Written Answers to Questions
Tuesday 10 July 2007
Transport
A21: Repairs and Maintenance
Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what her plans are for the A21 upgrade between Flimwell and Robertsbridge; and if she will make a statement. [148774]
Mr. Tom Harris:
None. Under the regional funding allocation process it is for regions to advise the Government on schemes, which in their view, should be prioritised for funding. Ministers then take decisions
on whether to accept that advice. In the case of the south east we have agreed in full to the recommendations made by the South East Regional Transport Board (RTB) for the period up to 2016. The proposed A21 upgrade between Flimwell and Robertsbridge has not been prioritised by the South East RTB in that period.
Bus Services: Concessions
Mr. Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much was spent by her Department on bus subsidy in the North East of England, broken down by (a) local authority and (b) bus operator in each of the last 10 years. [147305]
Ms Rosie Winterton: Since 1998, the Department has provided grants to local transport authorities through the Rural Bus Subsidy Grant, Rural and Urban Bus Challenge and Kickstart schemes. The table shows the total paid (in £s) to each authority in the North East region, and the regional total, for each year since the introduction of these grant schemes.
| £ | |||||||||
| Authority | 1998-99 | 1999-2000 | 2000-01 | 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07 |
The majority of local authority support for bus services is funded from the Government’s unhypothecated Revenue Support Grant and from other sources.
The Department also provides Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) directly to operators of local bus services. Bus routes cross local authority borders and it is not possible to allocate BSOG payments to different local authority areas with sufficient accuracy; information on payments to individual operators is commercially confidential. However, we estimate that BSOG payments to operators in the North East region now total around £24 million annually.
Cycling
Mr. Andrew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much (a) resource and (b) capital expenditure was made available for improving the convenience and safety of cycling in each of the last five years. [147084]
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department provides a central budget for cycling which since 2005-06 has been the responsibility of Cycling England.
| £ million | ||
| Resource/ r evenue | Capital | |
It is not possible to provide a split of funding between capital and revenue/resource for earlier years but central expenditure on cycling was as follows and largely related to capital expenditure.
| £ million | |
Funds in 2002-03 and 2003-04 were for our Cycling Projects Fund while funds in 2004-05 supported additional safe links to school and additional cycle parking at rail stations. In addition the Department provides revenue/resource funds through its Road Safety Grant Challenge Scheme. Details of the cycling grants awarded were as follows:
| £ | |
The majority of expenditure on cycling is spent by local highway authorities who receive capital funding from the Department through the Local Transport Plan system since 2001-02. We have no information on revenue spending. English authorities outside London have informed the Department that their investment in cycle facilities is as follows for the last five years:
| £ million | |
London boroughs also receive funding from the Department via a block settlement through Transport for London (TfL) and with other revenue streams. TfL has advised the Department that their investment in cycling facilities since 2001-02 is as follows and that around 80 per cent. of this money has been spent on physical infrastructure much of it to support the London Cycle Network+.
| £ million | |
Departments: Common Purpose
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much her Department paid to Common Purpose in each of the last five years; for what purpose; and what the outcome of the expenditure was. [147591]
Jim Fitzpatrick: The following payments have been made to Common Purpose over the last five years:
| £ | |
These payments relate to leadership development for senior managers within the Department to meet their individual development needs. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the development in meeting these needs has been, or will be, carried out by the individuals and their managers.
Departments: Public Transport
David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate her Department has made of the number of its staff using public transport to commute. [147344]
Jim Fitzpatrick: An estimate covering the full Department is not currently available, however the most recent survey of our London HQ buildings indicated that 92 per cent. of staff in the London HQ travel to work by cycling, walking or via public transport. The remaining 8 per cent. used a car or motorbike to travel to work.
DfT has plans to carry out new staff surveys as part of a development of site specific travel plans, which are due to be finalised by April 2008.
Driving Offences: Fixed Penalties
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment she has made of the potential effect on road safety of introducing a sliding scale of penalty points on a driving licence for speeding offences of varying gravity. [148378]
Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department for Transport issued a discussion note inviting comments on this in September 2004. The principle of a graduated scale was supported by the majority of respondents, and the Road Safety Act 2006 provides an enabling power to graduate the fixed penalty points awarded for speeding offences.
The Department’s objective is to help drivers to travel at safe and legal speeds at all times. The proposals for graduated speeding penalties are designed to recognise there are considerable differences in the degree of excessive speeding by motorists and for the punishment to better fit the crime. A graduated structure would allow more careful consideration of drivers who through lapses of concentration breach the speed limit by a relatively small amount and where even two penalty points are expected to act as a sufficient deterrent to prevent re-offending. It would also allow for a higher penalty of six penalty points to act as a strong deterrent against more extreme speeders who exceed the speed limit by large amounts.
The proposed final graduated penalty structure will be subject to statutory public consultation before it is considered by both Houses under the affirmative resolution procedure.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |