| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sir John Stanley: I am grateful to the Minister for giving that undertaking. I am well aware that Network Rail has taken the view that Mr. Kennedy's son, Mr. Alex Stedall, made the telephone call after the train had passed. There was another train, which had gone past. I myself have seen this morning the closed circuit television videotape. It shows incontrovertible evidence, which was not denied by the Network Rail and HSE representatives present. It shows Mr. Stedall—who was identified by his father and by himself, so there is no doubt about identification—opening the gate, going on to the line, looking, going quickly back and closing the gate, and the train then going past. There is no question whatever but that Mr. Stedall saw the train approaching him. The videotape evidence shows that he went back and closed the gate, and that the train then went past.
Dr. Howells: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that intervention. I shall certainly communicate his description of what he saw on the CCTV footage, and I will ask for answers that I hope will be useful to him.
Of course, one has always to try to place trust in the experts, and there is no doubt that the rail inspectorate has great experience in such matters. We have one of the very finest safety records in the world. Indeed, I was fortunate enough recently to visit Japan, where level crossings pose the biggest problem in terms of railways incidents. Level crossings pose difficult problems—and I am not talking about only private ones, or ones where special permissions have to be sought and granted, but public level crossings when people do idiotic things.
I want to know exactly what happened at this incident and I will certainly try to find out for the right hon. Gentleman. I want to reassure him that the necessary measures are being taken across the country. It is important that all our colleagues understand that because most of us have level crossings in our constituencies and we need to be aware of the fact that the HSE and Network Rail are concerned to ensure that we have safe level crossings.
I understand that further improvements to this particular level crossing using existing technology are unlikely to be cost-effective in relation to the level of risk in usage. I hate to be so utilitarian in saying that, as I am not insensitive to the risk in the light of what the right hon. Gentleman has told us about what happened to Mr. Kennedy's son.
I take the point, which the right hon. Gentleman has made vividly, that we are not talking about only one or two people on the level crossing who might be injured: if a vehicle is on the crossing, it could endanger the train itself. That is an important point, and we saw a terrible accident recently on the Worcester line, which resulted in deaths. That accident was the consequence
8 Jul 2004 : Column 1107
of the misuse of a level crossing. There are thousands of level crossings and one wonders how much it would cost to ensure that every single one of them was protected by much safer mechanical devices and procedures than we have at the moment. We have to look further into that matter.
I understand that the cost of installing miniature warning lights at this particular crossing has been estimated at £800,000. The right hon. Gentleman raises his eyebrows, as I did when I read that. I will certainly try to test that figure and see if it is true, but there are an awful lot of crossings up and down the country just like that one. If the cost of installing that sort of equipment at each of those crossings runs at about £800,000, one wonders how any Government or any rail company—it is a privatised railway these days—could afford to do such a thing. As I said, I will certainly test the figure for him.
Automatic barriers would be even more costly and I fear would probably be regarded by the auditors of this place as being wholly inappropriate, given the relatively small number of households served by the particular level crossing. However, Network Rail and the HSE are aware of the new developments of stand-alone warning-light systems driven by existing track circuiting, which could be cost-effective. We will take
8 Jul 2004 : Column 1108
a look at that one. Trials are planned and, if successful, it may prove to be a better solution to the problem of level crossings.
I do not want to give the right hon. Gentleman too bleak a picture in responding to the problem. There are certainly some interesting technological developments nowadays. I will examine them and I hope that we may be able to apply such solutions to such crossings. On the other hand, I do not want to give the right hon. Gentleman any false hope about what will be done at this crossing, as I am not even sure that it is appropriate or whether the technology will prove to be successful on British railways.
I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising this issue. I want to reassure him that the HSE and Network Rail are committed to ensuring the safe operation of all level crossings, especially the one about which the right hon. Gentleman has expressed considerable concern. I will ask the HSE and Network Rail for their response to the issues that the right hon. Gentleman has raised so that I can satisfy myself that the crossing does not constitute, as he put it, an accident waiting to happen.
Question put and agreed to.
- Adjourned accordingly at twenty-five minutes past Six o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |