---

Dr. John Pugh (Southport) (LD): What studies have been conducted into the effect of the expressway parallel to the M6 on rail patronage, given that £7 billion has gone into the west coast main line?

Mr. Darling: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the number of people using our railways is increasing, with more than 1 billion passengers being carried by the railways last year. Indeed, when the first phase of the west coast main line is completed in September, it will become a more attractive proposition. I cannot agree with what is implicit in his comments, which is that the way to get more people to use trains is to make it increasingly difficult to go up and down the M6—[Interruption.] The Liberal Democrats always give the distinct impression that that is what they are saying. We need to invest in road and rail capacity to give people a proper choice.

Mr. Colin Challen (Morley and Rothwell) (Lab): If I understood correctly my right hon. Friend's answer to the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood), he suggested that, were car sharing allowed on the M4 bus lane, it would lead to more congestion. Will extra capacity for such lanes elsewhere in the country be reserved for public transport, so that we can avoid the possibility that he mentioned in relation to the M4?
 
6 Jul 2004 : Column 698
 

Mr. Darling: I do not want to over-complicate the proposal before it is too old. I propose additional capacity for cars containing two or more people: adding more and more people before the hour is out will lead to disaster. However, as my hon. Friend knows, there are many examples of bus lanes and other measures that give priority to public transport. This proposal is specifically about car pool lanes, however, and is very much modelled on what happens in parts of the United States. As I said, it works there, and I do not see why, in principle, it cannot work here.

Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con): What are the safety implications of turning existing hard shoulders into running lanes?

Mr. Darling: The hon. Lady is right that there are safety implications, which is why we are considering them carefully. She may recall that, a couple of years ago, I announced that we were going to consider the use of the hard shoulder on the M42 at peak times, to try to relieve congestion. Obviously, a lot of new technology is required to make sure that traffic speeds reduce and cars can run safely. Again, that works in continental Europe—for example, in Holland—and it is one way of making better use of existing capacity. The alternative is to build more lanes on the M42, which would have an environmental effect.

My strategy is clear: let us have additional capacity where it is required, but let us get the most out of the assets that we already have. I think that I heard the current Conservative spokesman say such a thing on a Sunday television programme a few weeks ago—[Interruption.] Perhaps I was listening to the wrong programme; it was someone who looked like the hon. Gentleman and who claimed to be the Conservative transport spokesman, but they are changing so fast now that we can never be sure. The hon. Lady's point in relation to safety is important, and we shall certainly consider it.

Tony Wright (Cannock Chase) (Lab): The M6 toll road is a considerable achievement. There was quite a stir last year, however, when a director of one of the companies involved said that the terms of the contract, with the absence of Government regulation, meant that it was the best opportunity for monopoly pricing anywhere in the world. He was quoted in The Daily Telegraph as saying,"We won't see anything like this ever again." Will my right hon. Friend assure us that, in contract terms, we will not see anything like this ever again?

Mr. Darling: If I recall rightly, the gentleman in question was taken out and shot—metaphorically, at least. I was never sure whether he was shot because he said the wrong thing, or whether he was being remarkably candid about what his company thought. One of the features of the midland express contract, which was signed in 1992, is that the company has the absolute right to charge whatever it wants—within some constraints, but it has fairly free rein. Obviously, we need to examine that, because there is an issue of public policy. Hauliers are deeply unhappy about the £11 charge that they face at the moment.
 
6 Jul 2004 : Column 699
 

Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire) (Con): The Secretary of State said that the benefits of the toll road had been spread as far as Stoke-on-Trent. I ask him to consider whether that might be partly due to the completion of the A50 link road. When will that concrete road be resurfaced with a better, less noisy surface? Will the scheme that the Secretary of State has announced fall under schemes of national importance as far as the Transport and Works Act 1992 is concerned?

Mr. Darling: I need to consider the latter point—it is certainly a pretty major scheme. In relation to concreting, I had better write to the hon. Gentleman and see what point the programme has reached. I am glad, however, that he recognises that the improvements to roads are beginning to bear fruit. He might want to reflect on the fact that if that programme were to be cut drastically, it would have an adverse effect.

Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab): The Secretary of State will be aware that my constituency is in the enviable position of stretching exactly between junctions 15 and 16 of the M6. There has already been much uncertainty about the impact of M6 widening, especially how we would fit just one lane on each side on the stretches between Seabridge, Keele, Audley and Betley in my constituency, and between Butterton and Madeley in the Stone constituency. He will be aware that there will be immense concern about how a four or six-lane expressway will run parallel with the M6. Will he therefore say a little more about how the national consultation will work, and what undertakings he can give to me and my constituents in the borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme that their voices will be heard and not drowned out?

Mr. Darling: Of course all voices will be heard. As I said earlier, the in-principle consultation will allow my hon. Friend and all his constituents ample opportunity to say what they think. In relation to the planning process, when a route is proposed, whether it is a widening or a new scheme, it is also subject to consultation, which is why I was at a loss to understand the criticism that was made earlier. People have every right to be consulted. I hope that we can avoid the situation that we had with the existing M6 toll: the contract was signed in 1992 and given the go-ahead in the mid-1980s, but I am told that it was first discussed when Harold Wilson was Prime Minister. That gives the House some idea of how long it takes to build anything in this country.

Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): Will the Secretary of State confirm that hard shoulders have been provided on motorways because highway engineers, road safety experts and the emergency services believe that they are a vital road safety measure that enable broken-down vehicles to avoid fast-moving traffic. In his calculations, how many crashes, injuries and deaths is he prepared to accept?

Mr. Darling: Not for the first time, the hon. Gentleman goes a little bit over the top. In relation to the M42, we are going to see whether hard shoulder running at peak times works, and considerable discussion, not just with highway operators but with the police, fire and
 
6 Jul 2004 : Column 700
 
ambulance services and others, has taken place. This has worked successfully in the Netherlands, for example, which has very heavy road usage, and it is worth considering. He is right that safety is important, and we take it very seriously.

Mr. David Kidney (Stafford) (Lab): In the 1990s, the Conservative Government published and then withdrew proposals to widen the M6 motorway by what was called the parallel widening method. Is it intended that the expressway would fill the route of those proposed parallel works?

Does my right hon. Friend accept that Stafford contains the greatest concentration of houses and environmentally sensitive sites on the entire route? Does the plan give Stafford a wide berth? If not, has he dusted off the part of the multi-modal study that suggested a brand-new road rather than a monster motorway through Staffordshire?

Mr. Darling: My hon. Friend is right to raise environmental concerns, and concerns for those whom he represents. The consultation is about whether, in principle, we should build a tolled expressway rather than widen the road. No specific route is included in the consultation; when we reach that stage we shall have to consult people, because they will want to know exactly where the road would be built, but that is the second stage rather than the first.

---