| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
27 Mar 2003 : Column 559—continued
7.27 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) on securing the debate and on the way in which he made his points with his customary courtesy and quiet forcefulness. I noted that he began his speech with what I call tabloid headline speak, by saying that he would "quiz the Under-Secretary". However, I also noted that, throughout his speech, he heaped praise on the rest of the ministerial team and me. That never does his cause any harm. I commend that approach to others who seek to get into our good books on road and transport issues in their constituencies.
The M6 is a vital link between the midlands and the north-west, as you know, Madam Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend pointed out that the corridor has been part of the multi-modal study that examines ways in which to improve road, rail and other public transport links in the next 30 years.
I shall explain the purpose of the studies to put the matter in context. Previous problems with the strategic road network would have been addressed without reference to other modes of transport. However, the integrated transport White Paper, which was published in July 1998 and entitled "A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone" set out the Government's proposals for a better, more integrated transport system to tackle the growing problems of congestion and pollution.
The White Paper acknowledged that we could not simply go on as before, building more new roads to accommodate the growth in car traffic. The Government's 10-year plan for transport, which was published in July 2000, emphasised that tackling problems on the strategic road network requires an integrated set of solutions.
The plan recognised that there are physical, environmental and financial limits to the amount of extra road space that we can build. The Government therefore set up the multi-modal studies to develop sustainable long-term solutions to problems identified under key parts of the strategic road network. The studies were remitted to look at a wide range of measures that could contribute to a solution.
Those measures include opportunities for achieving mode shift by providing people with alternatives to car travel, and through the potential for reducing the need to travel afforded by schemes such as company car plans, the greater use of electronic communications, land use planning, and pricing measures.
Importantly, the studies were specifically asked to look at the case for increases in road capacity in the context of a wider transport strategy. It was never thought that road building could be avoided entirely. Indeed, the potential need for some increases in road capacity to address congestion problems on the strategic road network was clearly recognised in the 10-year plan. At the time, it was considered that we would need to widen some 5 per cent. of the strategic road network, and that about 150 other major schemes would be needed on the network.
The M6 corridor between Birmingham and Manchester was the subject of the west midlands to the north-west multi-modal study, which my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford rightly called the MidMan study. That was begun in December 1999, and reported to the west midlands local government association and the north-west regional assembly in May 2002.
The M6 was built in the 1960s. You, Madam Deputy Speaker, will not remember it, but I recall it from my youth. It was built to provide a high-speed and vital link running from the north and the north-west to the south-east and south-west. The stretch between junctions 13 and 14 was built in the early 1960s. It was the first section to open in the midlands and was commonly known at the time as the Stafford bypass. That relieved the severe traffic congestion occurring at the time in Stafford town centre. It was followed in 1962 by the section between junctions 14 and 15, and in 1963 by the section between junctions 15 and 16. The section between junctions 12 and 13 was opened in 1966, when the motorway was extended southwards.
The M6 plays a vital role in supporting the national economy, and the section between junctions 11 and 20 is severely congested, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford said. Car journeys account for about 88 per cent. of the trips in the M6 corridor, with this section carrying traffic volume in excess of 90,000 vehicles a day. In addition, 93 per cent. of the total tonnage of freight is carried on the road, with the remainder carried by rail.
The M6 has to bear that load, but the road does not meet current standards. Even a minor incident can lead to serious disruption and delay. In a growing economy, that is unacceptable. We needed to look at all the possible ways of delivering significant improvements to transport in the area.
The original scheme for widening the motorway was developed in the early 1990s, but it was put on hold by the previous Conservative Government in 1995. The scheme was to provide five lanes of motorway in each direction—one more than the eventual recommendation that we are considering.
Following careful consideration of the MidMan study recommendations and the views expressed on them by regional interests and others, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport outlined our response to the House in December 2002. In this response, it was made clear that we accepted the MidMan recommendations. At the same time, my right hon. Friend specified that the detailed design work must be carried out to high environmental standards in order to minimise any adverse environmental impacts.
I am happy to be able to reiterate this commitment today, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford raised the matter in his speech. Environmental protection measures will be an integral part of any final scheme. In addition, I can respond to my hon. Friend's specific question about the road surface by assuring him that it will be the new noise reduction surface.
I should add that, outside of the Forestry Commission, the Highways Agency is in fact the largest planter of deciduous trees in the country. It is rather late in the evening for me to release that little snippet of information to the House, but it is true nevertheless.
The study clearly demonstrated that some road widening is a necessary component of the strategy aimed at tackling congestion on the M6 motorway, and it looked at alternative options for solving problems on the M6. In particular, the study found that staying with three lanes and tackling congestion through a combination of demand management measures and public transport improvements would not in itself provide an acceptable long-term solution. My hon. Friend asked whether we have the appropriate solution. The answer is that we would not be going ahead with this unless we though that it was the appropriate solution. The study concluded that widening to five lanes would, as my hon. Friend pointed out, have adverse environmental impacts. That is why in our response we confirmed our support for the study recommendations for widening the M6 motorway from dual three to dual four lanes between junctions 11A and 19. We also support the short-term measures recommended by the study to improve conditions on the motorway, and we have asked the Highways Agency to
take them forward. Those improvements will relieve congestion and improve safety and accessibility. We have also asked the Highways Agency to carry out further detailed work so that widening can be taken forward quickly and largely delivered over the next 10 years.I understand my hon. Friend's concerns regarding impacts on the environment and on his constituents. That is why we asked the Highways Agency to ensure that detailed design work is carried out to high environmental standards in order to minimise any adverse environmental impacts. I can assure him that as part of its work the Highways Agency will consult local stakeholders on these issues, and it has been working since December 2002 on the best way in which to take forward the recommendations.
In the time that I have left, I shall address some of the other points that my hon. Friend raised. With regard to the traffic jams that he notes on the M6 between junctions 8 and 10, it is intended that that issue will be most sensibly resolved by the new M6 toll road. He also mentioned active traffic management. We expect a pilot scheme of ATM on a 17-km—or 10-mile—stretch of the M42 to start in summer 2004, and we will of course look closely at its implications for road safety and at its effectiveness in dealing with traffic congestion.
I assure my hon. Friend that on the M6 scheme, as on all schemes of this type, the Highways Agency works very closely with local stakeholders, and it will work closely with the relevant local authorities. I understand that the Highways Agency has already initiated that dialogue with the relevant local authorities. As part of its analysis, the Highways Agency will take account of the deliverability of any solution in terms of its costs and its impacts on the environment and on local communities.
Mr. Kidney: I am really grateful to my hon. Friend for the assurances he is giving me—they are all the right things that I want to hear. The one matter that I want to check with him is that there must be a finite pot of money for the MidMan recommendations, and the option that my hon. Friend is going with includes recommendations for rail and bus park and ride schemes. They take much less than 10 years to implement, so will they go ahead before the widening goes ahead?
Mr. Jamieson: As my hon. Friend knows, all multi-modal studies have huge cost implications. If I said today that all the aspirations in those studies were going to become reality, I might be called to account in two or three years' time. It is our ambition to carry forward a wide-ranging package of measures—not only road, but rail, measures. I have to say that many of my constituents look with envy at the amount of work that is taking place on the west coast main line, which serves part of my hon. Friend's constituency, and ask me why such sums are not being spent in other parts of the country. The single biggest investment in rail that there has ever been is passing near my hon. Friend's constituency.
My hon. Friend has mentioned on several occasions his support for investment in public transport. We agree with him. In our response in December 2000 we
explained that motorway widening would be complemented by the major investment that we are putting into the upgrade of the west coast main line. That will bring significant benefits to rail travellers and help to relieve some of the traffic on the M6. In addition, we have asked the Strategic Rail Authority to examine the scope for accommodating further local and regional rail service improvements, recommended by the MidMan study, as part of the west coast mainline modernisation programme, subject, of course, to the value-for-money criteria being met.We also strongly encourage the local authorities in the study corridor, particularly Staffordshire, Cheshire and Stoke-on-Trent, to take forward the recommended local transport measures. As part of the 2003–04 local transport capital settlement also announced in December 2002, we are pleased to provide funding of £475,000 for Staffordshire for better interchanges and car parks at stations, as a first step in implementing the study recommendations.
My hon. Friend will also know that the study takes a view that all realistic opportunities to optimise the volume of rail freight should be carried forward. The SRA's proposals for upgrading the west coast main line allow for a significant increase in capacity for freight traffic, which will help relieve the M6 and his constituents from some of the noise of lorries. I am aware that the study also made further recommendations for improvements in rail freight
capacity. However, it is essential that the rail industry should focus initially on our key priority of upgrading the west coast main line.In conclusion, these measures will bring real improvements to the M6 motorway over the next decade and reflect our great commitment to providing a safe and reliable transport system fit for the 21st century. If issues remain that I have not been able to cover in my comments tonight, I would be delighted, were my hon. Friend to indicate them, to correspond with him, adding to the copious correspondence that we have had already. I thank him for raising these issues tonight, as he always does, in a powerful and persuasive manner on behalf of his constituents.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |