| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Oil Pollution
Ms Atherton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will consider recommendations for oil pollution to be subject to MARPOL standards and legislation. [146158]
Mr. Hill: The relevant provisions of the MARPOL Convention and its Annexes, notably "Annex I: Prevention of pollution by oil", have been incorporated in UK law through regulations under Merchant Shipping legislation and are in force.
Ms Atherton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what provision his Department makes available to meet the costs of oil pollution in ports. [146159]
Mr. Hill: My Department does not make provision to meet the costs of oil pollution in ports. Compensation for oil pollution damage resulting from spills of persistent oil carried in bulk as cargo by tankers is available from the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, under the framework of the 1992 Protocols to the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 1969 and the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage 1971. UK legislation applies strict liability for all oil pollution from shipping, and this therefore obliges non-tanker owners to meet the costs up to the limits according to the ships' tonnage under the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976.
London Underground
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the dates on which parts of the (a) Bakerloo, (b) Central, (c) Circle, (d) District, (e) East London, (f) Hammersmith and City, (g) Jubilee, (h) Metropolitan, (i) Northern, (j) Piccadilly and (k) Victoria London Underground lines were closed to passengers during 2000; and if he will set out in relation to each closure the stretch of line closed and the purpose of the closure. [145703]
Mr. Hill [holding answer 18 January 2001]: This is an operational matter for London Underground (LUL) but they have provided the information in the table.
LUL keep a variety of records of incidents on the London Underground system. For the purpose of answering this question, LUL have taken
- line closure to passengers during 2000 to mean formal closures of lines or sections of lines for planned works.
23 Jan 2001 : Column: 525W
23 Jan 2001 : Column: 527W
23 Jan 2001 : Column: 527W
Mr. Hill: The accounts of London Underground Ltd. are prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 1985, which requires compliance with all accounting standards. Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 15, issued by the Accounting Standards Board, became mandatory for accounting periods ending on or after 23 March 2000 and has consequently been adopted by London Underground in its accounts for the year ended 31 March 2000.
FRS15 sets out the principles of accounting for tangible fixed assets. As well as imposing stricter rules on the allocation of overheads to capital projects, the standard requires that expenditure previously treated as renewals must now either be charged to cost of operations, or capitalised as an addition to fixed assets.
The revised accounting policies have reduced London Underground Ltd.'s gross operating margin for 1999-2000 to £153.6 million (from £293.6 million 1 ), and increased its operating loss before grants to £145.2 million (from £101.2 million 1 ). These are, however, purely accounting changes. Neither affects the amount of cash available, or Government grant paid, to London Underground Ltd.
In 2000-01, the changes in allocation of cost will reduce London Underground Ltd.'s gross operating margin and the value of its investment programme from the budgeted values published in the LT Annual Business Plan to £135.6 million (from £260 million) and £360.6 million (from £400 million) respectively. However, as these are again purely accounting changes, neither the External Finance Limit for the year, nor physical delivery of the investment programme, will be affected.
The actual figures for 2000-01 will be published in due course.
- 1 The amounts reported in the accounts of London Regional Transport, which are prepared in accordance with the London Regional Transport Act 1984, and were published as part of the LT Annual Report 1999-2000, "Improving London's transport", document on 28 June 2000.
Railway Lines
Mr. Key: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the location of gauge corner cracks of the railhead on the lines
23 Jan 2001 : Column: 528W
between London Waterloo and Exeter via Salisbury; what speed restrictions were imposed; and what the age of the track was. [146338]
Mr. Hill: This is an operational matter for Railtrack. I understand from Railtrack that, since Hatfield, 17 speed restrictions were imposed on the lines between London Waterloo and Exeter. Three of these restrictions remain in place but are expected to be withdrawn by 28 February. Of the 17 restrictions, six were on the slow lines over which trains from Waterloo to Exeter do not normally run. The remaining restrictions are north of Basingstoke. The age of the rail affected varied.
Mr. Key: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when the railway lines between London Waterloo and Exeter were last tested ultrasonically. [146337]
Mr. Hill: This is an operational matter for Railtrack. I understand from Railtrack that the rails along the route between London Waterloo and Exeter are tested at various frequencies depending on the speed and number of trains. Teams work continuously testing all routes, so the date that the rail was last tested could only be given for a specific location.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |