PLA and the London boroughs in respect of safety on the Thames.
Free travel is a matter for the public transport operators in co-operation with those who fund them. In London, all tube, bus and docklands light railway services from 23.50 on Friday 31 December to 9 am on Saturday 1 January will be free. However, it is stressed that one must have a valid travel ticket at all other times.
Mr. David Tredinnick (Bosworth): My hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) referred to the difficult balancing act for the Home Secretary in relation to restrictions and security. Does the Home Secretary recall the problems in the autumn when all kinds of travel restrictions were talked about and a massive media campaign warned people about the difficulties in Cornwall--I speak as a Cornishman rather than a Leicestershire Member on this point--which resulted in a collapse in the number of people who went there? It was a fiasco for the county.
I am worried that some of my constituents in Hinckley may have second thoughts about coming to London because of concerns about whether they can get out of Euston or St. Pancras. They may wonder whether the traffic will simply be stopped at a certain point on the M1 or the M40. The Home Secretary owes those of us in the midlands a reassurance that every effort will be made to ensure that the traffic flows properly off the M1 and the M40, that there are overspill car parks and that those travelling by train will actually get there. If there is a tiny disturbance at Euston, will the whole east coast main line shut down for the millennium?
Will the Home Secretary advertise the special services that are to be offered on new year's eve?
Mr. Straw: The hon. Gentleman talked about the eclipse in the autumn; I think that it took place on
11 August. There was a lower attendance than anticipated, but that is in the nature of events. We cannot entirely predict human behaviour.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex): It was raining.
Mr. Straw: I recall that it rained in Cornwall under the previous Administration, too. These days, we live not in a command economy but in a world of private enterprise, albeit informed by policies of social justice. [Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] It is called the third way. People cannot be directed to enjoy themselves, even if that is antithetical to Conservative Members. Facilities are laid on and people are invited to take part, but they make their own choices.
I was asked earlier about the size of the crowds. There will be large crowds. It is only an estimate, but the Government office for London put the number at between 1.5 million and 2 million people. By definition, there will be very large crowds. Those who do not like crowds should not come into London.
The hon. Gentleman also asked whether we could abolish traffic jams just for new year's eve. Just as it rained under the previous Administration, there were traffic jams then, too. One absolute certainty--I promise it--is that, whoever wins the next general election, and the one after that and the one after that, there will occasionally be traffic jams and gridlock.
The purpose of the traffic limitation zone and all the arrangements in respect of public transport is to ensure that the maximum number of people can get into and out of central London in the greatest possible safety and that it is safe for people to walk about and enjoy themselves there. I understand Conservative Members' attachment to the motor car, but they need to bear in mind the fact that 90 per cent. of day-by-day journeys into central London are on public transport, so this is well within people's experience.
One final point for those who are concerned about accuracy: the hon. Gentleman asked whether, if there was trouble at Euston, the east coast main line would be affected. The answer is no, because that line runs into King's Cross.
Point of Order
1.19 pm
Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Following your ruling on 14 May 1997 about the oath of allegiance and access to the services of the House, I was surprised and alarmed to read in The Sunday Times this weekend that
- "Sinn Fein MPs Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness are to be given offices in Westminster without having to swear the oath of allegiance to the Queen . . . Betty Boothroyd, the Speaker, is finalising the details."
- "Boothroyd's concession is part of the delicate choreography of 'confidence building measures' designed by George Mitchell . . . Boothroyd will justify her change of heart on the basis of the new devolved administration at Stormont . . . The Commons authorities have been pressured into making the gesture by Downing Street. 'These are elected MPs voted in by their constituents,' one senior source said."
- "It is understood that Betty Boothroyd, the Speaker, has dug in her heels to prevent a breach of the general rule that MPs who do not swear allegiance to the Queen cannot have access to Westminster facilities. But Miss Boothroyd is reported to accept the Government's view that allowing the two MPs to have offices at Westminster could be seen as part of the 'confidence-building' measures."
What is going on? Have you, Madam Speaker, been put under any pressure by Downing street; and could you confirm that if you have been--or are in the future--put under any pressure by the Executive to change your ruling of 14 May 1997 unilaterally, the request would be met with the dusty response that Members of this House would expect from you?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |