---

Kent Rail Franchise

8. Jonathan Shaw (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab): What assessment he has made of the Strategic Rail Authority's proposed Integrated Kent Rail Franchise. [179616]

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Kim Howells): The Strategic Rail Authority's consultation on service patterns for the Integrated Kent Rail Franchise ended on 23 April. It is assessing responses before finalising the specification of services.

Jonathan Shaw: Is my hon. Friend aware that the last time that the Kent rail timetable was reviewed was in 1963? What concerns me is that that coincides with another event of 1963, namely the great train robbery. We in Medway are concerned that the SRA will propose a reduction in commuter services. While we welcome the channel tunnel rail link domestic services stopping in the Medway towns, we have always argued that this should involve additional rail services, particularly given the 5 per cent. growth in the Thames gateway area. Will the Minister confirm that we need additional rail services rather than a reduction in peak commuter services into London, given the predicted growth?

Dr. Howells: May I remind my hon. Friend that railways in this country are not a free good? They cost a lot of money. We have built the first new railway for a hundred years, through Kent, which will benefit enormously the people of Kent, as it will benefit the rest of the country. His question about those services being entirely additional to those already existing raises a number of issues. Some of the domestic services will have to have pathways cleared in the existing timetable if they are to run and if people are to get into the centre of London more quickly—

Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con): Is that a no?

Dr. Howells: I hear the call from the Tories that they do not want any of this. That is fine. If they are reflecting what their constituents feel, and they do not want channel tunnel rail link domestic services into the centre of London, they should be honest enough to come out and say so. We will try to make sure that there is the maximum capacity in terms of passengers being able to access central London, both on the existing network and on the new network.

Hugh Robertson (Faversham and Mid-Kent) (Con): Under the Strategic Rail Authority's proposals, villages such as Hollingbourne, Harrietsham and Lenham in my constituency stand to lose all their rail services in the middle of the day and at weekends. Given that those are exactly the same villages that were decimated by the channel tunnel rail link workings in the mid-1990s, will
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1177
 
the Minister undertake today to honour the commitments given at that time to ensure that rail services are improved?

Dr. Howells: I understand that the SRA has had 4,200 responses to its consultation. It is going through those responses, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman responded on behalf of his constituents. I assume that he would agree that the proper way forward is for the SRA to make the judgment as to how best to ensure that existing capacity is maintained and improved wherever possible, and that people can get from Kent into London more quickly. Those people's jobs depend on it, and many of the services provided in the economy of London depend on people from Kent being able to get easily into London.

Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that the high-speed link is for the benefit of the whole country? In that case, should it not be top-sliced in respect of its cost, so that the SRA does not take that into account in determining what moneys are available to support the franchise?

Dr. Howells: I am not quite sure what system of payment my hon. Friend is proposing. All I know is that it must still be paid for, and that in the end, the Government pay for it.

Mr. Damian Green (Ashford) (Con): The Minister will be aware that the overwhelming majority of those 4,000 responses to the Strategic Rail Authority were hostile—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) seems to get in an awful state when he is not called. I must tell him that those on the Front Bench put in a request, and it is not my fault when that happens. When he does not get called, he should take it in good spirit. That is important.

Mr. Green: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope that I will also represent the views of my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker), who, I understand, feels strongly about this issue. The Minister will know, as he has referred to the 4,000 responses, that the overwhelming hostility to the SRA's proposals for the Kent franchise, which he also hears from his Back Benchers, is precisely because the SRA proposes cutting services to many smaller stations around Kent. Can he assure the House that we will not see a perverse effect from the billions of pounds that he has said have been invested in the channel tunnel rail link? As things stand, overall rail services in Kent will get worse. It seems a colossal waste of taxpayers' money to invest money in a new railway, and to have, as a direct result, worse rail services.

Dr. Howells: I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle because I am sure that he could have put that question a bit better, as we have had this question time and again. I say to the Front-Bench spokesman that the industry is privatised, and that his party privatised it. The days of the Government being able to intervene on the railways,
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1178
 
in the way that he describes, are long gone, and he knows that full well. What he is doing is making a cheap political point, and his constituents will understand it.

Bus Quality Contract Scheme

9. Mr. Colin Challen (Morley and Rothwell) (Lab): When he intends to publish the results of the consultation on reducing the 21-month minimum waiting period for implementing a bus quality contract scheme. [179617]

The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling): We are considering the responses to the consultation, and we will be announcing its outcome shortly.

Mr. Challen: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, because anything that brings closer the day when we have better bus services will be very welcome. Is he aware that I often receive complaints from my constituents, in unparliamentary language, about the quality of some of our local bus services, particularly in my local villages? Recently, one bus service was removed to improve the service to another village—robbing Peter to pay Paul. We need to investigate how to improve bus services. Will my right hon. Friend be willing to meet me when I have completed my local bus transport survey, to discuss its results?

Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend and other Members on both sides will agree that bus services are working quite well in some areas, where we have seen an increase in patronage and the services are satisfactory. In other areas, however, there have been difficulties. As I have said before, we are looking at those matters and will come forward with proposals in due course. I am firmly of the view that we should try to build on what works, then make adjustments to deal with aspects that do not work, rather than go back to the drawing board.

CABINET OFFICE

The Minister was asked—

Internet

20. Mr. Anthony D. Wright (Great Yarmouth) (Lab): How people who cannot use the internet will be able to   benefit from the Directgov approach to service delivery. [179601]

The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Douglas Alexander): Directgov, which was launched earlier this year, is available not just on the internet but to 7 million homes with interactive TV. Cabinet Office officials are looking at other channels, such as mobile telephones, to make sure that Directgov is available to as many people as possible.

For those who do not have the skills or ready access to these technologies at home or at work, the Government have established 6,000 UK Online centres, which offer
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1179
 
free or low-cost access and deliver online learning to help and encourage people to enjoy the benefits of information and communications technology.

Mr. Wright: I thank the Minister for that response. I have visited the Directgov site and found it extremely useful, and I imagine that many of my constituents will find it useful. The many online centres in my constituency, including at Greenacre school, Breydon middle school and Great Yarmouth high school, have worked extremely well for the community. However, there are still many people, such as the elderly and disabled, who cannot access those online centres and find it difficult to fund digital television or personal computers. What assistance can my hon. Friend offer to my constituents in Great Yarmouth who cannot access those centres but would find it extremely useful to go online to the Directgov site?

Mr. Alexander: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question, which raises several important issues. He is right to identify that there are a number of UK Online centres in his constituency—nine in Great Yarmouth and a further 13 within a 15-mile radius. The challenge of getting the United Kingdom online is one that the Government have embraced, although there are some specific barriers, which my hon. Friend identifies. Income continues to affect internet access: 12 per cent. of the lowest income groups have home internet access compared with 86 per cent. of the highest income groups. That is why the Government continue to pursue their anti-poverty strategy. The age gap is also considerable in terms of those who use online services. It is more difficult to get older people to use UK Online centres, so last year we ran the "Get Started" campaign, which specifically targeted the elderly community, among other groups, to make sure that we gave every advice and assistance to people who wanted to become silver surfers. I shall be happy to write to my hon. Friend to set out the strategy that the Government are adopting in relation to his constituency.

Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam) (LD): I congratulate the Government on the clear interface of the new Directgov website, which serves to highlight the inadequacy and complexity of many of the other Government websites to which it leads. Will the new head of e-Government who has recently been appointed have the authority to insist that other Departments use improved web standards to make them as clear as the Directgov site?

Mr. Alexander: I thank the hon. Gentleman for that typically charitable question. We of course take great pride in the Directgov site, which is a significant improvement on its predecessor, UK Online. We are receiving extremely positive customer feedback about the site. On the substantive point that the hon. Gentleman raises, when Ian Watmore takes up his new position in the Cabinet Office in September, one of his tasks will be to work effectively with other people in a range of Departments to ensure that our offering has consistently high standards. We believe that he will take to that task with relish, which is consistent with the whole drive towards e-Government that we have advanced during this Parliament.
 
22 Jun 2004 : Column 1180
 

Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most effective ways of Government interfacing with the public is through services provided by post offices? Does he also agree that we should do everything possible to maintain a comprehensive post office network through which we can have a real interface between the Government, IT services and the public?

Mr. Alexander: My hon. Friend has asked an important question about the future of post offices and I will happily communicate his point to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. I would say, however, that if we reflect on the capacity for post offices to use banking services and, in particular, to drive profitability—we should not lose sight of the fact that the Post Office continues to be the largest retail network in the UK—the electronic offering of banking services from a range of post offices is entirely consistent with the good work being undertaken by Post Office management to ensure that the units are commercially viable wherever they exist in the country.

Mr. Oliver Heald (North-East Hertfordshire) (Con): I welcome the Minister back and congratulate him on the birth of his daughter.

Recent American research has shown by a huge margin that the public would rather deal with the Government through other methods rather than the web. Low public take-up of e-government in this country seems to confirm that. Why, then, has the Minister ordered that all external public services should be web-based? Has he not seen the misery caused to pensioners by scrapping the pension order book? Is he now going to force them to apply for other services online and, if so, what is the timetable?

Mr. Alexander: I hardly know where to begin in answering that question. First, pensioners will, of course, continue to be able to receive cash over the counter at their post offices, despite the scaremongering of Opposition politicians. Secondly, it is a characteristically Luddite position of the Conservative party to suggest that the Government should not match other sectors in society in providing web-based offerings of its services. Thirdly, I would point out that considerable progress has been made in getting the UK online under the present Government. On broadband access, for example, considerable progress has been made, and both the public and private sector have worked effectively to drive up the take-up level, so it ill behoves the hon. Gentleman to suggest that his constituents would not want access to those services.

---