---

Road Works (Congestion)

11. Mr. James Plaskitt (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab): What steps he is taking to ease congestion during road works on trunk routes. [173503]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. David Jamieson): The Highways Agency designs roadworks in a manner that minimises disruption to the road user. Where possible, planned works take place during off-peak hours. As many lanes as possible are kept open, following notification to the public.

Mr. Plaskitt : My hon. Friend will be aware that the Highways Agency is carrying out an extensive works programme at junction 15 on the M40, the Longbridge roundabout. That is a very severe pinch point in the road network. I am very pleased that the work is being carried out, and I lobbied hard for it for a long time. While it is being carried out, however, carriageway restrictions from time to time cause very severe congestion. I have asked the agency to look at how the work is phased, and to consider doing more at night, but it is not very keen. Will my hon. Friend discuss the Longbridge work with the agency, to see whether these temporary difficulties can be overcome?

Mr. Jamieson: I can tell my hon. Friend that I have done that already, in the light of the parliamentary question that he has tabled. I understand his concern, on behalf of his constituents, about the delays on that stretch of road. The work being carried out is necessary to improve traffic flow and safety. My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the work on the island will be completed in the next two weeks, and that all the works in the area will be finished by September. Unfortunately, night work is not always possible on this project. That is due in part to the need to ensure the safety of the work force, as there is a hole 1 m deep at the side of the road, and to the fact that the work being undertaken is of a type that it is difficult to conduct during the night. However, my hon. Friend makes a serious point, and I shall urge the Highways Agency further to expedite the work.

Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): The Minister is always very helpful, but will he ensure that there is more co-operation between the Highways Agency, local highway authorities and the utility companies? That would mean that, when a trunk road was subject to road works being carried out by the utility companies, the alternative route—which may not be a trunk road—would not be subject to works at the same time. To my mind, such co-operation would be sensible and would limit congestion.

Mr. Jamieson: My hon. Friend—[Laughter.] The hon. Gentleman said such nice things about me, I thought that I would define him as my hon. Friend. He makes a good point. The Highways Agency is looking to make sure that the works that it carries out are, where possible, co-ordinated with other local works. The hon. Gentleman will know that the new centre in Birmingham and the new regional information centres that are being set up will give far better information to
 
18 May 2004 : Column 817
 
motorists. Also, traffic offices are now in place around the midlands—not quite into the hon. Gentleman's area yet—and they are helping to keep the traffic flowing.

The hon. Gentleman makes a serious point and it is something that we are mindful of in all the programmed work that the Highways Agency undertakes.

Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North) (Lab): My hon. Friend will be aware that roadworks are caused largely by damage from heavy vehicles. I am sure that he will be familiar with the fourth power law, relating axle weight to road damage. Would it not be a sensible way forward to invest more heavily in rail freight, especially that which is capable of taking road trailers on trains? That would take traffic off the roads, reduce the level of road damage and reduce congestion.

Mr. Jamieson: My hon. Friend asks a very clever question. Of course we are making efforts to take freight from the roads on to rail where we can, and where possible on to water, as the Minister of State said earlier. Notwithstanding that, the road network will still be needed to carry the vast bulk of traffic. Most roadworks are due to deterioration caused by all road users over a long time. So it is not an either/or. We must spend money on our rail system for freight and passengers, but it is essential to keep the road system in good condition. I am pleased to say that the Highways Agency roads are probably some of the best maintained not just in the country but in Europe.

Rail Passenger Services

12. Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire) (Con): What assessment he has made of the reliability of information provided to passengers (a) on stations and (b) on trains about services and alterations to them. [173504]

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): The latest national passenger survey shows that 13 per cent. of respondents were dissatisfied with the provision of information about train times and platforms at stations and 23 per cent. dissatisfied with the provision of information during the journey.

Mr. Luff : I thank the Minister for that genuinely helpful reply. I have decided that, should the charms of this place ever be subdued in my breast, I will find another way to serve my constituents—to stand on the platforms at Droitwich Spa, Worcester Shrub Hill or Worcester Foregate Street stations and advise them what the trains are actually doing. I remind the Minister of scenes of chaos at Worcester Shrub Hill on Monday when trains were transformed while standing at platforms or eventually, of course, cancelled. When the Minister is talking to train operating companies, will he ask them to review all their procedures in relation to information? When he is talking to the Strategic Rail Authority, will he ask them to give a high priority to information systems within the funding available to them?

Dr. Howells: I can certainly do that. The hon. Gentleman will have to put on a bit more weight if he is going to become the Fat Controller of Worcestershire, but I have no doubt he could do the job if he were asked.
 
18 May 2004 : Column 818
 
There is nothing more infuriating than being on a train that has stopped without explanation or indication of when it is likely to move again. The point is a very important one.

A number of train operating companies have taken this task very seriously. I pick out—

Mr. Damian Green (Ashford) (Con): GNER.

Dr. Howells: Certainly. I think First Great Western is improving a good deal and South West Trains now has some impressive electronic kit at stations which keeps the public well informed in real time about where trains are and how long it will be before they get to the station.

John Cryer (Hornchurch) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that a contributory factor to the problems that have just been alluded to is that when the railways were privatised eight years ago there was a complete lack of vertical integration? Britain's railways had always been vertically integrated going right back to the 1820s when construction was first started on the network. Does my hon. Friend agree that there should be some move towards reintroducing vertical integration? There seems to be indications from the Government that that may be the case. If it is to take place, the most sensible way to do it would be inside the public sector rather than our handing ever greater tranches of power to the private sector, which has already made such a hash of running Britain's railways.

Dr. Howells: I would not agree with my hon. Friend's last point. He is very young still, but I can remember what British Rail was actually like. I advise him not to look back at that bit of history through rose-tinted spectacles. It was very difficult, at times. One of the key themes of the rail review is to discover how the parts of the railway can speak to each other much more coherently, so that we can inform passengers where trains are, how long delays are likely to be and so on. Some interesting experiments in integration are taking place, including one run by South West Trains in which the Wessex train control centre is doing some valuable work.

CABINET OFFICE

The Minister was asked—

Emergency Planning

21. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey) (LD): What the civil contingencies grant for emergency planning was for Greater London, (a) in total and (b) broken down by borough, in each year since 2000. [173513]

The Deputy Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Phil Woolas): With leave, Mr. Speaker, I have been asked to reply. I wish to pass on the apologies of my hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office who—I am delighted to inform the House—is taking paternity leave because of the birth of his daughter. I am sure the whole House will wish to pass on their good wishes to him and his family.
 
18 May 2004 : Column 819
 

The civil defence grant is paid as a contribution to the emergency planning function of those local authorities that have a statutory duty of civil defence, which in London is the 32 boroughs, the Corporation of London, and the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority. The total payments to those authorities have increased from £1.75 million in 2000–01, to £2.8 million in 2004–05.

Simon Hughes : I should be grateful if the Minister would pass on our best wishes to the Minister for the Cabinet Office and his family.

Does the Minister accept that all those authorities have told the Government that they have not been given enough? Does he accept that the money that they have been told they may get this year they still have not received? When will the negotiations, which are apparently still continuing, about the money London needs for civil defence and emergency planning be completed so that there can be certainty about the services available to this city and its citizens to protect against an undesirable and obviously unwished for terrorist attack?

Mr. Woolas: I thank the hon. Gentleman for an important question. I accept that local authorities say that they do not get enough money and they are within their rights to do so. However, I have checked the situation and I can tell the House that the amount of civil defence grants paid to the boroughs has increased from £1.74 million in 2000–01 to £2.8 million now. The hon. Gentleman will recognise that while local authorities play a key role in civil defence, they are not the only agency involved. Discussions are indeed continuing between my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local and Regional Government and the representatives of London authorities.

Mr. David Borrow (South Ribble) (Lab): Could my hon. Friend explain to my constituents in provincial England how the balance of funding for civil contingencies is decided and, in particular, address the concerns of some of them that most of the money is going to London, which may not adequately reflect the real balance of risk in the UK?

Mr. Woolas: I thank my hon. Friend for that important question. What is referred to as resilience work is important throughout the UK. The Government have provided an extra £330 million for that purpose, in addition to the local authority money. That sum was earmarked before the tragedy of 9/11. Of course, the regional resilience teams have been established in the devolved authorities and throughout each English region, and they are being provided with the resources that they need to do that important job.

Mr. Oliver Heald (North-East Hertfordshire) (Con): But surely the Minister is aware that since 2002 the grant has been frozen and that the Government's intention is to continue that freeze? How are London's councils to manage the new duties imposed on them under the Civil Contingencies Bill and how can the Government claim to be increasing London's security when they have frozen that important grant? Does that not confirm what the Metropolitan police said in the Project
 
18 May 2004 : Column 820
 
Unicorn report that Government policy is "outdated"? Is not that yet another, more serious example of Labour letting London down?

Mr. Woolas: It is not: the contrary is the case. The Project Unicorn report was commissioned by the Metropolitan police and there has been press speculation about it, but that simply goes to show the important point that in looking at such reports the Government are taking their responsibility extremely seriously.

Mr. Heald: "Outdated"?

Mr. Woolas: The hon. Gentleman says that the policy is outdated, but I put it to him that the robust policies already being co-ordinated across all Government agencies, as well as local authorities—which is obviously important—are being put into an even more robust framework through the Civil Contingencies Bill, which the House will debate next week. We are far from not taking our responsibilities seriously and far from not providing the necessary resources; whereas his party would reduce public expenditure in that area.

Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab): Some of my constituents have told me that they are nervous about their children coming to London on school trips, especially to visit the House of Commons, owing to concerns about security on the London underground and in London generally. What reassurance can the Minister give my constituents? Does he believe that the exorbitant headlines in some national newspapers, which make people more nervous about visiting London, are winning the terrorists' battle for them?

Mr. Woolas: I thank my hon. Friend for that question. There is always a danger that scaremongering will achieve by propaganda what terrorists want to achieve by violence. However, when researching this portfolio, I was very, very pleased by the amount of effort that is going into London. The fundamental review of London's resilience arrangements has been carried out and there is a new London-wide strategic emergency-planning regime. Enhanced command and control centres are in place and there are specific plans to deal with different types of possible terrorist attack. The Mayor—the very excellent London Mayor—has provided for 100 extra British Transport police officers. I can also inform the House that the closed-circuit television network on the London underground system is the most extensive anywhere in the world.

---