8 Mar 2004 : Column 1235W
Written Answers to Questions
Monday 8 March 2004
LEADER OF THE HOUSE
Welsh Language
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Leader of the House what recent changes there have been in the use of the Welsh language in the conduct of public business by the House; and if he will make a statement. [158026]
Mr. Hain: The most recent change in the use of the Welsh language in the formal proceedings of the House followed the First Report of the Procedure Committee in 2000–01 (HC 47). On 5 March 2001, the House endorsed the Committee's recommendation that Welsh could be used by Select Committee witnesses giving evidence in Westminster, as well as in Wales.
Westminster Hall
Bob Spink: To ask the Leader of the House if he will make it his policy to have senior Ministers reply to debates in Westminster Hall. [160094]
Mr. Hain: Since its creation in 1999 Westminster Hall has proved itself a popular and valuable debating chamber covering a wide variety of political issues. Government Departments take into consideration the topic of the debate and the division of ministerial responsibilities when deciding which Minister should respond. It is not necessarily the case that the Minister most suited to responding will be the most senior Minister in any given Department. However, all Ministers who respond to debates in Westminster Hall do so with the full authority of the relevant Secretary of State.
TRANSPORT
Air Quality
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action the Government are taking to improve air quality, with particular reference to use of alternative road fuels. [159326]
Mr. Jamieson: Alternative fuels receive considerable support from Government, in the form of significant fuel duty incentives, grants for vehicle conversions under the PowerShift Programme, and reduced rates of Vehicle Excise Duty and company car tax for cleaner vehicles. In the December 2003 pre-Budget report, the Chancellor published the Alternative Fuels Framework, which sets out the basis on which support will, in future, be provided for clean, low carbon road transport fuels. In particular, it includes a commitment to provide three-year certainty on duty differentials for all alternative fuels from Budget 2004.
8 Mar 2004 : Column 1236W
Air Safety
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list in descending order airlines using British airports by their air safety records. [159313]
Mr. McNulty: The safety of UK airlines is overseen by the Civil Aviation Authority to a high standard. Foreign airlines operating to the United Kingdom are required to be operated in accordance with the minimum safety standards established by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. They are regulated by aviation authorities of their home states.
Alternative Fuels
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the impact of changes in grants for people to convert vehicles to run on liquefied petroleum gas. [159322]
Mr. Jamieson: Currently, grants are available for the purchase/conversion of vehicles to run on liquefied petroleum gas under the Powershift and CleanUp programmes administered by the Energy Saving Trust. In 2003–04 these two programmes provided grants for the purchase/conversion of around 3,000 vehicles. In response to this year's increase in demand for these programmes, the Trust have discussed the appropriate level of Powershift and CleanUp grants for next year with stakeholders, and estimate that a similar number of vehicles will be converted/purchased during 2004–05.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps the Government is taking to meet its targets on use of (a) compressed natural gas and (b) hydrogen as road fuels. [159323]
Mr. Jamieson: Our plans for encouraging the promotion and use of clean, low carbon vehicles and fuels are set out in the Powering Future Vehicles Strategy, published in July 2002. The Government has no formal targets for the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) or hydrogen as road fuels. But it supports the development and use of these and other clean, low carbon fuels in a number of ways, including through fuel duty differentials and other fiscal incentives, and by means of purchase grants to offset the additional cost of vehicles operating on these fuels. The Chancellor of the Exchequer confirmed in the Pre-Budget Report in December 2003, for example, that compressed natural gas (CNG) would continue to benefit from the very low fuel duty levels it currently enjoys for at least another three years. We are also currently supporting the trials of three hydrogen-powered buses in London, and subject to the outcome of these trials the Government intends to exempt hydrogen from fuel duty for a limited period in the future to encourage further development and uptake.
Bardon Signal Box
David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the estimated cost of the planned alteration work to Bardon Signal Box on the Leicester to Burton railway line is. [158609]
Mr. McNulty: This is an operational matter for Network Rail. I have passed this question to Network Rail, for them to respond directly to the hon. Member.
8 Mar 2004 : Column 1237W
Bus Passes
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list for each local authority the cost of a bus pass for pensioners. [159349]
Mr. McNulty: Under the Transport Act 2000, all local authorities are required to issue a bus pass free of charge to older and disabled people entitling the holder to local bus travel within their district for at least half the single journey bus fare. However, local authorities are able to offer more generous schemes or alternative schemes to the statutory minimum if they wish. Many local authorities offer alternative travel schemes, which
8 Mar 2004 : Column 1238W
entitle older people to greater travel benefits and in some cases an annual fee is charged for the pass for these alternative schemes. The cost and extent of the alternative pass varies from one local authority to another. Those that charged for the pass for an alternative scheme, following the introduction of the statutory minimum scheme in June 2001, are listed in the following table, which is reproduced from Transport Statistics Bulletin "Concessionary Bus Fares Schemes England 200l", a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library. This is currently being updated and the latest information will be published later this year. Other authorities providing an alternative scheme may offer the pass free of charge.
| Name of authority | Annual fee (2001) | Alternative concession |
|---|---|---|
| Basildon, Essex | £100 | Free travel in district |
| Bracknell Forest UA | £40 | Free travel for those aged 75 or more. |
| Braintree, Essex | £110 | Free travel in district |
| Brentwood, Essex | £54 | Free travel in district |
| Bridgnorth, Shrops | £30 | Free travel in whole county |
| Colchester, Essex | £159.45 | Free travel, plus travel tokens |
| Darlington UA | £52 or £62 | £52 for free travel in urban area, £62 for free travel in all UA |
| Dartford, Kent | £5 | Fee to get flat fare of 20p within borough |
| East Staffordshire | £10 | Free travel |
| Eden, Cumbria | £5 | Free travel in district |
| Harlow, Essex | £33 | Free travel in district |
| Hertsmere, Herts | £36 | Free travel in district |
| Ipswich, Suffolk | £1 | District scheme for 25p flat fare |
| Maldon, Essex | £150 | Free travel |
| Middlesbrough UA | £10 | Fee for fare reductions |
| North Wiltshire | £5 | For reduced rate travel |
| Preston, Lancashire | £10 | For free travel for those aged 70 or over |
| Redcar and Cleveland UA | £12 | Fee for fare reductions |
| Sevenoaks, Kent | £20 | Fee to get flat fare of 20p |
| Shrewsbury and Atcham, Shrops. | £115 | For free travel in the borough, half fare in the county, also produces a £15 permit for reduced rate travel |
| Slough UA | £30 | Fee to get free travel in UA |
| South Buckinghamshire | £20 | Permit gives free travel from age 70 |
| St Albans, Herts | £57 | Free travel in district |
| Stevenage, Herts | £25 | Free travel in district |
| Stockton on Tees UA | £5 | Fee for fare reductions |
| Suffolk Coastal | £13.50 | Fee for fare reductions |
| Telford and The Wrekin UA | £80 | Free travel throughout UA, half fare in Shropshire and to some towns beyond |
| Three Rivers, Herts | £25 | Free travel in district |
| Worcester City | £8 | Allows 25p flat fare or 40p return fare |
| Wyre, Lanes | £5 | Reduced rate travel |
Computerised MOT Test
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the (a) expected in-service delivery date and (b) cost of the computerised MOT test were when the contract was let; and what they are expected to be now. [159594]
Mr. Jamieson: The information is as follows:
(a) in the original contract the expected start of roll-out date for the computerised service was May 2002 at a transaction charge per recorded test of £1.07.
(b) the current contract stipulates that roll-out of the service should have started by mid-February 2004 with no increase in transaction charge. The start of the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency's (VOSA) testing has been delayed following slippage in SBS Software and an independent review of progress has recommended changes to plans to reduce risk and allow for additional testing. In the light of the review team's recommendations VOSA are discussing a revised programme with SBS. Discussions are not yet complete—but on current expectations the service is unlikely to be rolled out until late 2004.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what penalty clauses are available for his Department to invoke should Siemens fail to deliver the computerisation of the MOT test (a) on time, (b) within cost estimates and (c) to the specification. [159595]
Mr. Jamieson: This is a PFI contract between my Department's Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) and Siemens Business Services (SBS) and SBS bear the risk of late or unsatisfactory delivery of the service. The contract provides that if MOT Computerisation is not delivered:
8 Mar 2004 : Column 1239W
(a) on time—SBS would not receive payments under the contract until the computerised service is available to MOT stations and delay would reduce the term of the contract. Therefore SBS would be penalised by extra costs as well as reduced income and profit;
(b) within cost estimates—under the contract SBS would bear the risk of increased development costs. They could also be subject to claims for liquidated and other damages for extra VOSA costs if they are responsible for delays;
(c) to the specification—the system will not be rolled out to MOT stations until it has satisfactorily completed field trials against the specification. SBS would bear the cost of corrective action to meet the specification and of consequent delays and would not receive any payments until the service is operational. Under the contract VOSA can withhold some transaction payments from SBS if the operation of the system does not meet specified minimum service levels.
As with any PFI contract VOSA has termination rights in specified circumstances.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |