Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Robert Marshall-Andrews (Medway) (Lab): On the strategic basis that he just mentioned, will my hon. Friend give way? [Interruption.] I should very much welcome the Minister's attention to the intervention that I am about to make, facile though that may at first appear. Is it not the case that the Medway towns have been the beneficiaries of more inward investment from the Government than any other single conurbation in the United Kingdom? All of us in the Chamber welcome that with open arms. The Minister might find it rather difficult to hear me say that one of the Government's great achievements is in my constituency. The Minister previously said he could not understand why the Government had given so much money to my constituency.
Before you tell me that this is an incursion or an invasion, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I ask the Minister to answer this question: is it not right that, given the enormous investment in the capital structure of the Medway towns, we must have a concomitant investment in our infrastructure to give us the speed and the ability to feed into London? That must be a structural and strategic gain
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. That is rather long for an intervention. I hope that the hon. and learned Gentleman is drawing his remarks to a conclusion.
Mr. Marshall-Andrews: You have been more than beneficent as regards my intervention, Madam Deputy Speaker. You will have understood the point that I am making.
Jonathan Shaw: I am grateful for my hon. and learned Friend 's contribution. He is right. We have seen considerable investment in the regeneration of the waterfronts and moneys for our universities. That was one of his aspirations when he stood for the Medway constituency in the 1992 general election. That aspiration has been driven forward by many people in the Medway towns. His contribution, like that of my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham, has been important. We now see students receive higher education in the Medway towns, and they too will need a transport system.
We are concerned about the strategic aspects of that, and we are worried that the SRA does not appreciate the scale of development in Medway. Unlike other areas, there has been no quantitative estimate of the scale of development. Development is taking place on Strood, Chatham and Gillingham waterfronts, and importantly, those are all within walking distance of a train station.
Today 20,000 residents17 per cent. of the work forcetravel to London. We are generating new employment opportunities, as my hon. and learned
29 Apr 2004 : Column 1105
Friend the Member for Medway pointed out, and the channel tunnel rail link domestic service will assist us further.
Mr. Gwyn Prosser (Dover) (Lab): My hon. Friend is making powerful arguments for linking the channel tunnel rail link with some of the strategic centres of Kent. Does he agree that the port of Dover ranks highly among those strategic centres? Does he support the view in east Kent that we should be linking the busiest city in this country with the busiest ferry port in the world? At the same time, when we look at such major strategic matters, we should not lose track of the issues that he has already raised regarding services to some of our small stations. I have in mind places such as Kearsney, which is just a stone's throw from my home, Martin Mill and of course Snowdown.
Jonathan Shaw: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has worked tirelessly in respect of Dover. As I said, the Strategic Rail Authority has left the door open and is exploring the matter, which is testimony to the hard work that he has put in on behalf of his constituents.
As I said, 17 per cent. of the work force travel to London. The population is set to increase from the current 250,000 to 300,000 by 2024. That means that commuting could rise by 30 per cent. over the next 20 yearsthe equivalent of 1.3 per cent. a year. By the time the new trains start running in 2008, demand is likely to be 5 per cent. higher than now, and it is likely to be 10 per cent. higher in 2012.
There is welcome news in the SRA document, as well as the channel tunnel rail link domestic service, and it is important to place that on record. On the Ashford, Maidstone and West Malling line, which serves the southern end of my constituency, there are set to be three additional peak period trains to Victoria. The Medway valley line, to which I referred earlier, will have trains running through to Tonbridge. That will make the line significantly more attractive to use. However, the proposal to reduce stopping times is unacceptable, and I, together with parish councils at Cuxton, Snodland, East Malling, Larkfield and Aylesford, have met the SRA and voiced our objections.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Dover (Mr. Prosser) said, throughout the county, people are very hostile to reductions in off-peak rural services. Rather than save a few minutes, the people of Kent would like to retain existing services. There is a significant opportunity to grow off-peak services and to provide better stations, information and revenue collection, which is simply not undertaken on some lines.
My hon. Friend the Minister understands our anxiety. I know that he not only fully appreciates what we are seeking to achieve in Medway and the Thames gateway, but actively supports it. As a former planning Minister, does he share our belief that changing the timetable in such a revolutionary way is very dangerous? If there is one lesson that we have learned in recent years, it is that we cannot achieve a quick fix for the railways. If there are to be changes, they have to be not revolutionary, but evolutionary. Passengers will need time to adapt to changes. It is important that a level of flexibility is built in, so that where we see growth occurring, the rail system can meet that demand.
29 Apr 2004 : Column 1106
The task ahead is difficult, with many competing demands for priority. We are seeing investment in our rail service. Some £600 million has been invested in new trains on the south-east network, and they are being rolled out. They are air-conditioned and are far more able to respond to the climatic challenges of snow and ice. The Government have a track record of £75 million a week in investment. Hatfield lifted the lid on the appalling state of our track. The Tory legacy of botched privatisation has been long, painful and very expensive. It has caused delays, but we cannot move forward without a safe network.
The review is the first of the Kent rail timetable since 1963. The great train robbery took place in that year, when £5 million was snatched from a Royal Mail train in Buckinghamshire. The Strategic Rail Authority's proposals will amount to the great train robbery of Kent if they are allowed to go forward. We do not want a reduction in our train services. We have what Martin Luther King had in another significant event in 1963a dream. We have a dream of a more reliable rail service that is fit for the future, and fit to carry the people of Kent around the county and, in what has been the focus of the debate, to carry them to and from our capital city.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Jonathan Shaw) on securing the debatein one sense, it is timely; in another sense, it is not, and I shall come on to the reasons for that. I further congratulate my hon. Friend on mentioning Martin Luther King, Ronnie Biggs and my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (Paul Clark) in one cogent, clear speech.
I congratulate my hon. Friends the Members for Chatham and Aylesford and for Dover (Mr. Prosser), and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Medway (Mr. Marshall-Andrews) on the way in which they have argued their case not only in public forums such as this, but throughout the process from specification to consultation, which may appear tortuous. I include my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham, who is more mute than usual because of his high office, in those congratulations.
I congratulate my hon. Friends on placing this debate in the context of the significant activity by the Government in Kent throughout 1997. The debate is timely, in that the Strategic Rail Authority concluded its 12-week consultation on the integrated Kent franchisehereafter IKFon 23 April, and my hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford knows that the SRA is seeking to move to invitation to tender by June, at which stage the results of the consultation will be announced. The debate is not timely, in that, whatever I say, I cannot prejudge the outcome of the consultation, but I assure my hon. Friends that their comments will be fed into it, although I am sure that those points are already part of the consultation.
My hon. Friend is right that rail services in Kent have suffered from under-investment, a slow network, unsatisfactory reliability and outdated rolling stock. As he says, the timetable in Kent and south-east London has remained largely unchanged for the best part of 40 years, and it needs to change to reflect current and
29 Apr 2004 : Column 1107
future needs, to deliver improved reliability and to build on the capital infrastructure that we have put in. I take the point that our objectives must be concomitant, at least in part, with not only that capital infrastructure investment, but our plans for the entire area.
My hon. Friend knows that passenger services throughout Kent, parts of Sussex and south-east London are currently operated by South Eastern Trains, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the SRA and took over the services from Connex. The key objectives in SET's business plan for 200405 are to stabilise the business, to provide a higher standard of service to passengers and to introduce new trains to replace the Mk 1 slam-door fleet. That is important because we are discussing a service that will not be introduced until 2007 and beyond, so there is still an interim period. I hesitate to say it because I know that it will come true and bite me, but I am sure that a "save our slam-door trains heritage society" will be formed at some stage. I do not know whether such a society exists yet, but the sooner we get the new stock in, the better.
As my hon. Friend said, the proposed franchise represents a significant milestone in the development of Britain's railways, and a major opportunity for Kent. It is a stark fact that the channel tunnel rail link is the first major railway to be built in this country in more than a century, and section one opened on time and to budget in 2003I had the great pleasure of visiting Leeds castle for the sideshow that took place at the same time as the main opening. Section two of the CTRL is due to open in 2007, providing faster journey times and opening up new travel opportunities. In developing the IKF, the SRA wants to make the best use of the whole railway network in the region, including the CTRL. As my hon. Friends said, that is a matter of balancing the strengths and advantages of the high-speed line with the needs of the existing network.
The objective is to specify a passenger train service provision that is based around current and future demand while delivering better reliability at a cost that is both value for money and affordable. The SRA is proposing a revised timetable of services for the integrated Kent franchise that is based on an all-day regular service pattern that is easy for customers to understand.
New stations at Ebbsfleet and at the other end of Stratford will assist regeneration in the Thames gateway, including north Kent, and provide new access to the rail network, some improved journey times and service reliability, which will benefit other centres on the network.
The IKF timetable specification document is the final step in the formal consultation to develop a detailed franchise proposition. Earlier consultations addressed CTRL domestic services and the proposal for an integrated franchise of services running on CTRL and the national rail network. I do not need to rehearse the proposals for the Medway towns, because my hon. Friends will certainly know about them. I am grateful to them for highlighting the advantages, in terms of their constituency interests and the interests of the county, of adding to what already prevails. I am sure that they will have pointed out some of the gaps to the SRA.
29 Apr 2004 : Column 1108
The SRA forecasts demand patterns for peak and off-peak periods that will require significantly different service patterns, especially in the context of maximising the use of dedicated CTRL domestic rolling stock at peak times. The calling pattern of peak services will have to reflect available platform length at certain stations together with any further constraints that may emerge through the SRA's detailed timetable development work.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |