|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
5 Jan 2004 : Column 50Wcontinued
For the latest year, 200203, approximately ¾ of the expenditure relates to Think! which promotes road safety messages to adults and children and is a vital part of the Government's strategy to reduce deaths and injuries.
Until 2001 figures for expenditure cover the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, (DTLR) and the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Breaking out the transport element for the years 199798 to 200001 could be done only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Jamieson: The prime responsibility for the safe use of traffic cones on motorways lies with the highway authority and its consultants and contractors. In general, the Highways Agency, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport, is the highway authority for motorways in England.
5 Jan 2004 : Column 51W
Mr. McNulty: On 16 December 2003, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport published a White Paper, The Future of Air Transport, which sets out policies in airport development up to 2030.
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency has recently let a contract with a satellite company to provide analysed images from satellites linked specifically to the identification of oil spills. This will run for two months during January and February, and will cover the English Channel and South West approaches.
A further operational programme using satellites for oil detection is scheduled for March over a period of five months. This will be a transnational project involving Germany, the Netherlands and the UK.
Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the compatibility of public service obligations on regional air services with European Commission regulations. 
Mr. McNulty: The imposition of Public Service Obligations on regional air services is governed by EC Regulation 2408/92. All applications for the imposition of PSOs on regional air services are considered against the criteria set out in the relevant Regulations.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what investigation he has undertaken of the condition of signalling equipment on the rail line between Gloucester and Bristol; and what safety appraisal he has sought from the different rail authorities. 
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) advise that they have not received any reports of any specific problems with the signalling equipment along this rail line. However, the HSE's Railway Inspectorate (HMRI) recently requested infrastructure reports about this region from Network Rail which they will be analysing.
Mr. McNulty: The Strategic Rail Authority hopes to re-launch its freight grant schemes when funds become available. It plans to replace track access grants with a new Company Neutral Revenue Support scheme.
5 Jan 2004 : Column 52W
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement further to the recent Commission for Integrated Transport Report on proposals fundamentally to review how motorists pay to use the road network. 
Mr. Jamieson: On 9 July 2003, Official Report, columns 117579 my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced a feasibility study into road charging. The terms of reference are contained in the Department for Transport publication "Managing our Roads". The study will report to him next summer.
Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many road resurfacing projects have been delayed since 2001 from their provisional or planned dates owing to value management work. 
Mr. Jamieson: Value management is a structured process used by the Highways Agency to establish priorities and best value from the available budget for maintaining the strategic road network. A range of factors is taken into account in programming maintenance projects that include the latest information on surface conditions and opportunities to combine maintenance work with other projects in order to minimise disruption to traffic. The re-phasing of projects is not the result of value management work, but arises from a reappraisal of factors that influence the appropriate timing for works to be undertaken, in the light of better information.
Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people are employed (a) full time and (b) part time by (i) his Department and (ii) consultants engaged by his Department in supervision and monitoring of safety camera partnerships. 
Mr. Jamieson [holding answer 9 December 2003]: There are five people (four exclusively) employed in the Department working on the safety camera programme which includes the supervision and monitoring of partnerships. The number of consultant staff involved in supervising or monitoring the safety camera programme varies from time to time.
Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what statistical data safety camera partnerships are required to submit to his Department each quarter; and to what use such statistical data is put. 
Mr. Jamieson [holding answer 9 December 2003]: Partnerships are required to provide quarterly monitoring information and data covering traffic speeds, casualties, public opinion and costs. The information is collated, analysed and presented to inform policy development. The results are published annually on the DfT website and are available in the Libraries of the House.
5 Jan 2004 : Column 53W
Mr. Jamieson: Five. When Kent joined the scheme there were already three cameras enforcing at high-risk sites on this route. The Partnership have recently installed a further two cameras at sites where 11 people had been killed or seriously injured over the past three years.
Mr. Jamieson: All surplus funds arising from safety camera activity within partnerships operating within the netting off programme, that is over and above the amount required to cover their costs, are passed to the Treasury. Where areas are not yet in the scheme all fine revenue from camera activity passes to the Treasury in the usual way.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the cost of running (a) speed and (b) red light cameras in Essex was in each of the last five years; and what the estimated costs are for the current financial year. 
Mr. Jamieson: The cost to the Essex Safety Camera Partnership for operating their safety cameras for the most recent audited years was £1,846,480 in 200001 and £3,179,304 in 200102. Estimated costs for 200203 and 200304 are £5,150,286 and £5,980,765 respectively. Costs for speed and traffic signal cameras cannot be apportioned separately. Prior to the start of the safety camera netting off trial in April 2000 local authorities were not obliged to provide information on camera activity.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|