| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Abandoned Vehicles
9. Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore): What proposals he has to increase powers of local authorities in relation to untaxed and abandoned vehicles. [132968]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty): Since April 2002, all local authorities can apply to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency for powers to wheel-clamp and remove untaxed vehicles. As a result, 13 local authorities have taken these powers, four are being trained and a further 20 are in discussion with the DVLA. Regulations aimed at speeding up the removal of vehicles abandoned on the highway by reducing the notice period also came into force in April 2002. In addition, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs issued a consultation paper in July 2003 proposing to reduce the notice period from 15 days to five working days for vehicles abandoned on private land.
Huw Irranca-Davies: I thank my hon. Friend for that full reply, and draw his attention to the blight caused to many communities in the south Wales valleys in terms of quality of life and tourism development. As one wanders across the top of the Bwlch mountain, one comes across abandoned vehicles in what seemed a remote area. I applaud the changes to vehicle licensing from 1 January 2004, which will aid the identification of owners who dump their vehicles illegally in that way, but will my hon. Friend ensure that there is a good information campaign so that owners are not caught out inadvertently by the new, much more stringent and welcome powers?
Mr. McNulty: My hon. Friend is right. More stringent powers must be accompanied by greater awareness and an education process to allow people to know what is going on. I am pleased that at least three Welsh authorities—Rhondda, Swansea and Pembroke—are discussing that with the DVLA, and I commend the new powers to the rest of the Welsh authorities.
Rail Franchises
10. Mrs. Ann Cryer (Keighley): What the criteria are for awarding railway franchises; and what plans he has to allow the Strategic Rail Authority to run franchises under section 212 (30) of the Transport Act 2000. [132969]
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): Our directions and guidance to the Strategic Rail Authority list the factors that it should take into account when assessing bids. A copy is available in the Library of the House of Commons. Ultimately, the authority is looking to secure the best value for money for passengers and taxpayers. Apart from the interim arrangements necessitated by the termination of the Connex South Eastern franchise, we do not currently anticipate any other circumstances in which section 30 will apply.
Mrs. Cryer: What future circumstances may prompt the Department to use section 212(30) to invite the Strategic Rail Authority to take over a franchise on a more permanent basis? After all, I understand that even Mr. Gladstone believed that the nation's railways were better run through public ownership. He must not have sat on the fence.
Dr. Howells: I am not sitting on the fence, either—I do not believe that we should nationalise the railways.
We cannot predict all future events and the use of section 30 will depend on the merits of specific circumstances. However, the SRA has made it clear that it intends to run the franchise that I have mentioned for as long as it takes to re-tender it to the private sector.
Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion): In welcoming the late arrival of the all-Wales and Borders franchise this week, I ask the Minister to confirm that the criteria for it include the long-awaited projects, which have been in the pipeline for more than two years, of the link to Cardiff Wales international airport, the hourly service on the Cambrian line and the new service to Ebbw Vale. Will he confirm that the new franchisees will work on those new services for Wales?
Dr. Howells: I expect that the new franchisees will consider a range of projects that various people throughout the Principality favour. I have such a project: part of the busiest railway line in Wales, from the central valleys to Cardiff, is in my constituency. I am glad that many improvements have been made to it. However, I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will draw improvements to the service on the important central Wales line to the attention of Arriva Trains when it takes over the franchise.
Ian Lucas (Wrexham): Does my hon. Friend agree that safety is one of the most important criteria for the railways? Safety in stations is an important issue in north Wales and Arriva should consider that seriously when determining its allocation of resources in the next few months.
Dr. Howells: Yes, safety in railway stations is extremely important. If we are to persuade more people
to use the railways—last year, they carried more passengers than in any year since 1947, and we want to improve on that again—and companies want to win new business, they must all take safety and security at railway stations seriously.
Alistair Burt (North-East Bedfordshire): When the Minister offers advice to the SRA about franchises, will he ask it to pay special attention to the way in which it intends to deal with increased pressure from commuters from the hundreds of thousands of new houses that are being forced on the south of England, thus putting more pressure on rail capacity that is already at its maximum? Evidence of delays on the sadly misnamed Thameslink 2000 project means that hard-pressed commuters on both sides of Bedfordshire are finding that they have only hope and expectation instead of genuine delivery of proper improvements to services. That can only get worse, with many new commuters adding to the pressures on the current inadequate infrastructure.
Dr. Howells: I know the hon. Gentleman well and I respect his views, but I am sure that he agrees that the new communities are not being forced on south-east England in a Stalinist way. Many people want to live there. He knows as well as me that London could do with an equivalent of Queens in New York where its teachers, public service workers and many others who run the capital can afford housing. Such people also want to know how they will get in and out of London, and we must try to ensure that they make those trips easily.
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman also agrees that the new communities should be sustainable. We must ensure that jobs exist there. We have a duty not only to haul tens of thousands of new householders back and forth to London but to ensure that there are jobs in the communities so that not everybody has to make those journeys. That partly answers the earlier question of how we define sustainable transport and communities.
Rail Network (Maintenance)
11. Kevin Brennan (Cardiff, West): If he will make a statement on future contracts for maintenance of the rail network. [132970]
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling): Network Rail has already announced plans to bring railway maintenance activities in the Reading, east midlands and Wessex contract areas in-house. Network Rail has also announced that it will take Jarvis's three contract areas back as well. The Government welcome these plans for better management because they will lead to tighter control over the quality, cost and effectiveness of the maintenance regime.
Kevin Brennan : I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Has not the fragmentation of maintenance following privatisation proved an unmitigated disaster? Is it not common sense that, where public safety is involved in relation to maintenance, the best thing to do is directly to employ the people responsible for the
maintenance, check that they do it and sack them if they do not? Is it not now time for Network Rail to take all maintenance in-house?
Mr. Darling: When Network Rail took back the contracts concerned, it found very substantial concerns about the costs, about the quality of work, and about whether the work had been done. All those matters reinforced the view that it was right to take those maintenance contracts back in-house. It is too soon to evaluate what it has found in relation to the Jarvis contracts, but I am in no doubt—I have made this clear on a number of occasions—that it is essential that maintenance should be done effectively and that costs should be driven down. Costs were far too high as a result of the privatisation that the last Conservative Government left. In relation to safety, it is essential that people know what work is required, make sure that it is done and then check that it is operating safely. All those things will be improved as a result of what Network Rail has already announced.
Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell): Does the Secretary of State expect that, before too long, all the rail network will be maintained by Network Rail, and that the other private sector operators will, step by step, hand their contracts back to Network Rail as well?
Mr. Darling: That is something that Network Rail will no doubt want to consider. One reason that the costs of maintaining the network had risen so dramatically was that there was no proper control over what the private contractors were doing. Network Rail has to consider what is best in terms of the running and operating of the network, but it will no doubt look at what it has found so far when considering what the next step ought to be.
Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd): When future maintenance contracts are considered, will specific mention be made of the north Wales railway stations, which have had massive under-investment in recent years? Will funding be put in place so that our stations no longer smell of urine, closed-circuit television can be installed and safe, secure car parks can be established?
Mr. Darling: Network Rail is looking at the entire network, both track and stations, to see what improvements can be made and when they ought to be made. As my hon. Friend will know, and as I pointed out earlier, we are already spending very substantial sums on the railway. Before anyone can consider asking people to put their hands into their pockets for more money, we must ensure that the money is being properly spent in the first place. As I said a few moments ago, the evidence in relation to the contracts that have been taken back in-house is that those contracts at least will be more effectively run by Network Rail. What it decides to do in relation to the others is, of course, entirely a matter for Network Rail.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |