---

Blackpool Tramway

3. Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde) (Con): What investment his Department will be making in the refurbishment of Blackpool tramway. [179611]

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr.   Kim Howells): As I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will understand, there are many pressures on the transport programme and there are several major light rail schemes currently under consideration. We will announce a decision on Blackpool as soon as we can.

Mr. Jack: I thank the Minister for his reply. Will he confirm that all the Members of Parliament who represent the Fylde coast and who have an interest are in the Chamber? Will he also confirm that sustaining an existing transport system, like the Blackpool tramway, is compatible with Government policy? Does he recognise the importance of the project to the regeneration of Blackpool and the effect that it will have on the Fylde coast? This project, as it exists, should not be the subject of a determination using an optimism index. The system works and needs to be sustained. Can we have the Minister's support?

Dr. Howells: The right hon. Gentleman is well known for his optimism. I pay tribute to him and to my hon. Friends who have campaigned for the project for a long time. I must remind him, however, that a great deal of investment has gone into light rail. Indeed, the number of passengers carried on light rail has increased by 86 per cent. since 1996–97. We will certainly consider all the light rail schemes that have been proposed, including Blackpool. I hope that we can make an announcement on Blackpool in the short term rather than the long term.

Mr. Gordon Marsden (Blackpool, South) (Lab): My hon. Friend will be well aware from his previous incarnation in the tourism game that the Blackpool tram system is very well used and patronised, not just by tourists, but also by residents. Picking up the point made by the right hon. Member for Fylde (Mr. Jack), will my hon. Friend convey to his officials and those charged with making a final deliberation that, whether or not an optimism index is reasonable, it is not necessarily reasonable to apply the same optimism index to a blue-sky scheme as it is to one that is tried and tested, which has no nasty surprises in terms of rerouting utilities and things of that nature?
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1167
 

Dr. Howells: I can assure my hon. Friend that we are well aware of the nature of the scheme. It is long established. We know its strengths and limitations. I shall certainly pass on his observations to officials in my Department.

Mrs. Joan Humble (Blackpool, North and Fleetwood) (Lab): To reinforce the point again about the importance of the Blackpool tramway, is my hon. Friend aware that it goes through Cleveleys all the way up to Fleetwood and is an existing service, used not just by tourists, but by local residents? My constituents in Fleetwood use the tramway to travel down into Blackpool to work and to get back home again. Equally, tourists in Blackpool use it to go up to Fleetwood to enjoy the facilities there. It is vital that the investment is put in to ensure that the tramway, which has been in existence for 100 years, continues for another 100 years.

Dr. Howells: I commend my hon. Friend on the case that she has made for the Blackpool tramway and on reminding the House that it is a working tramway that carries people to and from work in the centre of Blackpool. I can only repeat what I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Marsden)—we are well aware of the importance of the scheme, but we must consider it in the context of a number of other proposed schemes, all of which are regarded as important to their neighbourhoods.

British Transport Police

4. Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham) (LD): If he will make a statement on the funding arrangements for the British Transport police. [179612]

The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling): The British Transport police are funded primarily by the rail industry, and this year its budget of £162 million includes funding for 100 extra officers on the London underground.

Dr. Cable: Is it not fundamentally unsound that a key part of the British police service that not only enforces law and order on trains and at stations but conducts sophisticated anti-terrorist operations on the underground and at mainline stations should be dependent on grudging and capricious contributions from the private rail companies? Can the Minister not insist that those companies fund the British Transport police at the same level as the rest of the police force?

Mr. Darling: I do not think that it is wrong that the railway industry funds the British Transport police. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that, as the Government fund quite a lot of the railway, public money is going to the transport police one way or another. We have just set up a new police authority that will have the job of looking at the budget needed by the British Transport police, especially in light of the report by Her Majesty's inspectorate to be published tomorrow. It shows that certain aspects of the force need to be looked at, and it has the power to get money from the industry to the police. However, the budget has been increased by about £25 million, and the Government have funded £2 million-worth of expenditure on the anti-terrorism
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1168
 
measures mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. Money is therefore going into the force, and force numbers have been increased.

Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab): The Secretary of State will nevertheless be aware that the increase in force numbers was needed because on the London underground and the overground trains British Transport police are being called on to do more to contribute to security. Will he insist that the new police authority tells the train companies that they must pay up and look cheerful, as they need those dedicated forces and had better get on and find the cash?

Mr. Darling: I agree with much of what my hon. Friend said.

Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): Smile then.

Mr. Darling: How can one smile when talking about railway finances? Believe me, it is simply not possible. Every day, I go to the office and see a black cloud hanging above my desk, but I shall try to be cheerful. My hon. Friend the Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody), however, is absolutely right—the British Transport police do a first-class job, and we are asking them to do more. In the current climate, we are likely to ask them to increase the amount of activity that they undertake, which is why it is important that the organisation is properly equipped and funded. I believe that that can and will be done, and we are looking at it in the context of the railway review.

Mr. Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con): Is the problem not whether the Secretary of State is cheerful but that he is complacent? There is more violent crime, fewer detections and, notwithstanding his remarks about increased numbers of transport police on the underground, there will be a reduction of 150 transport police on the overground as a result of the £40 million deficit in the British Transport police pension fund, which only last year Ministers assured us was in surplus. The running costs for the new police authority are six times higher than forecast, so why do the Government not apologise for that manifest failure?

Mr. Darling: The hon. Gentleman is wrong about police numbers—they will not be reduced. As for crime, yes, it has increased in some respects, but on the other hand theft on the London underground and criminal damage to railway carriages has been reduced. Detection rates for robbery have gone up. I am certainly not going to say to the House that there are not still problems and more that needs to be done, but the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong to claim that police numbers are to decrease. They are not. They will remain exactly as they are at present. As I said earlier, there will be 100 extra officers for the London underground.

Rail Freight Interchange Facilities

5. Jim Dobbin (Heywood and Middleton) (Lab/Co-op): What plans he has to increase the number of rail freight interchange facilities. [179613]
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1169
 

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): The provision of rail freight interchanges is primarily a matter for the private sector rail freight industry and commercial property developers. The Strategic Rail Authority published its strategic rail freight interchange policy in March this year. The document aims to facilitate the development of a network of commercially viable rail freight interchanges by providing guidance for planning authorities and developers.

Jim Dobbin: My constituency lies midway between the M1 and the M6 and the ports of Hull and Liverpool. A huge industrial development is to take place at junction 21, called the Kingsway industrial development. A tremendous number of heavy goods vehicles run through and around that part of the north-west. Will my hon. Friend take into consideration the points that I have raised and give some guidance to the private sector developers who are developing freight terminals, when the Government come to designate and plan for the future?

Dr. Howells: I am prepared to talk to anyone who is interested in such developments, because the country needs them. I remind my hon. Friend that the railway is privatised and those developments are driven by the market, as they should be. I am sure that he has made a compelling case to the developers for the kind of facility that he mentions. We are keen to get as much freight as possible off the road and on to the railways.

John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): The Minister is aware that on average, 80 per cent. less carbon dioxide is emitted by one tonne of freight that travels by rail, rather than by road. Is he also aware that the logistics industry believes that rail freight should be a viable economic alternative to road haulage, but that will depend on the development of rail freight interchanges or rail freight villages? Given that such developments are both environmentally and economically desirable, what can the Government do to help the planning process, particularly in view of the failure of that for the west London freight village?

Dr. Howells: My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has been conducting a major review of planning law and practice. In conjunction with the Strategic Rail Authority we are looking hard at how it might be possible to push projects forward. The hon. Gentleman knows that many considerations have to be taken into account. Those often entail environmentally sensitive areas, the prospect of noise for local residents and so on. That is always difficult: everyone is in favour of moving freight on to the railways for environmental reasons, but no one wants freight terminals at the bottom of their garden.

Mr. Bill O'Brien (Normanton) (Lab): My hon. Friend the Member for Heywood and Middleton (Jim Dobbin) referred to the east and west ports, Hull and Liverpool. One of the problems is the lack of a high-speed rail link between the east and the west. We have the links between north and south. Has my hon. Friend the Minister given any thought to the possibility of developing a high-speed rail link from the east ports to
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1170
 
the west ports, which would be of tremendous value to those moving freight across from the west coast to the east coast and into Europe?

Dr. Howells: We are very much aware of the issue, but the huge sums that are currently being spent to upgrade the west coast main line will enormously increase the capacity for freight trains on that line. Also, we are doing a great deal of work to link the north–west via the west coast main line from the eastern ports, such as Felixstowe, which are major container ports. We will bring that traffic down, including 9 ft 6 in high boxes, which are essential, via the north London line, across on to the west coast main line and up to the north-west. There is a great deal of work going on, as we are anxious to achieve that. We are keen to see much faster transit of freight by rail from the east coast to the west coast.

Mr. John Taylor (Solihull) (Con): Is the Minister aware of a project recently considered in Solihull to link the Land Rover plant to the west coast main line? Surely, that would be compatible with the Government's policy of road on to rail. Would he care to give an indication that, if the Ford Motor Company were to revive that plan to connect the Land Rover plant to the west coast main line, the Government would approve and indicate their approval?

Dr. Howells: I have not seen any sign of that project yet, but we will certainly take a look at it. Of course, when Ford built its Bridgend plant many years ago, it paid part of the costs of rail connection on to the great western main line, which has proved very successful in moving products out of that plant. We would certainly be interested in the project, and we are very interested in what part the private sector can play in helping to fund such projects.

---