House of Commons
Tuesday 1 April 2003
The House met at half-past Eleven o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
Mersey Tunnels Bill
To be considered on Tuesday 8 April.
Oral Answers to Questions
TRANSPORT
The Secretary of State was asked—
Roadworks
1. Keith Vaz (Leicester, East): If he will make a statement on procedures which are followed before roadworks on trunk roads are permitted. [105783]
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling): We intend to introduce legislation to control streetworks, and the Highways Agency is also introducing measures to manage trunk road maintenance better. The House will wish to know that, as part of the trunk road noise reduction programme, I have today set for the first time a timetable for the removal of all concrete surfaces on the motorway and trunk road network. I am also giving the go-ahead to three major road improvements: the A14 Ellington to Fen Ditton improvement; the A57/A628 Mottram, Hollingworth and Tintwistle bypass; and the A45/A46 Tollbar End improvement. I have also asked the Highways Agency to take forward work on three schemes with a view to entry into the targeted programme of improvements: the A38 Derby junctions improvement; the M40/A46 Longbridge roundabout improvement; and the A55/A483 junction improvement at Chester. There is a statement in the Library on this matter.
Keith Vaz : I welcome the statement made by the Secretary of State, but is he aware that a report by his own Department, published in the Leicester Mercury this week, shows that Leicester is the most congested city in England after London? People in Leicester are spending up to 26 per cent. of their journey times waiting in queues because of roadworks. Does my right hon. Friend share my concern about this shambolic state of affairs, and will he look carefully at the Bill that I am introducing this week concerning compensation for
those who are held up in such queues? Will he meet representatives of Leicester city council and other campaigners to try to resolve this appalling state of affairs?
Mr. Darling: My right hon. Friend the Minister of State is meeting representatives of the Local Government Association to discuss this issue, and I am sure that he would also be happy to talk to my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) about it. My hon. Friend is right to identify the fact that one of the main sources of congestion in towns and cities across the whole country is roadworks. The legislation that the Government are introducing will mean that traffic managers can be appointed who have a duty to issue permits to control what has been, up until now, fairly unrestricted access to digging up roads. The object will be to keep traffic moving.
The approach has been tried out in London over the last few weeks, and it is having some effect. There is no doubt that the endless digging up of roads, and roadworks that start and seem to go on and on, cause major disruption not only in Leicester but elsewhere, and the Government are determined to introduce legislation far better to regulate the access to roads and, above all, to enable us to achieve our No. 1 priority of keeping traffic moving as much as we possibly can.
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire): I very much welcome what the Secretary of State has just said about the replacement of concrete road surfaces. Can he give the House any more information on that announcement, such as when the A50 Derby to Stoke road will be resurfaced? I have mentioned that road to him on many occasions.
Mr. Darling: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that question. I am sure that all hon. Members who have experience of constituents being bothered by the noise that comes from concrete motorways will welcome this announcement. The work will, of course, take time. It will probably be helpful to the hon. Gentleman and the House if I do not read out the entire list of roads and the dates when they are going to get done. However, the press notice has a list attached to it of all the stretches of road involved, and an indication of when they are going to be done. Twenty-six will be done in the near future; the others will be done over the next few years. All the information is in the Library, but if the hon. Gentleman has any further questions, he will no doubt get in touch with us directly.
Mr. Tom Levitt (High Peak): The Secretary of State's announcement about the A57/A628 Tintwistle and Mottram bypass will be greeted with delight in Tintwistle and Glossop in the High Peak—and, indeed, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (James Purnell)—not least because this road was taken out of the Government programme by the Conservatives as long ago as 1994. Will the Secretary of State please give us an indication of the timetable that he is considering, so that we may know when this road will become a reality?
Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend is right; it is a great pity that this project was taken out of the planned road
improvements programme some years ago. It is likely that work will start in 2006. Planning work now has to start, and the necessary plans have to be drawn up with a view to entering into contracts. I visited the area last week, and it was perfectly obvious to me that the level of congestion in those small towns was completely unacceptable. I am very glad that many of the environmental agencies recognise that, notwithstanding the fact that this is an area of some sensitivity, a bypass round those three towns is absolutely essential. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his welcome.
Mr. Christopher Chope (Christchurch): As always, the Government's announcement is not as good as it is made out to be. Work on many of the roads with concrete surfaces will not be completed until 2011, and the money to be spent on the programme is almost identical to the sum that will be raised over the next 10 years through the new stealth tax on motorists using the M25. It is from this month that the Dartford crossing has been paid for, and it will be paid for again—
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should try to ask a question.
Mr. Chope: I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Secretary of State confirm that the money that will be raised from the stealth tax on the Dartford crossing is more or less all that will be spent on the new road improvements?
Mr. Darling: What I can say to the hon. Gentleman is that my announcement today is infinitely better than anything that he could ever have announced. As my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Mr. Levitt) pointed out, some of the proposals to which we are giving the go-ahead were stopped by the last Conservative Government. Resurfacing concrete roads will take time because it would be impossible, and highly undesirable, to shut entire lengths of the motorway network for resurfacing, so the work must be phased in and done in an orderly way.
The big difference between our parties is that this Government have the money and commitment to improve our road network while the Conservative party is committed to a 20 per cent. spending reduction. The transport budget would undoubtedly suffer greatly from those cuts—we have only to look at what the Conservatives did to the transport system when they were in office. We are now putting right some of their mistakes.
Mr. Bob Laxton (Derby, North): I thank my right hon. Friend for the announcement of the welcome changes to interchange junctions on the A38. Will he reassure me that land-take will be kept to an absolute minimum, especially around Markeaton junction and Markeaton park?
Mr. Darling: I hope that it will. We should aim to take as little land as possible during all road improvements. If my hon. Friend would like more details of the current proposals, I am sure that we could arrange for him to see them so that he could make representations directly to those responsible for the planning process.
Railways
2. Mr. Andrew Mackay (Bracknell): How many meetings he has had in the last six months with train operating companies about train performance. [105784]
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling): I meet train operating companies on a regular basis to discuss their work, including the need to improve reliability of train services.
Mr. Mackay : What comfort can the Secretary of State offer to my constituents who regularly travel from Bracknell to Waterloo but have found that South West Trains has cut the service by half? Its managing director, Andrew Haines, has just written to me saying:
- "the doubling of off-peak services to Reading from two to four per hour . . . was only credible if Network Rail/Railtrack continued to improve the performance of the network and its assets. In an environment where Network Rail-caused delays are twice the size that they were prior to Hatfield in October 2000, the 10 per cent. increase in train services operated since privatisation is unsustainable."
My third point relates to Network Rail. It is right that not only train operating companies must improve their performance—about 38 per cent. of delays are attributable to South West Trains—because Network Rail must also improve the quality of track. In the old days, British Rail reckoned that 500 miles of track needed to be replaced each year. In the six years before privatisation, under the last Conservative Government, that dropped to 300 miles. The figure dropped to 200 miles under Railtrack, and in one year it was just over 140. That illustrates the scale of the problems that Railtrack left us. Before the right hon. Gentleman gets too excited—I know that more friends of Railtrack are on the Conservative Benches than anywhere else—he should remember what happens when investment is cut and there is no year-on-year investment. The price for that is being paid by rail passengers, and we are determined to put that right.
Lawrie Quinn (Scarborough and Whitby): May I endorse my right hon. Friend's comments on the Railtrack legacy? As a former Railtrack employee, I saw only too clearly the failure to invest in renewal of our tracks. When he met train operating companies, did he explore the possibilities for a social railway on lines such as the Esk valley, which runs from Whitby in my constituency to Middlesbrough? Do we not need a new settlement for those lines and to ensure that we service the needs of such remote communities, which are often in the most inaccessible parts of the country?
Mr. Darling: I am well aware, as is the Strategic Rail Authority, of the value of rural lines serving remote
communities, but I say to my hon. Friend that the No. 1 priority for the rail industry has to be driving up reliability. Look at the figures overall: just under half the problems that are causing delays are the fault of the train operating companies, while the other half are Network Rail's. The train operating companies and Network Rail need to make a determined effort to get to the root of those problems, sort them out and drive up reliability. The latest figures show that there is a slow improvement, but frankly, the industry needs to do an awful lot better.
Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale): Given that train operating companies, like passengers, will have been alarmed by recent reports that there may be scaling back and closures of some branches and smaller stations, will the Secretary of State tell the train operating companies and the House whether he is committed to preserving the entire existing branch network?
Mr. Darling: I am committed to ensuring that we have a reliable railway service. Under any Government and under any organisation, the exact pattern of services will be subject to review from time to time. As the hon. Gentleman is committed to a 20 per cent. cut in the money spent on railways, he should not stand at the Dispatch Box and maintain that, somehow, he will get a better railway by spending a lot less on it.
3. Paddy Tipping (Sherwood): What steps he is taking to protect former mineral railway lines for future transport use. [105785]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): The Strategic Rail Authority's property advisory group investigates the transport potential of former railway land that the SRA inherited from British Rail. It has retained more than 300 sites with potential for transport use, of which at least 12 are former mineral lines or facilities.
Paddy Tipping : Does the Minister accept that former colliery railway lines in Nottinghamshire and across the country can provide park-and-ride facilities, light rail solutions and more sustainable transport corridors for cycling and walking? Given that fact, will he have discussions with, for example, Network Rail to ensure that it responds quickly and more positively to the many proposals being put to it?
Mr. Jamieson: I thank my hon. Friend for those questions. He has campaigned hard on the issue over a number of years, and I can assure him that the Government share his concern that disused railway lines, whether they be former mineral lines or not, should be used, where possible, for transport. That is why we have released nearly 200 such sites for transport use and, as I said, 300 have been identified for possible future use. I note that, owing largely to my hon. Friend's actions, the Silverhill colliery scheme is likely to be settled and the contracts signed by the end of the year so as to make use of it as a country park cycleway. His points are well made and very much in line with our policy.
Mr. Don Foster (Bath): Is the Minister aware that, a year ago, the Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs launched the aggregates levy sustainability fund, which promised £12 million towards ensuring environmentally-friendly transport of minerals and aggregates? Can he therefore explain to the House why his Department has announced that it is not prepared to allocate that money for that purpose? Does that not show a lack of joined-up thinking, just like the cut that it has made in the freight facilities grant?
Mr. Jamieson: The hon. Gentleman mentions the freight facilities grant, which has poured a great deal of money into getting traffic and aggregates off the road and on to rail. We still have £40 million in the scheme, which is doing some of the things that he says he has the ambition to do.
Mr. Mark Todd (South Derbyshire): I have raised previously the future of the national forest line, which serves mineral extraction operations in south Derbyshire and north-west Leicestershire. The closure of the Drakelow power station in my constituency presents substantial opportunities for review of the line's future. Will the Department take those opportunities?
Mr. Jamieson: Yes, indeed. Sometimes when a closure is intended it is possible for the line to be used for other purposes, and this is a good example. My hon. Friend may wish to write to me, and to the Strategic Rail Authority. The line is certainly one of those that we could consider for future transport use.
4. Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion): If he will make a statement on the rail franchise process for Wales and the Borders. [105786]
13. Ian Lucas (Wrexham): When the announcement of the rail franchise for Wales will be made. [105799]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): The Strategic Rail Authority expects to announce the preferred bidder in June. The new franchise is expected to commence in the autumn.
Mr. Thomas : I very much hope, as does most of Wales, that the June date is a firm one.
Can the Minister give an undertaking that any cost savings identified during the franchise process involving the train operating companies that are bidding and the SRA will be dedicated to new services, and that there will be no overall diminution of the amounts available for the franchise in Wales? Will he ensure that in future there is better co-ordination between the SRA and the Welsh Assembly, and that the Assembly's rail priorities are those espoused in Wales by the SRA?
Mr. Jamieson: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman welcomes the new franchise as an all-Wales franchise. I think that it fulfils the Welsh Assembly's ambition, providing for better dialogue between the operator and the Assembly, and will allow a new focus on services in Wales.
The SRA has told bidders to consider what services they could provide, with varying levels of subsidy. The aim is to ensure that we obtain the maximum value from the subsidiary. Any reduced subsidiary options would certainly not include route closures.
Ian Lucas: When the SRA considers additional services, will it look closely at the integration of services from my constituency to England, including those running down to London? Although Wrexham is the major town in north Wales, it does not yet have an hourly service linked with the service to London from Chester. Will the Minister take that up with the SRA, and give Wrexham the service that it deserves?
Mr. Jamieson: I recognise that service integration needs improvement. One of the advantages of an all-Wales and the borders franchise is that, rather than a number of operators discussing the integration of services to and from Wales, there will be only one such operator.
The operator of the new franchise will need to work with the SRA and the operator of the London services to maximise integration, and to benefit my hon. Friend's constituents as well as others travelling to and from Wales.
Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury): Wales and the Borders offers a valued service to the small towns in my constituency, which is currently under threat. Does the Minister agree that the SRA is not helping the Government's 10-year transport plan by applying pressure to TOCs to reduce services to London termini?
Mr. Jamieson: No, I do not. I think that the new proposal from Wales and the borders will benefit not just those in Wales but those on the periphery. As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Ian Lucas), the franchise operator will need to work closely with the other operators to make the best use of the lines. The utilisation capacity study that is currently under way will ensure that all users gain the greatest possible benefit.
Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston): May I reinforce what was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Ian Lucas), and ask the Minister to consider not just the inter-city connections mentioned by my hon. Friend but local connections such as Wrexham to Bidston, which runs an important service across a popular travel-to-work area?
Mr. Jamieson: It is not just a matter of looking at the services within Wales and to the borders; we must also look at the inter-city routes and how they integrate. As my hon. Friend suggests, the benefit of the new franchise is that that sort of integration and cross-working between operators can take place for the benefit of his constituents and many others in Wales and surrounding areas.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |