House of Commons
Tuesday 3 February 2004
The House met at half-past Eleven o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
CONTINGENCIES FUND 2002–03
- That there be laid before this House the Accounts of the Contingencies Fund, 2002–03, showing:—
(1) The receipts and payments in connection with the Fund in the year ended 31st March 2003,
(2) the distribution of the capital of the Fund at the commencement and close of the year; together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General thereon.—[Gillian Merron.]
Oral Answers to Questions
TRANSPORT
The Secretary of State was asked—
Railways
1. Martin Linton (Battersea) (Lab): What plans he has to open new stations on the west London line. [152271]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty): The Strategic Rail Authority has approved the construction of two new stations on the west London line—one at Imperial Wharf in Chelsea and one at Shepherds Bush. The earliest date currently envisaged for their opening is February 2005.
Martin Linton : I thank the Minister for his reply, but press the case for reopening Battersea High Street station and other stations on the south and west London orbital lines, such as Brixton, Battersea, Stamford Bridge and North Pole. Is the Minister aware that since privatisation, only two new stations have been opened in the entire south-east of England, because there is absolutely no incentive in the system for Network Rail or the train operating companies to invest in new stations? Indeed, those two new stations had no railway money put into them.
Is the Minister further aware that there is so much freight on the west London line that it will be almost impossible for trains to stop there—
Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should try for an Adjournment debate on this matter.
Mr. McNulty: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I reiterate that I have no plans for any more new stations on the
west London line. As it is one of the most congested in the country, adding another station would have significant performance implications, and it is highly unlikely that it would be feasible, given the current levels of traffic. As a London MP, I caution my hon. Friend not to equate new stations with the amount of investment that is being made. The London end of the channel tunnel rail link, the Jubilee line extension, the Docklands light railway and all the extensions to it, and the £17 billion of investment in the tube show that investment in transport in London is a key priority for the Government.2. Matthew Green (Ludlow) (LD): What steps his Department is taking to ensure that there is a direct train service from Shropshire to London. [152272]
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): I am sure that the hon. Gentleman knows that the Strategic Rail Authority, not the Government, has responsibility for specifying minimum service levels in each train operating company's franchise agreement. I understand that the authority's current view is that there is not a sufficiently strong business case for maintaining direct services between Shropshire and London.
Matthew Green : I hesitate to thank the Minister for that answer. He may be aware that Shropshire is the only county that from May will not have a direct rail link to London. Indeed, the largest towns in Shropshire—Shrewsbury and Telford—will be the largest towns in the country without such a link. The last route that passes through Ludlow and goes on to Waterloo will be closed from May 2004, thanks to the Strategic Rail Authority. Does the Minister think that he is doing enough to ensure that Shropshire has a direct link to London—or does he have something against the county?
Dr. Howells: That was a very Liberal question. The one train a day that used to run from Shrewsbury via Telford to London Euston was withdrawn from the winter 2000–01 timetable because it did not attract sufficient passengers to make it commercially viable. I do not know if the hon. Gentleman is hinting that that will be yet another addition to the Liberals' spending plans, but it would not surprise me if he was.
Pollution Offences
3. Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con): What steps have been taken to ensure that pollution offences may be prosecuted on the same terms wherever they occur within the UK pollution control zone, as recommended by the Public Accounts Committee in its second report of the Session 2002–03. [152273]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): We need to bring the statutory defences under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 into line with those in the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Oil Pollution) Regulations 1996. My Department has investigated the scope for achieving that through a regulatory reform order, but has established that it is not possible. We will therefore seek to amend the 1995 Act when a legislative opportunity is available.
Mr. Leigh : As the Minister knows, polluters seek to avoid their liabilities by resorting to the "pay to be paid"
device in their insurance policies. The International Maritime Organisation has asked for those practices to be banned. Are the Government going to ban them; if not, why not?
Mr. Jamieson: We take pollution from ships around our coast very seriously in this country. The hon. Gentleman will know from the National Audit Office report of June 2002 that between 1997 and 2002 we reduced the amount of oil spilled in the UK pollution control zone by more than 90 per cent. He will also know from a letter sent to him by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency in January this year that we are making good progress in implementing not only the National Audit Office recommendations, but those of his own Committee.
Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): When the Minister revisits the legislation with a view to bringing forward amendments, will he seriously consider making such offences strict liability offences?
Mr. Jamieson: Yes, indeed. The hon. Gentleman will know that some of those offences can already attract very heavy fines—in fact, the heaviest fines that magistrates can impose for oil pollution. Certain areas around the Scottish coast, including the Shetlands, are particularly sensitive. We are mindful of the need to protect the coast—that is why, I am glad to say, the number of pollution incidents and the number of gallons of oil spilled have reduced very substantially over the past five years.
Alternative Transport
4. Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the impact on health of his Department's policies on encouraging alternative modes of transport. [152274]
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): We are trying, in a number of different ways, to encourage people to walk and cycle more often and to raise levels of physical activity generally. We are working with a number of Departments, such as the Department of Health, and we hope to publish in the spring a number of the joint measures that we intend to take to encourage increased levels of cycling and walking, especially to schools and workplaces.
Huw Irranca-Davies : The purpose of my question is to try to tease out the cross-cutting nature of the Government's agenda on health, and how transport can fit into that. May I also ask my hon. Friend what discussions he will have with colleagues in the Welsh Assembly Government to make sure that best practice on both sides of Offa's dyke is disseminated, to the benefit of the health of our youngsters?
Dr. Howells: My hon. Friend will be glad to hear that we are in close, regular contact with the Welsh Assembly Government, and we are certainly interested in their development of a walking and cycling strategy for Wales. We will consider it carefully in drawing up our strategy.
Mr. Archie Norman (Tunbridge Wells) (Con): Can the Minister comment on the enormous proliferation across
the country of little blue signs with bicycle and pedestrian symbols on them? Is he aware that they are being put up in many areas where there is absolutely no prospect of increasing the amount of cycling or walking? What steps will the Department take to assess the value to the taxpayer of this exercise, which seems to smack more of political correctness than of delivering results?
Dr. Howells: I was not aware that the hon. Gentleman was concerned about this proliferation of little blue signs. I had not noticed them, but I will look out for them in future and try to make a subjective judgment on their effectiveness.
Mr. Greg Knight (East Yorkshire) (Con): Health is an important issue, and if the Minister really shares our view that the use of less polluting forms of transport should be encouraged, will he join me in condemning the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Stealth Tax himself, for announcing the withdrawal of the excise duty concession on liquefied petroleum gas fuel? Is not that a severe setback to persuading more motorists to do something about improving air quality?
Dr. Howells: I certainly will not join the right hon. Gentleman in doing that, and I do not believe that the Chancellor has announced that. That will be a matter for him when he comes to make his Budget statement.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |