| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
3 Mar 2004 : Column 938W—continued
TRANSPORT
Air Passengers (Firearms)
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what rules apply to passengers transporting guns on air journeys (a) departing from, (b) arriving at and (c) passing through British airports. [157607]
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 1 March 2004]: Passengers must surrender firearms or any dangerous articles before entering the restricted zone (RZ) of the airport and cannot regain possession of them in circumstances which would enable them or others to take them onto an aircraft or undermine the security of the airport. Thus departing passengers must surrender any firearms they wish to transport to airport or airline staff prior to undergoing security screening and entering the RZ. Arriving passengers are handed back firearms upon completion of their journey in the presence of a Customs Official or police officer. Transit and transfer passengers do not regain possession of their weapons in the RZ.
HM Customs and Excise are responsible for the checking of firearms licenses and certificates at the airport.
Chorley Railway Station
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much the Government are contributing towards improving Chorley Railway Station. [157716]
Mr. McNulty: Chorley Station is benefiting from £137,000 of grant through the "Rail Passenger Partnership" scheme, administered by the Strategic Rail Authority.
Heathrow
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many aircraft movements there were in each period from November to October since 1980 at Heathrow. [157409]
Dr. Howells: The available information is as follows:
(2) All scheduled movements (whether loaded or empty) and loaded charter movements, but excluding empty positioning flights by scheduled aircraft, and empty charter movements.
(3) January to November 2003.
Source:
Civil Aviation Authority.
3 Mar 2004 : Column 939W
Local Government Finance
Jim Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what grants were awarded to local authorities in Dorset by his Department in financial year 2003–04 that fall outside the revenue support grant. [156204]
Mr. McNulty: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right. hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and the Regions (Mr. Raynsford) on 1 March 2004, Official Report, column 750W.
Lorry Road User Charge
Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received on the net cost to hauliers of the introduction of the Lorry Road User Charge; and if he will make a statement. [157040]
Mr. Jamieson: The Government have established a Lorry Road User Charge sub-group of the Road Haulage Forum, through which it conducts a dialogue with representatives of the haulage industry on a wide range of issues relating to the development and introduction of a charging scheme.
The Government have made clear their intention that the Lorry Road User Charge will be broadly revenue neutral for the UK haulage industry. That position has not changed. The extra revenue raised through the charge will be offset by reductions in fuel duty.
M1
Mr. Tony Clarke: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what further developments are planned to improve the (a) safety and (b) capacity of (i) junctions and (ii) carriageways on the M1 between junctions 15 and 16 to cope with the increase in traffic use arising from the Milton Keynes/Northampton sustainable communities plan. [157441]
Mr. Jamieson: We have no current plans for major improvements to this section of the M1. Following publication of the draft Milton Keynes and South Midlands (MKSM) Sub-Regional Strategy, the
3 Mar 2004 : Column 940W
Highways Agency, together with the three affected Regional Assemblies, looked at the strategic transport impacts of the growth proposals on the highway network. Their report has been put in the Library for the public examination of the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy which begins on 23 March 2004. We will respond to the findings of the public examination in due course.
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport for what reasons carriageway closures are in place between junction 1 and junction 2 of the M1 motorway; when this stretch of motorway was last subject to carriageway closures; and for what reasons these works and those previously undertaken were not carried out at the same time. [157924]
Dr. Howells: The M1 between junctions 1 and 2 is currently being resurfaced because the road surface is coming to the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced. The opportunity is also being taken to carry out other major repairs to the infrastructure along this stretch of the motorway.
This section was last subject to significant carriageway closures at the end of 2001 for essential repairs to lighting columns and for advance drainage works in preparation for the current resurfacing scheme. A period of time was needed on this project between drainage works and resurfacing to allow the ground to dry out and settle.
M6
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the purpose of the planned four-lane M6. [157717]
Mr. Jamieson: The West Midlands to North West Multi-Modal Study produced a long-term strategy for the M6 corridor aimed at improving road, rail and other public transport links within the corridor over the next 20 to 30 years. The study clearly demonstrated that some road widening is a necessary component of a strategy aimed at tackling congestion on the M6 motorway. The Secretary of State confirmed his support for the study's recommendation, including widening the motorway from dual 3 to dual 4 lanes between junctions 11a and 19, in his announcement of December 2002.
Ministerial Speeches
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many speeches he made between 9 June 2003 and 1 February 2004; and where a copy of each speech can be obtained. [156149]
Mr. McNulty: The Secretary of State has made speeches on a range of transport issues, many of which are available on the departmental website at www.dft.gov.uk.
PowerShift Project
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the PowerShift project; and if he will make a statement. [157925]
3 Mar 2004 : Column 941W
Dr. Howells: The PowerShift programme, which provides grants to encourage the purchase of low emission vehicles, has had its most successful year to date in 2003–04, with all the funding being fully committed. It is estimated that the programme will support the purchase/conversion of 4,200 vehicles in 2003–04 compared with a total of 2,139 in 2002–03 (figures from the Energy Saving Trust).
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the status of the PowerShift project is; how many new applications have been processed this year; how many new applications are being dealt with; and if he will make a statement. [157926]
Dr. Howells: The PowerShift programme will begin accepting applications for 2004–05 shortly. The Energy Saving Trust expects to process applications for 4,200 vehicles in 2003–04. We expect applications to continue at a high level next year.
Road Transport Directive
Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he plans to publish the draft regulations implementing the Road Transport Directive. [158225]
Mr. Jamieson: We expect to publish the draft regulations implementing the Road Transport Directive by the end of May. My officials are currently analysing responses from our consultation exercise and the results of this will be published shortly.
Speed Cameras
Mrs. Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many challenges there have been to speed camera fines in the last 12 months. [148941]
Mr. Jamieson: I am advised by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary that information is not held centrally on the number of people prosecuted for speeding offences who elect to challenge a fixed penalty notice.
Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the costs were of (a) purchasing and (b) operating speed cameras in Essex in each of the last six (i) financial and (ii) calendar years for which figures are available. [152476]
Mr. Jamieson [holding answer 3 February 2004]: We do not hold information centrally on the costs of local and police authorities' camera operations prior to the establishment of the Safety Camera Programme in April 2000. The information on the costs of the Essex Partnership for 2000–01 and 2001–02, which is compiled by financial year, is in the following table. Capital expenditure includes the purchase of camera equipment. Revenue expenditure covers the cost of administration of the prosecution process by conditional offer fixed penalty.
| 2000–01 | 2001–02 | |
|---|---|---|
| Essex | ||
| Capital | 612,027 | 1,036,298 |
| Revenue | 1,234,453 | 2,967,465 |
| Total | 1,846,480 | 3,003,763 |
The figures for 2002–03 will be contained in the report of the third year of the safety camera cost recovery scheme, which is to be published shortly. The results of the two-year trial of the programme demonstrate that safety cameras, covering sites with known problems of speed-related accidents, reduce collisions and road injuries. The third-year report will update the data on the road safety benefits of safety cameras.
3 Mar 2004 : Column 942W
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will take steps to remove speed cameras from non-hazardous sections of road. [156503]
Mr. Jamieson: The rules of the Safety Camera Programme require Partnerships to place cameras at sites or on routes with a history of speed related accidents, to review their sites regularly and to adjust enforcement strategies accordingly.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |