| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Derek Twigg): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Marsden)on securing this debate. He and my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) are great champions of Blackpool and the issues it is faced with. I welcome the opportunity to hear at first hand the views on the Blackpool to Fleetwood tramway and to set out the Government's position in respect of its future.
I am aware that the Blackpool to Fleetwood tramway is the oldest continuously operating tramway in the UK. It has been operating since 1885, and it currently carries about 4 million passengers a year. The Government recognise that the tramway is an established part of the transport network on the Fylde coast. Blackpool council has spent £4.5 million over the past four years on essential maintenance to keep the tramway running. It says that a minimum of a further £16 million will be required over the next three years to maintain the existing tramway.
We therefore recognise the situation regarding the tramway's future. To do nothing in the next few years would mean that it could no longer operate in the way that it has been doing for many years. We also need to consider the tramway in the wider local and regional context. Blackpool's provisional local transport plan was submitted in July 2005. It highlighted three significant changes since the previous local transport plan, which crucially affect the context within which Blackpool council will seek to deliver its transport strategy. They are the decision to bid for the tramway upgrade; a revision of the local land use planning framework; and the development of a master plan for Blackpool and subsequent formation of an urban regeneration company to take this vision forward.
Blackpool council's master plan aims to transform the town, widening its appeal to fresh tourist markets both from the UK and abroad, and providing opportunities for the people of the town, especially those in the most vulnerable groups. The council recognised that the most significant challenge during its local transport plan period will be to deliver the development necessary to regenerate its resort economy, while still meeting sustainable transport objectives. Those objectives aim to minimise the impacts of traffic, encourage modal shift away from the car, minimise poor air quality and improve the accessibility of vital jobs and services, especially to the residents of deprived areas. The council considers that continuing access to a mass public transport system in the form of a modernised Blackpool to Fleetwood tramway is integral to the sort of regeneration anticipated by the master plan.
In 2001, Blackpool and Lancashire councils submitted a bid for a major upgrade to the system. That was rejected by my Department on value for money grounds. The promoters submitted a new major scheme business case in July 2005. Their preferred option, as set out in the business case, is to renew the existing track, replace the electrification infrastructure on the most
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1045
northern section of the line and replace the overhead conductor over the entire length of the line. They propose to meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 by a combined fleet of new low-cost tram vehicles, accessible trailer cars coupled to refurbished heritage trams and raised platforms at stops to enable level boarding.
The forecast outturn cost of that would be £96 million, of which the local councils would provide £24 million. The promoters are therefore seeking central Government funding of £72 million. In terms of value for money, which my hon. Friend referred to, the promoters say that their preferred option would have a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.57:1. Their assessment is that it will have a strong economical benefit and will have some additional benefits in terms of environment, safety, accessibility and integration objectives. My officials are reviewing the promoters' BCR and other claims. If the reported BCR turns out to be accurate, and it is established that all the non-monetised impacts will be positive, the scheme would be classified as offering medium value for money under the Department's guidance.
We require promoters, when presenting a business case to the Department, to consider alternative options. In this case, the promoters have considered three other options for system upgrade, which I shall briefly set out.
The next best alternative is similar to the preferred option, but with a reduced length of operation. It proposes the loss of a third of the northernmost section, with services turning around at the proposed loop at Thornton Gate. A lower cost alternative would further reduce the length of tramway, with the line terminating at Thornton Gate and Pleasure Beach. That would be coupled with minimal investment in infrastructure and vehicles. Special services would be provided by refurbished heritage units. Finally, a "do minimum" option has been considered, which proposes the retention of a tramway only between Pleasure Beach and North Pier, accepting the loss of its local transport function. My officials have worked closely with the promoters on their proposals and are carrying out an economic assessment of the business case to provide me with value for money advice on the scheme.
My hon. Friend raised specific questions about the Department's handling of the Blackpool bid. He suggested there has been some confusion among my officials about whether the bid is new. I assure him that there has been no confusion. My officials met Blackpool council in July 2005, before the bid was submitted, to understand the context of the bid. We have treated the submission as a new bid.
My hon. Friend asked whether the Department recognises that the bid has been substantially revised to meet the Department's earlier concerns about affordability and value for money, and that it meets the
9 Mar 2006 : Column 1046
Department's requirements. We recognise that the costs have been reduced significantly compared with Blackpool's previous bid. As I said, we are considering the value for money assessment, and I cannot say at this stage what the results will be.
My hon. Friend also asked whether I accept that the costs and risks of upgrading an existing system are lower than for a new system. I confirm that we recognise that certain risks are lower for an upgrade. For example, a new light rail system would require utility diversions and Transport and Works Act 1992 powers.
My hon. Friend suggested that questions have been raised only recently on the capital costs. We raised issues about the information on capital costs at the end of 2005, following the Department's and our consultants' initial assessment of the bid submitted at the end of July. Also, we recently had to consider how the costs in the bid relate to the costs indicated in the advice that we received from the north-west region at the end of January on its priorities for use of the regional funding allocation. As I indicated, we are still completing our assessment of the bid, and at this stage I have not made any decisions in respect of the Blackpool to Fleetwood tramway. Therefore, the debate is very timely. I will take my hon. Friend's points into account, as well as other advice that I have received and the advice that my officials will give me in due course.
Following the publication of regional funding allocations last year, the north-west regional bodies have provided me with advice on which schemes are prioritised within the region. My hon. Friend asked whether I am aware of the endorsement of the tram project by both the Northwest Development Agency and the North West regional assembly. The advice that I received from the regional bodies gives priority to the refurbishment of the tramway to help the economic regeneration of Blackpool. I have also had a representation from the North West regional assembly supporting the scheme.
Any decisions on the projects prioritised by the regional bodies will be made in due course. We will take account of their views in our final decision on spend within the regional transport allocations. That will include their views on the timing of any funding provision as well as the amount.
The debate has given me the opportunity to hear my hon. Friend's views on the future of the Blackpool to Fleetwood tramway. As he rightly said, I have also received other representations, not least on my recent visit to Blackpool. I understand that there is a great deal of interest in the tramway in Blackpool. Obviously, I am not in a position to make and give a decision at the moment, but I listened carefully to my hon. Friend, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do that
| Index | Home Page |