---

Severn Bridge Tolls

4. Mr. Huw Edwards (Monmouth) (Lab): How many motorists are registered to pay tolls on the Severn bridge by the tag method. [166172]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): The tag system is operated by the bridge operators, Severn River Crossing
 
20 Apr 2004 : Column 142
 
plc. I understand from them that as of 29 February 2004 a total of 38,893 tags were in use. In February 2004, 22 per cent. of all crossings and 68 per cent. of heavy goods vehicle crossings used that system.

Mr. Edwards : Does my hon. Friend appreciate the concerns of my constituents who, since the opening of the new bridge, find that the old Severn bridge is used largely for local traffic, and find it irritating to have to pay £4.60 to get back to town when they have travelled only a couple of miles to the east of where they live in Chepstow? Will he consider introducing a better discount system to serve the residents of Chepstow and other parts of Monmouthshire, and perhaps others who live near the bridge?

Mr. Jamieson: I understand the importance of this to my hon. Friend's constituents, and why he would call for a concession for local residents, but if that was imposed by the Government, the operators would almost certainly want to re-finance the deal, which would push back the estimated date of 2016 for the removal of the toll. Those who buy a monthly tag and use the bridge more than 18 times already receive some concession. Any other form of concession would put a considerable burden on the public purse. Perhaps he would like to raise the issue with the Welsh Assembly Government, but I can tell him that there is no easy or low-cost solution.

Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion) (PC): Surely that last point is part of the answer. The Richards report has recently come out in Wales, and further devolution to the National Assembly is likely. Surely the future for both Severn crossings is now part of an overall package of road pricing for the whole of the motorway network in south Wales, and it would be better to transfer the responsibilities over a period from the Minister's Department to the National Assembly, to better reflect the views of local residents and the national needs of Wales.

Mr. Jamieson: We cannot now unpick the Act of Parliament that set up the two bridges. The hon. Gentleman's constituents may not be experiencing the same problems as the constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth (Mr. Edwards) but perhaps they can join forces to see whether the Welsh Assembly Government can find a solution, or whether the operators themselves can come up with something. We would be happy to assist in that, but I repeat that there is no easy or low-cost solution.

Mr. Ken Purchase (Wolverhampton, North-East) (Lab/Co-op): Just up the road from the Severn bridge, although it is early days, we have a very successful toll road round the eastern side of our west midlands conurbation. In view of that success, which has eased congestion on the M6, linking to the M5 to the Severn bridge, may I urge the Minister to revisit his consideration of the orbital road around the western side of the west midlands conurbation, especially in relation to tolling?

Mr. Jamieson: First, I congratulate my hon. Friend on his ingenuity in getting in that question in this
 
20 Apr 2004 : Column 143
 
context. I recognise the success of the M6 toll—I have used it myself—which considerably reduces journey times north and south around the north of Birmingham, and I am sure that his points will be given careful consideration.

Speed Cameras

5. Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): If he will estimate how many (a) lives will be saved and (b) serious injuries will be prevented in the next 12 months as a result of the installation of speed safety cameras. [166173]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): The independently produced evaluation report of the two-year trial of the safety camera cost recovery scheme showed a 35 per cent. reduction in the number of those killed or seriously injured at camera sites. A report covering the third year of the programme's operation is due to be published shortly.

Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): I am grateful for the Minister's encouraging response. Will he confirm that by the end of today—as of any other day in the year—it is likely that about 10 people will have been killed and scores of people seriously injured on our roads? Against that background, can he understand the logic of those who encourage law-breaking? How many deaths are those people prepared to tolerate? Should they not be made to visit some of the families of people who have lost their lives because of excessive speed?

Mr. Jamieson: The hon. Gentleman makes a very salient point. Last year's report on the eight pilot areas showed a reduction of about 500 collisions in those areas alone. Many of those collisions would have led to death or serious injury. Since cameras have been fitted throughout the country, we have seen a dramatic fall, particularly in death and injury to children, which is most significant. There has been a 35 per cent. reduction in three years. I agree that the people calling for the cameras to be removed—we may hear from the hon. Member for Ashford (Mr. Green) in a few moments—should reflect on the consequences of their policy and assess how many additional deaths of children and elderly people are likely to follow from it.

Mr. Bill Olner (Nuneaton) (Lab): I welcome the Minister's announcement about the reduction in the number of road injuries and deaths. Those who campaign for the removal of cameras should have on their conscience the consequences for the victims of road traffic accidents. However, I implore the Minister to look further into the issue of speed cameras on motorways. I agree that those cameras are effective when men are working on the motorways, but for long stretches and huge amounts of time there are no roadworks. With modern-day telematics, surely there could be variable speed limits for various parts of the day.

Mr. Jamieson: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that people calling for the removal of the cameras should also answer the question of how many more casualties will result at those sites. He will know that
 
20 Apr 2004 : Column 144
 
there are very few speed cameras on motorways, which are the safest roads in the country. The few areas where cameras are placed permanently are usually where there has been a record of serious injury or death or where there are roadworks. The figures show that in 18 months, 11 people working on the roads were killed. As I said earlier, I hope that we hear from the hon. Member for Ashford today. Regular attenders of Transport questions will know that we have still not heard about the 4,000 sites that he alleged had cameras in the wrong places. Perhaps we will hear from him some time today.

Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire) (Con): Do lorry drivers from foreign countries who are caught on speed cameras have to pay the fine?

Mr. Jamieson: That is indeed a problem. In association with our colleagues in the EU, we are looking into the problem of tracking down foreign drivers for the payment of fines. The issue of fines and other penalties across the Union is a matter of concern and we are also worried about the number of foreign vehicles in this country that may not be taxed or insured.

M1 Multi-modal Study

6. Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe) (Lab): If he will make a statement on action he plans as a result of the M1 multi-modal study. [166174]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty): Last week, we announced that we were putting a £1.9 billion scheme to widen the M1 in the east midlands into the targeted programme of improvements. That will now be taken forward by the Highways Agency. Work to progress other elements of the study's recommendations is being co-ordinated at various stages within the region.

Dr. Palmer : Together with Broxtowe borough council, I am concerned that the multi-modal study is being cherry picked and that we are seeing a celebration of the roads programme with insufficient progress made on other elements. I am sure that my hon. Friend would agree that the point of a multi-modal study is to integrate the different modes of transport. Will he assure the House that the other elements of the proposals will be taken with equal seriousness?

Mr. McNulty: I can tell my hon. Friend that, together with various stakeholders and key players in the region, we are progressing as much as we can on all elements of the multi-modal study across the piece, whether it be public transport, road or other elements. I can understand the frustration about the time involved in the process: in some cases it means local authorities making bids for the local transport plan—in conjunction or separately. We are seriously considering the outcome of this and other multi-modal studies across the piece, incorporating public transport as well as road elements.

Mr. Damian Green (Ashford) (Con): The Minister will know that drivers on the M1, especially in the west and east midlands, will want the multi-modal study to lead to easier, smoother driving on the motorway. In
 
20 Apr 2004 : Column 145
 
that regard, may I congratulate him and his ministerial colleagues on hinting to selected media that they propose to adopt the Conservative proposal for an 80 mph maximum speed limit on the M1 and other motorways? Can he confirm that he has stolen that very good policy, and may I assure him that we have many more good policies—on speed cameras, uninsured drivers and road humps—that he would be well advised to steal as well?

Mr. McNulty: The hon. Gentleman might find that he would have more integrity in the House if he had risen during the last question and answered the points made by my fellow Under-Secretary about his previous little wheeze for endorsing those who would break the law on speed cameras. Many, many motorists will welcome what we have already announced in the programme of almost £2 billion for the M1, as they will welcome much of what we have done, in a concentrated and focused roads programme, for further improvements to the M1.

We take very seriously all suggestions for policies, however bonkers they may be, and we shall put those of the Conservative party into the mix, too. I encourage the hon. Gentleman to pursue his transport policies, because the more he talks about a clear transport policy for the Tories, the more he ensures that he will remain on the Opposition Benches for a long, long time.

---