---

24 Feb 2004 : Column 356W—continued

Infrastructure Improvement Schemes (Lancashire)

Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the infrastructure improvement schemes in (a) Lancashire and (b) Chorley; and what their projected cost is. [153500]

Dr. Howells: The Chorley Transport Interchange opened in March 2003 at a cost of £2,500,000. Work is currently under way improving Chorley Railway Station at a cost of £309,000. Details of other local transport infrastructure schemes and projected costs are set out in the Local Transport Plans and Annual Progress Reports, published by Lancashire County Council, Blackpool Borough Council and Blackburn-with-Darwen Borough Council.

24 Feb 2004 : Column 357W

Additionally, both Chorley and Lancashire will benefit from the £7.5 billion West Coast Mainline route modernisation programme that is currently under way.

Details of infrastructure improvement schemes for the motorway and trunk road network in Lancashire, including projected costs during 2003–04, are set out in the following table.

Highways Agency: Infrastructure Improvement Schemes

Category/Scheme Description	2003–04 Full Year Forecast (£000)
Safety Improvements
M6 Preston Signage and Road Markings, Junctions 30 to 32	145
M6 Road Markings	31
A585 Thornton Roundabout Improvements	127
A585 Thistleton Junction Improvements	178
Safety Improvements—Minor Schemes	178
Congestion Easing
A585 Singleton Crossroads	33
Renewal of Roads
M6 North of Junction 34 to 35, Carnforth	3,632
M55 Broughton Crash Barriers	1,710
M6 Junction 32 Broughton Electric Cabling for Road Signs	219
Minor Capital Maintenance	670
Renewal of Bridges and Structures
M6 Three Pinned Concrete Footbridge	298
M6 Forton Service Area Piers	26
M6 Golden Fleece	10
M6 Carnforth	800
M6 Occupation Bridges Bailtons	3
M6 Occupation Bridge Mount Pleasant	100
Block Allocation for other Bridge Schemes	455
Accessibility Improvements
Improvements for Pedestrians, Cyclists and Horse Riders	35
Tourism Signage
M6 Strategic Tourism Signing	300
Total	8,950

Road Safety

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what reports from judges the Government have received in relation to concluded cases of failure to stop after a road crash. [154917]

Mr. Leslie: I have been asked to reply.

Failing to stop after an accident is a summary offence and as such it would normally be dealt with at a magistrates' court. Judges would not therefore deal with such offences unless they were committed for sentence to the Crown Court together with an indictable or triable either-way offence. My Department does not hold data centrally relating to reports from Judges who sat on particular cases.

Road Resurfacing

Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the latest criteria for prioritisation of resurfacing of roads are. [155979]

Mr. Jamieson: The criteria for the prioritisation of resurfacing flexible trunk roads are related to the condition of the surface. The combined assessment of levels of rutting, surface crack intensity, unevenness,

24 Feb 2004 : Column 358W

skid resistance, the general wear of the surface material and the frequency of accidents associated with the surface condition, is used to determine the programme for resurfacing. The aim is to maintain the trunk road network using the principle of minimising whole life costs, taking account of disruption to the road users and the need to keep the road in a safe and serviceable condition.

On concrete roads, priorities for dealing with the most pressing cases of traffic noise have been established as set out in the Secretary of State's announcement to the House on 1 April 2003, and these will be progressed as funding allows.

Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the criteria for categorisation of sites for each level of noise reduction road resurfacing programmes; and what the effect of each categorisation is. [155983]

Mr. Jamieson: Categorisation of sites for low noise surfacing is primarily based on maintenance need. In addition, we have criteria for categorisation for noise reduction of roads with concrete surfaces. I announced these criteria on 17 October 2001; they are:

1. that wherever possible the application of quieter surfaces will fit in with normal maintenance needs;

2. that priority will be given to those sites where treatment would benefit the greatest number of people;

3. that the works will be carried out in such a way as to minimise disruption to general public and users of the network;

4. that priority will be given to roads, opened since June 1998, where actual noise levels have turned out to be significantly higher than predicted at the time of Public Inquiry.

Priority is given to road surfaces that are deteriorating and to locations where road safety is an issue. Where the resurfacing is specifically for noise reduction purposes priority will be given to those cases in which the actual noise levels exceed those predicted by at least three decibels, or where more than 100 properties per kilometre are effected by excess noise.

Mr. Robathan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what change there has been in estimated costs of resurfacing the M1 between junctions 20 and 21 since the initial announcement; and if he will make a statement. [155987]

Mr. Jamieson: Final cost details for resurfacing of the Ml between Junctions 20 and 21 will not be available until current investigations by the Highways Agency are completed. It was initially anticipated that part of this section of the Ml would be resurfaced in 2004 but Value Management assessments have shown that other areas of the network need to be given higher priority. The assessments demonstrated that better value for money would be obtained by undertaking more work than simply resurfacing, although this would result in increased capital cost.

Rolling Stock

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what (a) actual and (b) percentage increase in power supply is required to operate an eight-car new third-rail train compared with its slam-door predecessor, assuming no change in average speed; and if he will make a statement. [155416]

24 Feb 2004 : Column 359W

Mr. McNulty: At lower speeds the new trains are more efficient. At higher speeds–up to 75mph–the traction draw is higher. The power draw for the new trains travelling at up to 75mph is capped at 1500 amps. For Mark I trains the draw is 750 amps. In percentage terms, a Siemens Class 450 Desiro train draws 39.6 per cent. more traction power than a Mark I train. A Bombardier Electrostar Class 375 draws 35 per cent. more traction power than a Mark I train.

Shipping

Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1235W, if he will introduce primary legislation to revise the eligibility criteria for the scheme; and what discussions his Department has had with representatives of seafarer trade unions concerning alterations to the Crew Relief Costs Scheme. [155511]

Mr. Jamieson: Primary legislation will be introduced when Parliamentary time is available. The proposed extension of the Crew Relief Costs Scheme was discussed with members of the Shipping Working Group, including seafarer trade unions, when the policy outlined in the White Paper "British Shipping: Charting a New Course" was being developed.

Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 9 February 2004, Official Report, column 1242W, if he will make a statement on the progress made towards implementing the actions contained in "British Shipping: Charting a New Course"; whether it is his policy to implement all the actions in the paper; and when his Department will conclude the implementation of these actions. [155513]

Mr. Jamieson: The Government's shipping policy is stated in the White Paper "British Shipping: Charting a New Course". Some of the actions are on-going and so will not have a date by which they will be completed. It is therefore not possible to issue a timetable showing when the implementation will be concluded. An update of the current status of the 33 actions from "Charting" has been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Snowfall Measures

Mr. Randall: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what guidelines his Department issues for local authorities in respect of measures to deal with snowfall. [155798]

Mr. Jamieson: The Department for Transport strongly recommends that local highway authorities carry out winter maintenance in accordance with the Code of Practice for highway maintenance, "Delivering Best Value in Highway Maintenance", which was published in July 2001.

---