You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Written Answers
Previous Section Index Home Page

Station Refurbishment

Mr. Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) what funding will be made available from the Government for the planned improvements to Bexhill and Cooden Beach stations; [9861]

Mr. Jamieson: The internal structural repairs at Bexhill station have been completed. South Central are negotiating with Railtrack start dates and costs for the next phase of the refurbishment work: replacement of windows and refurbishing the waiting room. It is hoped to complete this phase in late spring 2002. South Central is also in discussion with Railtrack about improvements to the platform ramps and reglazing work at Cooden Beach, as well as the funding arrangements for the work at both stations.

GoVia

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the impact of the recent Railtrack developments on the timetable and content of GoVia's existing franchise and the timetable and content of GoVia's proposed franchise. [9894]

Mr. Jamieson: The recent Railtrack developments will not impact on the existing or new franchise. The Strategic Rail Authority will negotiate a new franchise agreement with GoVia in line with the heads of terms that have already been signed.

Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry

Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will ask Lord Cullen to review his recommendations set out in "The Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry, Part 2" report to take account of Railtrack plc being replaced by a Government-owned non profit-making company. [9825]

29 Oct 2001 : Column: 479W

Mr. Spellar: No. The future ownership of Britain's railways was not part of Lord Cullen's remit.

Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he informed Lord Cullen of the possibility of Railtrack being placed in railway administration and being replaced by a non profit-making company prior to the publication of "The Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry, Part 2" report. [9826]

Mr. Spellar: No.

Transport Plan

Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how he intends to deliver the planned private investment in the railway set out in the 10-year transport plan. [9838]

Mr. Spellar: The Government intend to propose that a private sector company limited by guarantee should succeed Railtrack. This new company would be financially sound and structured so that it would achieve at least a BBB—and potentially higher investment grade credit rating. We are confident that this credit rating, combined with income from track access charges and network grants, would enable the new company to deliver the 'Railtrack elements' of private investment included within the 10-Year Plan.

We are confident that private sector investment will continue to be raised as planned for the completion of the channel tunnel rail link and for substantial new investment in rolling stock. We have envisaged for some time that major enhancement projects would be taken forward by standalone special purpose vehicles. The Government are continuing to develop their framework for establishing these vehicles.

Stingray Camera System

Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what has been the total cost of the Stingray camera system for combating vehicles excise duty evasion. [9884]

Mr. Jamieson: The cost of 11 Stingray camera systems, the vans in which the systems are housed, plus a fault monitoring and security system was £1.1 million. Use of the systems is expected to result in recovery of some £9 million per annum.

Housing

Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how much land owned by English Partnerships designated for affordable housing units has been sold without a requirement for the same number of affordable housing units to be built; how much of such land has been designated for affordable low cost housing in Chorley; and how much of such land has been sold for housing in Chorley in each of the last three years. [10095]

Ms Keeble: There is no difference between the number of affordable housing units earmarked for a particular English Partnerships (EP) site and those actually built. This is because the housing provider has a contractual

29 Oct 2001 : Column: 480W

obligation to provide the same number of affordable housing units as initially agreed between EP and the local authority.

No land has been designated for affordable housing in Chorley over the last three years. EP's main land ownership in Chorley is at Eaves Green. Chorley borough council considers the site unsuitable as a location for affordable housing as it is on the urban edge and remote from the town centre. EP's other land holdings in Chorley are currently "safeguarded" under the current local plan which means that development on them is precluded for the timeframe of the plan.

Pedestrian Protection

Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the organisations consulted by his Department in the recent consultation on pedestrian protection; and if he will place in the Library a summary of the responses received. [9975]

Mr. Jamieson: We consulted the following:



29 Oct 2001 : Column: 481W



We are finalising a summary of responses received and will place it in the Libraries of the House when available.

Vehicle Safety

Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what estimate he has made of the additional manufacturing costs for each vehicle if all new cars were to meet the four tests developed by the European Enhanced Safety of

29 Oct 2001 : Column: 482W

Vehicles Committee; and what scientific advice he has received on the proposal for a two-stage negotiated agreement on this subject. [9976]

Mr. Jamieson: Previous estimates have indicated a manufacturing cost increase of between £110 and £330 per vehicle to meet the full EEVC tests. However, we believe that this cost would reduce appreciably as manufacturers gain experience of pedestrian design, and as improved technological solutions become available.

Past research has indicated that the benefits obtained from the full EEVC proposals (as proposed for the second phase of a negotiated agreement) would be in the range of an 8 per cent. reduction in pedestrian fatalities and a 21 per cent. reduction in pedestrian serious injuries. Although the first phase of the negotiated agreement would lead to appreciable casualty reductions, the second phase offers greater protection against head injuries and reduced likelihood of leg injuries, a particular aspect being reduced knee injuries.

Next Section Index Home Page