---

15 Oct 2002 : Column 717W—continued

Road Accidents

Mr. Rendel: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many road accidents have been attributed to the use by (a) car, (b) bus, (c) taxi, (d) coach drivers and (e) cyclists of a hand held mobile phone in each of the last three years, (i) in total and (ii) as a proportion of the total number of journeys by that group. [74244]

Mr. Jamieson: Information regarding the use of mobile phones is not recorded within national statistics on road accidents.

Mr. Rendel: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many road accidents have been attributed to the use by tourist coach drivers of a hand held microphone in each of the last three years (a) in total and (b) as a proportion of the total number of journeys by this group. [74245]

Mr. Jamieson: The information requested is not available.

A21

Mr. Norman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many accidents occurred on the A21 between (a) Lamberhurst and Flimwell and (b) Tonbridge and Pembury between January and June. [73338]

Mr. Jamieson: The figures requested are shown in the table:

Injury accidents on the A21: GB 2001

Location	2001*	2001 1
Lamberhurst—Flimwell 2	2	4
Tonbridge—Pembury 3	8	20

Notes:

* Data for January to June only

1. Complete year data.

2. Figures are taken between the junction with the B2169 near Scotney Castle and the north end of the dual carriageway at Flimwell.

3. Figures are taken between the junction with the A26 at Quarry Hill and the junction with A264.

Motorways

Mr. Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to plant foliage on the central reservations of UK motorways. [74611]

Mr. Jamieson: The Highways Agency, responsible for motorways in England, has no plans to plant the majority of central reservations. Since 1990 central reservations have been designed and constructed as hard surfaced areas often with integral drainage channels and cable ducts for lighting. These areas are in a hostile environment which is subject to the effects of de-icing salt, turbulence and dust and not suited for growing plants.

15 Oct 2002 : Column 718W

Planting is considered viable only in wide central reservations where the total width is 10 metres or more and a healthy plant environment can be maintained. Where central reserve planting does exist in narrow central reserves there are high maintenance costs involving traffic management, replacement planting and pruning. These activities also result in delays to road users and potentially put operatives at risk from working close to live traffic.

M25

Mr. Blunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the concrete surface of the M25 between junctions 8 and 9 is to be replaced with quieter materials. [74441]

Mr. Jamieson: I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Tim Matthews, to write to the hon. Member.

Letter to Mr. Crispin Blunt from David York, dated 15 October 2002:

I have been asked by David Jamieson to reply to your recent question asking when the concrete surface of the M25 between junctions 8 and 9 is to be replaced with quieter materials. I am replying since Tim Matthews is currently away on business.

The surface of the M25 between junctions 8 and 9 will be replaced as part of the Government's commitment in the 10 Year Transport Plan to replace all concrete roads with quieter surfaces by 31 March 2011. This section of the M25 is not included in the current 3 year national resurfacing programme for the period 2001/04. The resurfacing programme for the remaining years of the Plan will be formulated as part of future Spending Reviews.

A556M

Mr. George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if (1) he will make a statement on the proposed A556M; [74429]

(2) What consideration he has given to making Junction 20 of the M6 multi-directional. [74428]

Mr. Jamieson: I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Tim Matthews, to write to the hon. Member.

Letter to Mr. George Osborne from Hillary Chipping, dated 15 October 2002:

The Transport Minister, David Jamieson has asked me to reply to your recent questions about plans for the A556 (M) and Junction 20 of the M6. I am replying in the absence of Tim Matthews, the Chief Executive who is currently away on Highways Agency business.

As you may be aware, the White Paper ''A New Deal for Trunk Roads'' published in July 1998, identified a need for the West Midlands to North West Conurbations Multi Modal Study (MIDMAN). As part of a combined package of transport solutions, the study has identified a number of highway improvements including widening the M6 Motorway to 4 lanes up to Junction 20 and re-modelling Junction 20 to make it multi-directional. A steering group made up of regional stakeholders, including the Highways Agency and the North West Regional Assembly (NWRA), has considered these improvements.

The Agency voiced their concern that the proposed Junction 20 improvements had not been adequately assessed against an alternative proposal to upgrade the A556 to motorway standard, which was considered as part of the A556/MIDMAN Study. The steering group therefore asked the Agency to carry out further technical work and report back to the NWRA. Subsequently, the Agency commissioned consultants to produce the A556 Area

15 Oct 2002 : Column 719W

Study, which concluded that the A556 (M) scheme should be taken forward in place of widening the M6 from Junction 19 to 20 and the Junction 20 improvements.

The Agency has now informed the NWRA of their conclusions. I understand that the NWRA considered the MIDMAN recommendations on 4 October and is in the process of making their views known to the Secretary of State. These and other issues will be considered by the Secretary of State and a formal announcement on the whole package of transport measures will be made in due course.

If you would like any further information about these issues, please contact the Highways Agency's Regional Manager for Network Strategy in the North West, Malcolm Roberts, at Sunley Tower, Piccadilly Plaza, Manchester, M1 4BE—Tel: [phone]

Smoky Vehicle Hotline

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the cost to the Vehicles Inspectorate of operating the Smoky Vehicle Hotline was in each of the past four years; what the estimated cost is for the present year; and if he will make a statement. [74704]

Mr. Jamieson: The smoky vehicle hotline is one of several services provided by the Vehicle Inspectorate through its general enquiry unit. Hotline calls may also be made to the Inspectorate's area offices. For these reasons I cannot give an individual cost for the service. The costs are met within the total operational costs of the agency.

15 Oct 2002 : Column 720W

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how many complaints about smoky vehicles have been made to the Smoky Vehicle Hotline (a) in each of the past four years and (b) during 2002; [74706]

(2) how many vehicles were inspected by the Vehicles Inspectorate (a) in each of the last four years and (b) during the current year to date because of an unsatisfactory response by the licensed operator to a letter from the Inspectorate following a complaint to the Smoky Vehicle Hotline; [74705]

(3) how many licensed operators were written to by the Vehicles Inspectorate (a) in each of the last four years and (b) during 2002 following complaints reported to the Smoky Vehicle Hotline. [74707]

Mr. Jamieson: The table below shows the number of calls about smoky vehicles recorded by the Vehicle Inspectorate in each of the last four years and during the financial year to date. The number of calls actionable by the Inspectorate, that is those calls which relate to ''O'' licensed vehicles and which contain sufficient information for the vehicle and operator to be identified, are also shown. The Inspectorate does not record the number of vehicles inspected due to an unsatisfactory response to a letter from the Inspectorate following a complaint to the smoky vehicle hotline. However, this does not indicate that no action is taken. Follow-up action may take the form of a fleet check and this enforcement activity would be recorded separately.

Smoky vehicle hotline calls recorded by the Vehicle Inspectorate

Category	April 2002–August 2002	01/02	00/01	99/00	98/99
HGV	88	465	1,042	2,139	4,441
PSV	112	310	824	1,524	2,965
Other	74	304	656	743	1,693
Total	274	1,079	2,522	4,406	9,099
Of which calls actionable	151	469	1,405	2,611	—

---