|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Gillian Merron [holding answer 8 January 2007]: The review on Class 2 and Class 3 vehicles has raised a number of issues in a very complex area which are being carefully considered before decisions can be taken about implementation.
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how the four formal safety recommendations arising from the FV Gaul Re-opened Formal Investigation have been implemented; and what the date of implementation was of each. 
The Report of the re-opened formal investigation into the loss of the FV Gaul made four recommendations for consultation with the fishing industry. In putting these recommendations forward, the Wreck Commissioner was aware that they were likely to have been superseded by improvements in design and working practices that had evolved over the
30 years since the loss of the FV Gaul. Nevertheless, he considered that, because of their fundamental importance to the safety of fishing vessels, they should be reviewed again.
permanent openings into critical internal spaces of a vessel, that could be submerged periodically and that are required to be kept open for intermittent purposes during fishing operations can usually be avoided by design. Such openings that do exist should have effective and, ideally passive or automatic means of closure;
automatic pumping arrangements together with water level alarms should be fitted to any space which may be vulnerable to flooding which would significantly reduce the vessels stability;
warning lights should be installed in the wheelhouse to indicate any openings, watertight doors or hatches which remain open.
The issues covered by these recommendations were initially addressed by the Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Rules 1975, which came into force in 1 May 1975. For vessels built on or after 1 January 1999, further safety requirements were introduced by the Fishing Vessels (EC Directive on Harmonised Safety Regime) Regulations 1999, which came into force on 1 December 1999.
The final recommendation was that a CCTV camera, with a monitor on the bridge, should be fitted to allow the officer of the watch to monitor continually any large working spaces that are vulnerable to flooding and which may be left unattended for relatively long periods of time.
The Fishing Vessels (EC Directive on Harmonised Safety Regime) Regulations 1999 require all vessels to be fitted with an audio and visual alarm (not necessarily a CCTV camera). It is considered that this requirement ensures an equivalent level of protection against flooding of the spaces mentioned in the recommendation.
Since the publication of the report on the FV Gaul in 2004, the Departments Fishing Industry Safety Group (FISG), which includes representatives of the fishing industry, has been conducting-a review of all Rules and Regulations applicable to vessels of 24 m registered length and over. This review will consolidate, update and enhance the current legislation into one Code of Practice, in line with Better Regulation principles.
The review is expected to be completed in the spring and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) will then undertake a consultation exercise on behalf of FISG. The intention is that the new Code will come into force in winter 2007-08, and will also take account of the four recommendations made in the FV Gaul report.
Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the estimated consumption of fuel by (a) UK hauliers and (b) foreign registered hauliers on UK roads was in the last year for which figures are available. 
Dr. Ladyman: 9.2 million tonnes of UK diesel were consumed by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) in 2005, which includes fuel purchased in the UK but used outside it, but does not include fuel purchased outside the UK. It is not possible to break this figure down into consumption by domestic and foreign HGVs.
This figure is published in table 3.1 of Transport Statistics Great Britain: 2006. The publication is available in the Library of the House and on the Department for Transports website at the following link:
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many information technology projects within the responsibility of his Department, its agencies and their predecessors have been cancelled since 1997; what the total cost was of each project at cancellation; and if he will make a statement. 
Gillian Merron: The Department for Transport was formed in summer 2002. Information on DfT projects is only held from that point in time. Information from 1997 could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Highways Agency: CEO and Correspondence Unit Document Management System (CECO)cost at cancellation: £227,574.
DfT (central): Electronic Documents and Records Management System (EDRM)cost at cancellation: £853,899.
1. The Driving Standards Agency cannot answer this question without reaching the disproportionate cost threshold.
2. The Vehicle Certification Agency has a nil return within UK In respect of its overseas offices it is de-minimus (<£2,000 pa) over the last four years. A further breakdown could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
3. It is not possible for Highways Agency to reply to this question without incurring disproportionate cost as individual case files would need to be examined to ascertain the information requested. The agencys reporting system does not differentiate between costs for legal advice and other legal services such as conveyancing, which may or may not include providing legal advice. In addition, in many cases, settlements are paid to claimants via the agencys legal representative such as Treasury Solicitor, and these amounts are also not differentiated in the accounting system and therefore cannot be ascertained without incurring disproportionate cost. Further, legal advice is also provided by some of the consultancies employed by the agency, the costs of this legal advice can not be differentiated from costs of other services provided.
Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how the £8 billion announced on 18 December 2006 will be allocated to local transport authorities in each year covered by the allocation. 
Gillian Merron: All the funding is for local transport capital and the £8 billion total is for five financial years (2006-07 to 2010-11). It consists of three funding streams allocated in different ways.
(i) a formula, which considers local transport pressures;
(ii) the distribution of the equivalent funding in the previous five years (of most importance for the earlier years); and
(iii) the Department for Transports classifications of the quality of the forward local transport plans and the delivery of the previous plans.
Secondly, funding for highways capital maintenance (approximately £3.6 billion) is being allocated largely according to a formula which considers pressures for road, bridge and (from 2007-08 onwards) street lighting capital maintenance. A small proportion (less than 10 per cent.) of the funding is being allocated in response to bids from local authorities for specific projects, mainly for strengthening bridges on main roads.
Thirdly, funding for major projects (in almost all cases each costing more than £5 million) is allocated in response to bids from local authorities. For 2007-08 onwards decisions about which projects are funded are being influenced by advice from regional bodies. The exact funding levels for local authority projects depend on the priorities in each region between trunk road and local authority schemes. On the basis of the previous distribution, £2 billion to £2.5 billion of local authority projects would be funded over the five years.
More details about the allocation process are published on the Department for Transports website under the local transport capital settlement 2006 heading at www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtrans/documents/divisionhomepage/032393.hcsp and under the regional funding allocation heading at www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtrans/documents/divisionhomepage/039134.hcsp
Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether the £3 billion announced on 18 December 2006 for the local transport capital settlement includes the £1.6 billion from the previous year. 
(i) allocations totalling £1.254 billion for 2007-08 to support integrated transport improvements and highways capital maintenance; and
(ii) indicative allocations for integrated transport totalling just short of £1.8 billion for 2008-09 to 2010-11.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the occasions since he has held his present office when he has used (a) rail services, (b) the London Underground, (c) tram or light railway services and (d) buses in connection with his ministerial duties. 
Gillian Merron [pursuant to the reply, 11 December 2006, Official Report, c. 736W]: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has also made one journey on a light railway service in connection with his ministerial duties since he was appointed to his present office.
This is available on the Department for Transports website at http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_ transstats/documents/page/dft_transstats_611935.hcsp and is also available in hard copy from the Library of the House.
Mr. Arbuthnot: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many passengers used (a) Bentley, (b) Fleet, (c) Hook, (d) Winchfield and (e) Liphook railway stations in 2005-06; how many passengers he expects to use each station in each of the next 10 years; and what plans he has to change capacity at these stations. 
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department does not have definitive figures of passenger use, however, the following figures for passenger use of the listed stations have been derived from the LENNON system in line with industry practice.
With regards to future usage, the Network Rail Route Utilisation Strategy assumed a growth 20 per cent. over 10 years. The Department in letting the new South Western franchise asked bidders to develop innovative means to manage the expected increase in capacity.
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department currently has no plans to publish this information. However, through the cross-industry Rail Sustainable Development Group, the passenger and freight rail sectors intend to report annually, starting in 2007, on their performance against a range of sustainability measures. This is expected to include data on diesel and electricity consumption.
In addition, the Office of Rail Regulation recently consulted on discharging its sustainable development and environmental duties including through the regular publication of key rail performance indicators such as energy consumption. ORR will publish its draft conclusions in February 2007 with final conclusions following in May.
Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport in how many and what proportion of road traffic accidents exceeding the speed limit was given as a contributory factor to the incident in each of the last five years; and how many of these accidents resulted in a fatality. 
Dr. Ladyman: The information requested for 2005 has been published by the Department on its website in table 6 of the article Contributory factors to road accidents. This article can be found at the following web address:
Dr. Ladyman [holding answer 8 January 2007]: Information on public (central and local government) and private funding for transport infrastructure in Great Britain is published in Table 1.14 of Transport Statistics Great Britain (TSGB), which is available on the Department for Transports website (www.dft.gov.uk) and is available in the Library of the House. These figures cover both new construction and structural maintenance, but the available expenditure data do not enable new road construction to be identified as a separate category.
Information on expenditure on road maintenance for England and Wales is available from Tables 8.2 and 8.3 of the National Road Maintenance Condition Survey 2005, also available on the Department for Transports website (www.dft.gov.uk) and the Library. Data for Scotland are published in Table 11.2 and 11.3 Scottish Transport Statistics 2006 Edition by the Scottish Executive, available on www.scotland.gov.uk. These sources identify expenditure on structural maintenance, but overlaps in definition mean that these sources can not be combined with the investment data from Table 1.14 to estimate total expenditure on road building and maintenance.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|