---

12 May 2003 : Column 124W—continued

London Underground

Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent discussions he has had with (a) the Home Office, (b) the British Transport Police and (c) Transport for London regarding crime on the District line in the London Borough of Havering; and if he will make a statement. [110550]

Mr. Jamieson: My right hon. Friend and ministerial colleagues meet representatives of these bodies periodically to discuss a variety of relevant matters.

Mrs. Dunwoody: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport on what basis the selection of the preferred bidders was made in respect of London Underground's public private partnership. [110811]

Mr. Jamieson: Negotiation of the PPP was the responsibility of London Underground and its parent body, London Regional Transport. The London Transport Board selected preferred bidders in 2001 for all three PPPs following a rigorous assessment process. London Transport published "London Underground Limited Public Private Partnership: Final Assessment Report" in February 2002, which describes bid evaluation for the PPP.

Linda Perham: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to prevent a recurrence of the recent disruption to services on the Central Line of the London Underground. [111739]

Mr. Jamieson: Both the Health and Safety Executive and London Underground are conducting detailed investigations into the causes of the derailment at Chancery Lane on 25 January. The London Transport Users Committee is holding an inquiry to consider whether total closure of the line was the only reasonable option following the incident and whether services could have been restored more quickly. Once these have concluded, we shall be looking, with LU, at what lessons can be learned to further improve both safety and service resilience in the future and ensuring that a programme is put in place to implement them.

12 May 2003 : Column 125W

Mrs. Dunwoody: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many units of new rolling stock Metronet are to receive; and when they are due to be delivered. [110809]

Mr. Jamieson: I understand that Metronet have announced that they will be providing a fleet of 47 new eight car trains for the Victoria Line. The first of these will enter service in 2009 (with prototypes running from 2006) and the entire upgrade will be completed by August 2012. The Sub Surface Lines will receive 190 new trains, the first on the Metropolitan Line in 2009, with new trains coming off the production line at the rate of one every 10 days. A new fleet of trains will also be built for the Bakerloo Line by 2019.

M2

Jonathan Shaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much compensation has been given, and on what dates, by the Highways Agency to Buckmore Park Scout Centre as a consequence of the M2 widening; and if he will make a statement about outstanding claims. [111087]

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

Letter from Tim Matthews to Mr. Jonathan Shaw, dated 7 May 2003:

The Transport Minister, David Jamieson, has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question regarding the amount of compensation that has been given, and on what dates, by the Highways Agency to Buckmore Park Scout Centre as a consequence of the M2 widening.

You will know from your previous involvement with the M2 Widening scheme that the Buckmore Park Scout Centre was accepted as a Rule 5 Case under the Land Compensation Act. This provides for compensation to meet the costs of reasonable equivalent reinstatement. Exceptionally, to enable work to be undertaken to organise the replacement facilities and get them built ahead of the M2 widening construction, it was agreed that compensation would be released in stages ahead of the normal "land entry" requirement. The payment of compensation was therefore spread over a period of time commencing in October 1995.

I set out in the attached annex the full schedule of payments made and dates of release. All these payments included the payment of VAT. You will note that the last entry is for statutory interest, providing for the interest on the difference between the sum released at the time of entry and the latest estimate of compensation.

You raise the issue of outstanding claims. At the end of 2001, the Valuation Office Agency (VOA), the independent valuer acting for the Highways Agency, had discussed with the scouts' valuer, all the heads of claim and had reached a point where a full and final offer could be made. However, because there was some question as to whether the VAT element could be recovered by the scouts, and therefore not form part of the "cost" of reinstatement, the full and final offer made was presented "without prejudice" to the outcome of the VAT enquiry.

The full and final offer, in the sum of £10,100,000 (including VAT) was made on 4 December 2001 and apparently accepted by the valuer for the scouts but his recommendation to accept was rejected by his client.

The dispute over the VAT element eventually led to the scouts making a reference to the Lands Tribunal on 15 April 2002. At that time the solicitor for the scouts raised a claim for compensation on a number of additional items. These were not specified in any way and to date the scouts have not responded to our request for this to be done.

12 May 2003 : Column 126W

The Highways Agency has therefore paid in full all the compensation recommended by the VOA up to the full and final offer that was rejected. Subject to the scouts justifying their claim for additional items there are no outstanding sums.

I hope that this answers your queries. The Project Sponsor for the M2 scheme is Colin Chadwick. He would be happy to discuss this issue in greater detail if you wish. He can be contacted at Room C8, 5 Broadway, Broad Street, Birmingham, B15 1BL—telephone [phone].

Annex

Date paid	Amount (£)	Works/fees	Cumulative (£)
30–10–1995	49,256.06	Fees	49,256.06
15–01–1996	21,525.00	Survey/design	70,781.06
16–04–1996	15,143.11	Design fees	85,924.17
15–05–1996	8,750.00	Design fees	94,674.17
28–01–1997	59,511.50	Design fees	154,185.67
05–03–1997	29,819.00	Design fees	184,004.67
11–03–1997	26,590.25	Fees & preparation	210,594.92
09–05–1997	20,715.25	Design fees	231,310.17
27–10–1997	7,470.26	Design fees	238,780.43
21–01–1998	104,271.41	Fees	343,051.84
16–02–1998	101,590.25	Design fees & bank charges	444,642.09
12–03–1998	17,625.01	Fees	462,267.10
19–03–1998	19,413.94	Fees	481,681.04
17–04–1998	43,850.76	Design fees	525,531.80
23–06–1998	2,432.25	Fees	527.964.05
22–09–1998	50,525.01	Design fees	578,489.06
14–10–1998	227,125.15	Works	805,614.21
22–10–1998	468,733.35	Works	1,274,347.56
23–11–1998	523,427.00	Works	1,797,774.56
21–12–1998	449,153.00	Works	2,246,927.56
29–01–1999	204,034.00	Works	2,450,961.56
18–02–1999	303,761.00	Works	2,754,722.56
18–03–1999	333,020.00	Works	3,087,742.56
16–04–1999	104,455.31	Fees	3,192,197.87
19–05–1999	308,414.00	Works	3,500,611.87
18–06–1999	7,843.13	Design Fee	3,508,455.00
23–06–1999	103,987.50	Works	3,612,442.50
23–07–1999	677,768.94	Works &. Buffer	4,290,211.44
26–08–1999	293,750.00	Works	4,583,961.44
30–09–1999	762,401.47	Works	5,346,362.91
28–10–1999	765,129.80	Works	6,111,492.71
11–01–2000	422,507.39	Works	6,534,000.10
10–02–2000	726,000.00	Works	7,260,000.10
25–02–2000	2,018,000.00	Works	9,278,000.10
25–02–2000	22,000.00	Fees	9,300,000.10
18–05–2000	50,000.00	Disturbance	9,350,000.10
12–09–2000	175,000.00	Works	9.525,000.10
04–01–2001	225,000.00	Works	9,750,000.10
15–03–2001	100,000.00	Works	9,850,000.10
28–08–2001	16,634.02	Seeboard invoice	9,866,634.12
14–02–2002	252,327.58	Interest	10,118,961.70

Marine Environment

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent discussions he has had with (a) his counterparts in Europe, (b) his counterparts in other maritime nations and (c) the International Maritime Organisation regarding the creation of internationally recognised marine environment high risk areas. [111426]

Mr. Jamieson: I have had no discussions of the sort described concerning marine environmental high risk areas (MEHRAs). MEHRAs are a domestic UK initiative. However, there is an international designation entitled 'Particularly Sensitive Sea Area' (PSSA), which represents the very highest level of environmental protection available through the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). A proposal for a PSSA in western European waters was discussed at the Transport Council in March, and my Department has played an active role in developing that proposal in co-operation with French,

12 May 2003 : Column 127W

Spanish, Irish, Portuguese and Belgian colleagues. The six countries' joint proposal for a PSSA stretching from the Shetland Islands in the north to the coast of Portugal in the south, and including the English Channel, was submitted to the IMO last month and will be considered by the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee in July.

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what targets he has set for the creation of marine environment high risk areas in waters within UK jurisdiction. [111427]

Mr. Jamieson: In his report "Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas", which first recommended the identification of marine environmental high risk areas (MEHRAs), Lord Donaldson proposed that not more than about a tenth of the UK coastline should qualify. That is the target I have set.

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to his answer of 16 December 2002, Official Report, column 580W, to the hon. Member for Reading, East (Jane Griffiths), what progress his Department is making towards the publishing of the consultation document on marine environment high risk areas. [111560]

Mr. Jamieson: The Government remain strongly committed to marine environmental high risk areas (MEHRAs). An interdepartmental group, including representatives of Defra, DTI and my own Department (including its Maritime and Coastguard Agency), together with the devolved Administrations, the country agencies for nature conservation and the UK Hydrographic Office, has been working to produce a report, which will announce the areas which have been identified as MEHRAs and which will consult on the protective measures proposed to protect these locations.

We have completed traffic surveys of a number of the identified locations on the east and west coasts of the UK, and we are developing proposals on ship routeing measures to take to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). An outline of the results of the traffic surveys and the proposed routeing measures will be included in the report.

However, this is a substantial task and an appreciable amount of work has still to be done in developing the proposed protective measures. In the circumstances, I now expect the report to be issued this autumn.

---