---

A47 Corridor

Mr. Moss: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has for a multi-modal transport study of the A47(T) corridor in eastern England; who is undertaking the study; which length of the A47 corridor is to be included; when the study is to begin; when the report is expected to be published; and if he will publish submissions from interested parties which have already been made as part of the consultation process. [35059R]

Mr. Jamieson: The A47 between Norwich and Peterborough was included in the programme of Multi-Modal Studies announced on 23 March 1999 as a Tranche 3 Study. The study incorporates both the A47 between its junction with the A1, to the west of Peterborough, and the beginning of the Norwich Southern Bypass, just west of Norwich, and the Peterborough to Norwich railway via Ely.

On 28 January 2002, the Government Office for the East of England appointed WS Atkins Consultants Ltd. to undertake the study. Determining the precise work programme will be part of the first phase of the study, but it is expected to report to the Regional Planning Body in early 2003.

Consultation with key stakeholders, interested bodies and organisations, elected members and the public will be an essential part of the study. Results will be presented by the consultants in a "Consultation and Participation" report.

Representation of the People Act

Mr. Luke: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will introduce proposals to amend the Representation of the People Act 2000 to allow citizens of EU member states resident in the UK to vote in Westminster parliamentary elections. [34979]

Dr. Whitehead: The Government's view is that extending the franchise in this way would need to be by reciprocal agreement with all other EU member states. There are no current proposals by the European Commission for action in this area.

12 Feb 2002 : Column 235W

Fire Service (London)

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the integrated clothing project for the fire service in London. [35809]

Dr. Whitehead: I announced the results of the third round of the Private Finance Initiative for the fire service on 25 October 2001. The indicative bid which London submitted on behalf of a number of fire authorities for an integrated clothing project was not one of the bids selected for support. The unsuccessful bidders were offered feedback on their bids. A meeting has been arranged between officials and representatives of the fire service in London.

City of London (Ward Elections) Bill

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what communications have taken place between Ministers, officials and advisers with the City of London Corporation in relation to the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill since 1997. [35659]

Dr. Whitehead: As with many other Private Bills, we have had—and continue to have—discussions and correspondence with the promoters of the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill.

Ports

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what proposals he has for action on initiative 4.2.8 of Modern Ports: A UK Policy, that suggests a reserve of power to safeguard port marine safety. [35874]

Mr. Jamieson: We consulted in March 2000 on a proposed reserve power, which was recommended in our review of the Pilotage Act which was published in July 1998. We proposed that, if it appeared to the Secretary of State that a harbour authority had failed, or was failing, to discharge any of its statutory functions, and that a serious danger to navigation or serious threat of pollution was likely to result, he should have the power, after consulting the harbour authority and such other persons as he considered appropriate, to give the authority appropriate directions. There has been no opportunity so far to promote the necessary legislation.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will abolish the Statutory Harbour Undertakings (Pilotage Accounts) Regulations 1988. [35871]

Mr. Jamieson: These Regulations are made under Section 42 of the Harbours Act which relates to the accounts of statutory harbour authorities relating to the harbour activities and empowers the Secretary of State to prescribe their form and content. The Pilotage Act 1987, which transferred responsibility for providing pilotage services to competent harbour authorities and empowered them to levy pilotage charges, extended this provision to pilotage accounts.

The effect of the 1987 Act is to require pilotage accounts to be kept separately, although there is no similar requirement in relation to any other harbour authority activity. A review of the 1987 Act, published in 1998,

12 Feb 2002 : Column 236W

recommended that this separation was no longer needed, but there has been no opportunity to change that requirement.

Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will take steps to ensure that the role of competent harbour authorities is separate from the ownership of a port. [35873]

Mr. Jamieson: A comprehensive review of responsibility for pilotage was undertaken after the 'Sea Empress' grounding five years ago. It was published, with Ministers' conclusions, in July 1998. It was a principal conclusion of that review that pilotage ought to remain a harbour authority function, and become fully integrated with other port safety services under harbour authority control.

Planning

Mr. Burnett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what percentage of appeals against a refusal of planning permission were received by the Inspectorate during the final month of the six month time limit in the last three years. [35471R]

Ms Keeble: The provision of information on planning appeals is the responsibility of the Planning Inspectorate. I have asked the Inspectorate's Chief Executive, Mr. Chris Shepley, to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Chris Shepley to Mr. John Burnett, dated 12 February 2002:

Sally Keeble has asked me to reply to your Question about the percentage of planning appeals made against refusal of planning permission during the final month of the six-month time limit in the last 3 years.

The information requested is as follows:

Year	Number of appeals	Number submitted in the final month	Percentage submitted in the final month
1999–2000	13,408	4,360	33
2000–01	15,105	4,643	31
2001–02(28)	7,175	1,983	28
Total	35,688	10,986	31

⁽²⁸⁾ Up to the end of July 2001 LPA decision dates

Mr. Burnett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) what plans he has to introduce a statutory duty on local planning authorities to enforce planning controls; [35469R]

(2) what plans he has to provide additional powers to local planning authorities to encourage compliance with enforcement orders. [35475R]

Ms Keeble: As we indicated in our Planning Green Paper published on 12 December 2001, we intend to review the current arrangements for enforcement by local planning authorities.

Mr. Burnett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what plans he has to enable a member of the public to have locus standi to apply for a prerogative order of mandamus or equivalent in respect of a breach of planning controls. [35481R]

12 Feb 2002 : Column 237W

Ms Keeble: We have no current plans to do so.

Mr. Burnett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions whether he intends to amend section 87 of the Town and Country Act 1971 and section 171 B of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991 relating to the use of a building as a single dwelling house. [35470R]

Ms Keeble: Section 87 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971 was replaced by sections 171B, 172, 173 and 173A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. All these sections deal with aspects of local planning authorities' enforcement powers. As we indicated in our Planning Green Paper we intend to review the current enforcement arrangements.

Marine Accident Investigation Branch

Mr. Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many investigations have been concluded by the MAIB;

12 Feb 2002 : Column 238W

what the cost incurred was; and how many staff were employed in MAIB investigations in each of the last five years. [35736]

Mr. Jamieson: The MAIB receives, on average about 1,500 accident reports each year. Only a small number are subjected to a full investigation but many more are followed up in Administrative Inquiries where further information is sought. A number of these lead to the identification and promulgation of lessons to be learned. The sole aim of the MAIB is to prevent accidents at sea.

The figures are produced in tabular form.

Prior to 1999 only selected investigation reports were published. All investigations completed since have resulted in the production of a report that has been made publicly available. In very general terms the MAIB has tended to look at fewer accidents overall each year but more thoroughly.

The costs of all investigations are met from the running cost budget of the Branch. This has increased in each of the past five years. The greater expenditure incurred in 1998 was due to additional costs involved in conducting a higher than normal number of underwater surveys.

	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001(29)
Administrative inquiries completed	695	628	636	546	459
Full investigations completed	55	40	39	40	47
MAIB running costs in £000	1,106	1,579	1,205	1,450	1,372
Staff involved directly in investigations	11	11	12	14	15

⁽²⁹⁾ Provisional

---