| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1910W—continued
Highways Agency: Expenditure
Greg Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much the Highways Agency spent on programme expenditure in Tunbridge Wells local authority area in the most recent year for which figures are available. [111367]
Dr. Ladyman: The information requested is not available.
Historic Vessels
Mr. Steen:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what (a) statutory provisions and (b) custom and practice apply to the display of port letters
and numbers on historic vessels which are not fishing for profit; and if he will make a statement. [111410]
Dr. Ladyman: There is no statutory provision which allows historic fishing vessels to display port letters and numbers once they have been removed from the Register. Regulation 113 of The Merchant Shipping (Registration of Ships) Regulations 1993 states that
“If a ship’s registration is terminated, whether by expiration of the registration period or otherwise, the marking prescribed under these regulations must be removed from the ship and written confirmation of that removal must be sent to the Registrar”
Ships that were previously granted Historic Registration status by the Registrar before the 1993 regulations came into force on 21 March 1994 have been allowed to retain the de-faced port letters and numbers provided they can produce the original letter and notification granting such status. New applications are not being considered given the requirement made under regulation 113.
Local Transport
Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much local transport grant was given to City of York unitary council in each year since the council's creation; and what criteria are used to assess how much each local authority receives. [111282]
Gillian Merron: The City of York council was created in 1996. Total local transport capital funding for the authority each year has been as follows:
| Total funding (£ million) | |
This included capital funding for major schemes (those over £5 million), maintenance and local integrated transport.
Total funding for 2007-08 is £6.31 million, which was announced as part of the 2006 local transport settlement in December. This is divided into an integrated transport block and funding for maintenance.
The funding allocations for the integrated transport block for York announced in December as part of the 2006 local transport settlement are as follows:
| City of York | |
| Allocation £ million | |
The 2007-08 allocation is the previously published planning guideline with an uplift of 12.5 per cent. because the council’s local transport plan for 2006- 2011 was assessed as excellent.
In addition, the total capital highway maintenance funding allocation for City of York council for 2007-08 is £1.419 million, all of which is formula funding. We have also provided £0.75 million for capital works on the detrunked sections of the A1079 and A1237. This is in addition to the maintenance allocation outlined above.
Major schemes are no longer included in the local transport settlement. We responded separately in July to the advice from the regions about their priorities for major transport projects—including those promoted by local authorities—up to 2015-16. The Yorkshire and the Humber region is getting £175 million over the next two years.
Nationally, £683 million is being provided for highways capital maintenance in 2007-08. Most (£634 million) is being distributed formulaically. The formula reflects the size and condition of local roads, bridges and street lights. Funding of £47 million is being allocated in response to bids for major maintenance and strengthening on the primary route network and for smaller authorities' exceptional maintenance schemes, and £2 million is to be allocated at a future date.
We are providing £571 million for integrated transport in 2007-08. Its distribution is influenced by three factors: a formula representing local pressures, the previous pattern of distribution and how well authorities have planned and delivered their transport objectives. Indicative allocations of £1,760 million are also being made for the three-year period from 2008-09 to 2010-11 to provide increased certainty and stability for local authorities to plan ahead. These are subject to the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review.
Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how his Department assesses the quality and performance of local authorities' local transport plans; what assessment his Department has made of City of York council's plans; and if he will make a statement. [111283]
Gillian Merron: As part of the 2006 local transport settlement, each of the 82 local transport plans in England (outside London) has been assessed against benchmarks grouped into nine criteria. These criteria cover areas such as road safety and congestion as well as how the plan fits in with wider transport policy aims and reflects local priorities. They are based on the central Government and Local Government Association agreed set of shared priorities for transport.
For each of the criteria, each plan is assessed as being weak, fair, good or excellent. Plan classifications are derived from the balance of the criteria classifications.
The City of York council’s second local transport plan (for 2006-11) was assessed as “excellent”. The “excellent” classification means that the Department found evidence of a very high standard of transport planning. The plan builds on the foundations of the
first plan (for 2001-06), which has delivered a wide range of benefits for local people.
These include the development of very successful park and ride systems and the new “Overground” bus network, which will evolve into a comprehensive public transport network for local users. The City of York council has already reported a growing number of people using the bus network, in addition to the increasing numbers of people making use of the improved facilities for walking and cycling.
Together with a robust parking management policy and the introduction of the urban traffic congestion management system, these improvements have delivered a significant reduction in traffic and cars parked in the city.
Motorway Cameras
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport for what reason a number of cameras on tall yellow-painted poles have been sited on the M1 motorway near to the junction with the M18 and on the M18 carriageway verge near to the M1; whether these cameras are permanent; and if he will make a statement. [110923]
Dr. Ladyman: The Highways Agency have erected speed cameras between Junction 31 (A57) and Junction 32 (M18) while works to construct a fourth lane of the northbound and southbound carriageway of the M1 are ongoing. The cameras have been installed to enforce a 50 mph speed limit for the safety of drivers and road workers. The cameras will be removed once the works have been completed.
Railways
Mr. Arbuthnot: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the number of standing passengers on peak hour trains between Waterloo and (a) Fleet, (b)Winchfield, (c) Hook, (d) Liphook and (e) Bentley stations; and what projections of these figures he has made for each of the next 20 years. [110919]
Mr. Tom Harris [holding answer 24 January 2007]: The Department does not hold this information.
With regards to future usage, the Network Rail Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS) assumed a growth of 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.
Rights of Way: Disabled Access
Mr. Dai Davies:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what powers are available to the highways
authority to ensure rights of way are accessible to disabled people. [115950]
Barry Gardiner: I have been asked to reply.
Recent legislation requires provision for disabled people to be considered equally with that of other rights of way users—for example, when determining the management of access to the countryside. The most significant areas of legislation are outlined as follows:
Disability Discrimination Acts—The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 covers all functions of public bodies, not just services and, therefore, includes the provision of public footpaths and other rights of way. It requires public bodies to promote disability equality and to have had Disability Equality Schemes in place since December 2006. A Disability Equality Scheme needs to:
i. Explain how equality for disabled people will be promoted
ii. Challenge discrimination against disabled people
iii. Help remove barriers for all disabled people.
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000—Under section 60 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (the CROW Act), local highway authorities are required to prepare and publish a Rights of Way Improvement Plan by November 2007. They are also required to review it not less than 10 years after publication. In developing the plan, the needs of disabled people must be taken into consideration. Further advice on what this involves is contained in the statutory guidance issued to local highway authorities by DEFRA in November 2002.
In addition, under section 69 of the CROW Act, to be commenced later this year, highway authorities must consider the needs of disabled people when authorising the erection of stiles and gates or other works on footpaths or bridleways.
Local highway authorities also have a duty to prevent, as far as possible, the stopping up or obstruction of public rights of way. Failure to do so can have a significant effect on accessibility for disabled people.
Road Building and Improvements
Mr. Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of new motorway and trunk road to at least dual carriageway standard are planned. [110625]
Dr. Ladyman: The following table lists the trunk road and motorway schemes currently in the Targeted Programme of Improvements, which provides new or additional lengths of motorway and trunk road to at least dual carriageway standard.
These schemes will be delivered subject to the satisfactory completion of statutory processes and the availability of funding.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |