| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Transport Plan
3. Gregory Barker (Bexhill and Battle) (Con): When he last discussed the 10-year transport plan with the First Minister. [152889]
The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Alistair Darling): I have regular meetings and discussions with the First Minister about a range of matters, including transport.
Gregory Barker : We are almost one third of the way through the 10-year transport plan. Is it on track? Are trains now one third more reliable? Are road journeys one third better? Can we take any comfort that the plan is going where it should go?
Mr. Darling: I will help the hon. Gentleman by giving examples that may assist him in relation to his own constituency—
Hon. Members: This is about Scotland.
Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. Members should not tell the Secretary of State for Scotland how to answer a question. I think that he knows how to conduct himself. [Interruption.] Order. I will decide whether or not the right hon. Gentleman is out of order.
Mr. Darling: Yes, the 10-year plan is on track. For example, we are spending more than £1 billion on upgrading the power supply to trains running south of the River Thames, and we have increased the amount of money going to local authorities. The hon. Gentleman's own local authority has seen a dramatic increase in money. As he is now interested in Scotland, which is a good thing, I can tell him that the Scottish Executive will be spending about £1 billion a year on transport—something they have never done before. The big difference between now and the past is that the Government are committed to sustained investment in the transport system. The problem has been that for decades, not enough money was put into transport. The hon. Gentleman may like to tell his constituents—and his party will no doubt tell this to people in Scotland—that Conservatives oppose every penny spent on transport. They have voted against such expenditure whenever they have had the opportunity.
Mr. Frank Roy (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab): My right hon. Friend will agree that shipping is vital to the transport sector in Scotland. Will he join me in congratulating the management and workers of the Wishaw firm that next week will charter a ship to transport 2,500 tonnes of steel that will be used in
building the grandstand for a racing track in Dubai? Will he do all that he can to encourage exports by companies such as Bone Steel?
Mr. Darling: I agree with my hon. Friend that shipping is of great importance in exporting products such as the construction materials from Bone Steel that will be used in building the Formula 1 track in Dubai. I take this excellent opportunity to congratulate a Scottish firm on winning that contract and showing that Scottish engineering is respected throughout the world—and it is good, too, that our shipping is being used to transport it.
John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): Does the Secretary of State agree, particularly in respect of rail, that the 10-year plan has been superseded by his statement of 19 January, when he said that the Government would consider devolving more responsibility to the Scottish Executive? Does he agree that effective devolution of responsibility is possible only if the money to implement the decision is also devolved? Can he assure the House that responsibility will not be devolved without the required financial means being devolved too?
Mr. Darling: The 10-year plan is an investment plan, and sets out sums of money, from both the public and the private sector, to be invested in the railways and other forms of transport, year by year in the whole of the United Kingdom. On 19 January, I said that we were looking at the organisation of the railways, and that one thing we wanted to consider was the devolution of decisions on rail spending. Obviously, we cannot have a railway if we do not spend the money, but at this stage I am not in a position to tell the House when our final decisions will be made. However, I fully understand the point that the hon. Gentleman is making.
Mr. Malcolm Savidge (Aberdeen, North) (Lab): Has my right hon. Friend had discussions on the economic and environmental importance of fast long-distance trains, particularly on the Aberdeen-London route, for both freight and passenger transport? In the latter case, would he impress on the First Minister the fact that improving the track through Fife deserves higher priority?
Mr. Darling: I agree that it is important that we have a fast and reliable train service from Aberdeen and Edinburgh down to London. I think that everyone in the House knows that the track through Fife has been a matter of concern ever since it was built. It is a difficult line, and it is something that the Scottish Executive and Network Rail, which owns the line, will want to consider. The priority for Virgin, GNER and ScotRail is to drive up reliability. If we get reliable train services, more people will use them.
Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): While the Secretary of State for Transport is seeking to devolve more responsibility to the Scottish Executive, is Network Rail not transferring control of route planning from Glasgow to Leeds? Is there not an inherent
contradiction between those two developments, and will the Secretary of State for Scotland use his good offices with the Secretary of State for Transport to resolve it?
Mr. Darling: Only a nationalist could get steamed up about the fact that the four people involved in that planning are working out of a Leeds office instead of a Glasgow office. I know that the hon. Gentleman is a betting man, and I am willing to bet him that most people in Scotland did not know that four people in Glasgow were involved in route utilisation studies. For goodness' sake, the important thing is that we have a coherent network so that train services are reliable. That requires money and management, both of which the Government have continued to provide, instead of the petty squabbling that typifies much nationalist thinking.
Crown Office
4. Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) (Lab): On how many issues he has consulted the Crown Office since 1 January. [152890]
The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Alistair Darling): I met the Lord Advocate just before Christmas and discussed a number of issues with him.
Mr. Dalyell : Since the Crown Office is the lead Department on Lockerbie, would my right hon. Friend ask it what it is doing to follow up the $10 million paid on the 23 and 24 December 1988 to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine general command?
Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend has raised that matter on a number of occasions, both in questions and in an Adjournment debate. He raised it with the previous Government in 1995. As he knows, the prosecution and investigation of crimes in Scotland are entirely a matter for the Lord Advocate, but I undertake to pass his concerns on to the Lord Advocate, the Crown Office and the Foreign Office.
Salmon Farming
5. Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): When he last met Scottish Executive Ministers to discuss the Scottish salmon farming industry. [152891]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mrs. Anne McGuire): My right hon. Friend and I regularly meet Scottish Executive ministers to discuss matters of common interest. He and I keep in close touch with developments affecting the Scottish salmon farming industry.
Mr. Carmichael : May I remind the Minister that salmon farming was worth £110 million to the Shetland economy last year? It was estimated by the Shetland Salmon Farmers Association yesterday that, if the anticipated 50 per cent. drop takes place next year, some 410 jobs in Shetland will be under direct threat as a result. I remind the Minister that the Secretary of State for Scotland retains an executive power under the Crown Estate Act 1961 to direct the Crown Estate Commissioners. I urge her to consider exercising that power to allow a rent holiday for salmon farmers in
Shetland and other affected communities. The rents paid to the Crown Estate Commissioners are not crucial in themselves, but could help with cash-flow difficulties.
Mrs. McGuire: I know that the hon. Gentleman has a great interest in developments because of his constituency interests—Shetland has the highest concentration of salmon farms anywhere in Scotland. Last year, the Crown Estate introduced a rate cut of some 10 per cent. for salmon farming. However, I will relay the hon. Gentleman's comments to the Crown Estate through my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. I ask the hon. Gentleman to welcome the fact that the Government have submitted an application to the European Commission for temporary measures to safeguard the salmon farming industry against the importing of salmon from non-EU countries. I hope that that will prove to be one of the ways in which we can build up protection around a high-quality salmon farming industry.
Mr. Calum MacDonald (Western Isles) (Lab): Will my hon. Friend confirm that this is, I think, the first time the Government have ever asked for safeguard measures for any product or industry? Is that not a very positive sign of the importance that the Government attach to the salmon farming industry in Scotland?
Mrs. McGuire: My hon. Friend clearly identifies the fact that this is an unusual measure for any Government to take. The Department of Trade and Industry, working closely with the Scottish Executive, was keen to take it, to ensure that we protect our salmon farming industry. I know that there is concern in my hon. Friend's constituency about dumping from non-EU countries undermining the quality of the product in Scotland.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |