---

Affordable Housing (South-West)

Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many affordable housing units in (a) south Somerset, (b) Somerset and (c) the south-west region have (i) been sold under right to buy and (ii) been newly built, showing for each category the net change, in each year from 1991 to 2002. [52612]

Ms Keeble: The available information is presented in the table.

Local authority and registered social landlord affordable housing stock, RTB sales and new build

	Dwelling stock at start of year owned by:			Activity during year— sales under right to buy		Activity during year—new dwellings completed			Net stock change during year
	Local authority	Registered social landlord	Total social landlords	Local authority	Registered social landlord	Local authority	Registered social landlord	Total social landlords	Local authority	Registered social landlord	Total social landlords
	South Somerset
1991–92	10,576	153	10,729	115	n/a	24	0	24	10	13	23
1992–93	10,586	166	10,752	163	n/a	0	46	46	-204	226	22
1993–94	10,382	392	10,774	372	n/a	0	127	127	-266	125	-141
1994–95	10,116	517	10,633	365	n/a	0	56	56	-391	83	-308
1995–96	9,725	600	10,325	183	0	0	71	71	-198	275	77
1996–97	9,527	875	10,402	170	0	0	20	20	-283	152	-131
1997–98	9,244	1,027	10,271	208	0	0	26	26	-221	84	-137
1998–99	9,023	1,111	10,134	195	1	0	90	90	-9,023	9,023	0
1999–2000	0	10,134	10,134	0	350	0	14	14	0	-175	-175
2000–01	0	9,959	9,959	0	157	0	13	13	0	211	211
	Somerset
1991–92	31,607	1,874	33,481	383	n/a	94	79	173	-161	74	-87
1992–93	31,446	1,948	33,394	426	n/a	57	227	284	-496	500	4
1993–94	30,950	2,448	33,398	798	n/a	12	314	326	-776	629	-147
1994–95	30,174	3,077	33,251	702	n/a	0	281	281	-706	534	-172
1995–96	29,468	3,611	33,079	498	0	0	288	288	-691	665	-26
1996–97	28,777	4,276	33,053	427	1	0	230	230	-789	453	-336
1997–98	27,988	4,729	32,717	604	1	0	105	105	-2,454	2,164	-290
1998–99	25,534	6,893	32,427	473	34	0	233	233	-9,376	9,282	-94
1999–2000	16,158	16,175	32,333	391	410	0	236	236	-399	-2	-401
2000–01	15,759	16,173	31,932	339	187	0	92	92	-4,529	4,694	165
South West
1991–92	273,597	35,369	308,966	3,120	n/a	1,096	1,104	2,200	-2,301	2,111	-190
1992–93	271,296	37,480	308,776	3,087	n/a	284	1,791	2,075	-3,785	5,401	1,616
1993–94	267,511	42,881	310,392	4,230	n/a	131	2,425	2,556	-9,960	11,012	1,052
1994–95	257,551	53,893	311,444	4,133	n/a	103	2,841	2,944	-11,033	8,413	-2,620
1995–96	246,518	62,306	308,824	2,769	159	182	2,889	3,071	-14,296	17,050	2,754
1996–97	232,222	79,356	311,578	2,824	288	98	2,477	2,575	-8,486	8,143	-343
1997–98	223,736	87,499	311,235	3,370	480	559	2,246	2,805	-9,604	8,830	-774
1998–99	214,132	96,329	310,461	3,276	454	37	1,615	1,652	-29,900	27,341	-2,559
1999–2000	184,232	123,670	307,902	3,708	1,322	26	1,589	1,615	-14,089	11,870	-2,219
2000–01	170,143	135,540	305,683	3,157	945	23	1,788	1,811	-14,269	12,308	-1,961

Notes:

1. Dwelling stock: Local authority owned dwellings include those outside the authority' geographical area.

2. RTB Sales: (Local Authority) Sales to sitting tenants under RTB legislation; other sales, transfers and disposals are reflected under "net stock change". (Registered Social Landlords) RTB data not collected prior to 1995–96.

3. New dwellings completed: New-build completions as reported by local authorities. Excludes acquisitions of existing stock and "off-the-shelf" purchases of private developments.

4. Net stock change: Calculated as the year-on-year change in reported dwelling stock each April. This reflects all gains and losses arising from sales, transfers and disposals (eg under LSVT arrangements), new construction, acquisitions, conversions and demolitions.

Source:

DTLR Housing Investment Programme returns (annual), P1B returns (quarterly), P2 returns (monthly), Housing Corporation CORE returns

8 May 2002 : Column 213W

Public Services

Virginia Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what steps he is taking to ensure that district authorities have the flexibility to fund and deliver high-quality public services to local people. [53636]

Mr. Raynsford: I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Alan Whitehead) to the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) on 7 May 2002, Official Report, column 26W.

London Underground

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (1) whether the Government will provide legally binding guarantees to support the finance raised by Metronet and Tube Lines; [54286]

(2) what the maximum amount of financial support for the PPP contractors is that is covered by letters of comfort from the Government. [54284]

Mr. Jamieson: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 18 March 2002, Official Report, column 18W and to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Transport to the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) on 18 April 2002, Official Report, column 1107W.

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many underground stations will be improved up to 2009; and how many were planned to be improved in the original PPP proposal. [54289]

Mr. Jamieson: The PPP is designed to improve the quality, reliability and capacity of every underground line in a coordinated programme to modernise the entire tube network. Details of the contractual requirements are a

8 May 2002 : Column 214W

matter for London Underground, but I understand that more than 200 stations will be improved by 2009. This is in line with the original objectives for the PPP.

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he expects the final safety case for the London Underground PPP to be completed. [54283]

Mr. Jamieson: No timetable or deadline has been set by the Government. The HSE will take the time it needs.

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what capacity increases the PPP scheme will lead to during the first seven and a half years of operation. [54288]

Mr. Jamieson: The PPP is designed to improve the quality, reliability and capacity of every underground line in a co-ordinated programme to modernise the entire tube network. Details of the contractual requirements are a matter for London Underground, but I understand that during the first seven and a half year contract period projects to increase the capacity of the Jubilee, Central and Waterloo and City lines will be completed.

In addition, work to increase the capacity of the Victoria, Northern, Hammersmith and City, Circle and Metropolitan lines will be well under way, including the introduction of new signalling and new trains on some lines. Further capacity increases will follow during the second seven and a half year contract period.

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what rights the PPP providers have to withdraw from the contracts at the end of the first seven and a half year period. [54290]

Mr. Jamieson: Details of the contracts are a matter for London Underground, but I understand they do not provide infrastructure companies with a unilateral right to withdraw from the contracts at the end of the first seven

8 May 2002 : Column 215W

and a half year period and that London Underground has a range of contractual rights to ensure the contract continues if it wishes.

Rosemary McKenna: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on progress with plans for modernisation of the London Underground. [55052]

Mr. Byers: I have been advised by the board of London Regional Transport that London Underground Ltd. has today signed public-private partnership contracts to modernise and maintain London Underground's infrastructure.

There are three contracts, which will each run for 30 years. Those for two of the infrastructure companies will go to Metronet, and the third to the Tube Lines Group.

In my statement to the House on 7 February I set out why the Government supported London Transport's decision that it was minded to proceed with the tube modernisation plans. The Government have consistently set out three key tests that the plans must pass if they are to proceed: that they are not a privatisation; that they should offer value for money; and that they should be safe for both passengers and staff.

I am satisfied that the modernisation plans are not a privatisation. The ownership of the assets, and the operation of the public service, stay in the public sector. It is also likely that the assets will continue to be scored on London Underground's balance sheet, in the public sector.

I am also satisfied that the arrangements offer value for money, when judged against alternative proposals. At my request, Ernst and Young reviewed London Underground's original value for money assessment and confirmed that, overall, London Underground's methodology for assessing value for money was robust, and that London Underground's recommendation that the PPP proposals deliver value for money, while subjective, was supported by its analysis. Since then, Ernst and Young has reviewed the work done by London Underground to update the value for money assessment in respect of material changes to the contracts. They confirmed that London Underground's approach was consistent with that used for the previous report. I have placed a copy of their update in the Library of the House.

The Health and Safety Executive has still to reach a final judgment on London Underground's revised Railway Safety Case. The position therefore remains that the tube modernisation plans will only proceed if the independent regulator accepts the safety arrangements for both passengers and staff.

Subject to approval of the safety case, I share London Regional Transport's belief that the modernisation plans are the right solution and offer significant benefits for Londoners.

Fares will continue to be set by the Mayor of London. The modernisation plans do not require fares to rise faster than inflation.

The three contracts are intended to take effect by the summer. I notified Parliament on 20 March that I was considering issuing a comfort letter in support of each of

8 May 2002 : Column 216W

the contracts. My intention is that such comfort letters should be issued shortly before the transactions are completed.

London Regional Transport's decision has been taken in the light of an extensive consultation with Transport for London. London Regional Transport has accepted some of the points Transport for London has made, and made changes to the contracts accordingly.

I fully support the decision taken today by the board of London Regional Transport and look forward to the modernisation plans coming into operation.

It remains my intention that the ownership of London Underground will be transferred to Transport for London as soon as possible.

---