---

21 May 2009 : Column 1490W—continued

The Department for Transport is a federated organisation comprising a central Department and seven Executive Agencies. Conferences are organised in support of strategic objectives and the above data includes associated costs, such as stands and equipment.

The increase in costs is due to the hosting of conferences for Executive Agency stakeholders (where no such conferences previously existed) and increases in the frequency and scope of other conferences.

All expenditure was incurred in accordance with the principles of Managing Public Money and the Treasury handbook on Regularity and Propriety.

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect of the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Acts 1995 and 2005 on the process of (a) reopening and (b) upgrading railway stations. [276298]

Paul Clark: No direct assessment of the effect of the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Acts on the process of reopening and upgrading of railway stations has been made by the Department for Transport.

However, the Department recognises that the Disability Discrimination Acts have driven greater improvements to the accessibility of railway stations, both through infrastructure improvements, such as those funded through the Department’s £370 million Access for All programme, as well as through improvements in the policies and practices in place for the delivery of rail services.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the additional cost of works to (a) reopen and (b) upgrade railway stations incurred as a result of the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Acts 1995 and 2005 in the latest period for which figures are available. [276299]

Paul Clark: The Department for Transport has not made any assessment of additional costs incurred as a result of the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Acts.

The Disability Discrimination Acts have required rail station operators to make reasonable physical alterations at stations since 2004, so that disabled people do not find it impossible or unreasonably difficult to access rail services. What is reasonable is for the Courts, not the Department for Transport, to determine.

21 May 2009 : Column 1491W

In addition, since 2002 new infrastructure works at stations have been required to follow the standards set out in the Department’s code of practice on accessible train and station design for disabled people. However, these requirements are not directly attributable to the Disability Discrimination Acts.

Lorries

Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent assessment his Department has made of the effect on road maintenance costs of the use of the road network by heavy goods vehicles. [276451]

Paul Clark: The Department for Transport has recently produced estimates of the effects of articulated heavy goods vehicles on road maintenance costs as part of the work to produce new Mode Shift Benefit (MSB) values for use in the allocation of freight mode shift grants. The estimates, and the methodology used to produce them, are described in "Mode Shift Benefit Values—Technical Report":

www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/165226/443908/msbtechpaper.pdf

The underlying relationships between HGV traffic and highways maintenance were investigated in “Lorry Track and Environmental Costs”:

www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/environment/nera/

which the Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions published in April 2000.

M606 and M62

Mike Wood: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness in improving road travel conditions of the high occupancy vehicle lane on the M606 and M62. [276633]

Paul Clark: The M606-M62 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane has been operating for a year and the Highways Agency is investigating the benefits to road users. Initial results suggest that those using the HOV lane are saving around eight minutes in the weekday morning peak compared with before the HOV lane was
21 May 2009 : Column 1492W
built. Those approaching the junction and not using the HOV lane are saving around five minutes in the weekday morning peak. These results are broadly as anticipated. A detailed report of performance will be published in the summer.

Railways: East Midlands

Mr. McLoughlin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many Sunday train services operated by East Midland Trains between 14 December 2008 and 11 May 2009 ran on time; and how many such services were subject to alteration between Derby and London. [276665]

Paul Clark: This information is not held by the Department for Transport in the form requested. Reliability data for train services are held in the form of the Public Performance Measure which records the percentage of trains arriving punctually at their destination.

More detailed train performance data for the rail network are collected and held by Network Rail. The hon. Member may wish to contact Network Rail's chief executive at the following address for a response to his question:

Iain Coucher

Chief Executive

Network Rail

Kings Place

90 York Way

London N1 9AG

Railways: Franchises

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which rail franchise contracts provide for a time extension; what time extension is available in each case; and what conditions govern the extension. [276328]

Paul Clark [holding answer 19 May 2009]: With the exception of Southern Railway which is due to terminate on 19 September 2009, all English and Welsh rail franchises have an option for a time extension based on certain criteria. The criteria may be seen in the following table:

21 May 2009 : Column 1493W

21 May 2009 : Column 1494W

21 May 2009 : Column 1495W

21 May 2009 : Column 1496W

Franchise name	Trading name	Start date	Nominal end date	Extension
First Capital Connect Ltd.	First Capital Connect	April 2006	March 2010	The full term of the franchise is for nine years until 2015, but this depends on meeting performance targets. At the end of the fourth year these were met which gave an automatic two-year extension, and a further extension for up to three years is at the discretion of DfT.
London Eastern Railway Ltd.	National Express East Anglia (NXEA)	April 2004	March 2011	There is the possibility of a three-year extension to March 2014 based on a Continuation Review. If NXEA passes, DfT will extend, but NXEA can decide not to take up extension. If NXEA fails, DfT can decide to offer to extend the franchise but NXEA has the right to refuse. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
c2c	c2c	May 1996	May 2011	There is a potential seven period extension at DfT's discretion, or 26 period extension by mutual agreement.
Northern Rail Ltd.	Northern	December 2004	September 2011	There is the possibility of a two-year extension to September 2013 based on a Continuation Review. If Northern passes, DfT will extend, but Northern can decide not to take up extension. If Northern fails, DfT can decide to offer to extend the franchise but Northern has the right to refuse. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
West Coast Train (WCT)	Virgin Trains	March 1997	March 2012	There is a potential seven period extension at DfT discretion.
London and South Eastern Railway Ltd.	Southeastern	April 2006	March 2012	There is the possibility of a two-year extension to March 2014 based on a Continuation Review. If LSER passes, DfT will extend, but LSER can decide not to take up extension. If LSER fails, DfT can decide to offer to extend the franchise but LSER has the right to refuse. Dates are dependent on introduction of SLC2.
First/Keolis TransPennine Express Ltd.	TransPennine Express	February 2004	December 2012	There is a potential seven period extension at DfT discretion or 65 period extension by mutual agreement.
First Greater Western Ltd.	First Great Western	April 2006	April 2013	There is the possibility of a three-year extension to March 2016 based on a Continuation Review. If FGW passes, DfT will extend, but FGW can decide not to take up extension. If FGW fails, DfT can decide to offer to extend the franchise but FGW has the right to refuse. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
London and Birmingham Railway Ltd.	London Midland	November 2007	November 2013	There is the possibility of a two-year extension to September 2015 based on a Continuation Review. If LM passes, DfT will extend franchise. If LM fails, DfT can impose an extension. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
East Midlands Trains Ltd.	East Midlands Trains	November 2007	November 2013	There is the possibility of an 18-month extension to April 2015 based on a Continuation Review. If EMT passes, DfT will extend franchise. If EMT fails, DfT can impose an extension. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
Arriva Trains Cross Country Ltd.	Crosscountry	November 2007	November 2013	There is the possibility of a two-and-a-half year extension to March 2016 based on a Continuation Review. If XC passes, DfT will extend franchise. If XC fails, DfT can impose an extension. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
NXEC Trains Ltd.	NXEC	December 2007	December 2013	There is the possibility of an 18-month extension to March 2015 based on a Continuation Review. If NXEC passes, DfT will extend franchise. If NXEC fails, DfT can impose an extension. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
Stagecoach South West Trains Ltd.	Stagecoach South West Trains	February 2007	February 2014	There is the possibility of a three-year extension to February 2017 based on a Continuation Review. If SSWT passes, DfT will extend franchise. If SSWT fails, DfT can impose an extension. DfT can extend by up to seven periods at either expiry date.
Arriva Trains Wales/Trenau Arriva Cymru Ltd.	Arriva Trains Wales	December 2003	October 2018	Franchise Managed by Welsh Assembly Government. ATW has five-yearly efficient operator reviews which ATW must pass to continue to operate for another five years.
The Chiltern Railway Company Ltd.	Chiltern	March 2002	December 2021	There is no extension period for Chiltern Railways but DfT has the right to “shrink back” the franchise term to June 2014 if infrastructure schemes submitted by Chiltern are not deemed to be “sufficient”.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport for what maximum period of time a rail passenger service can be temporarily withdrawn before (a) the service must be fully restored and (b) closure provisions are enacted. [276725]

Paul Clark: No maximum time period is specified under the Railways Act 2005 for which a rail passenger service can be temporarily withdrawn.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether it is permissible for a rail passenger service to be temporarily withdrawn for an indefinite period when there is no time-scaled plan to restore the service or enact closure provisions. [276726]

Paul Clark: Under the Railways Act 2005 a rail passenger service can be temporarily withdrawn. No maximum time period is specified.

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what provisions exist to allow a referral to be made to the Office of Rail Regulation to determine whether changes to a rail passenger service constitute (a) temporary withdrawal of that service and (b) its closure. [276727]

Paul Clark: There are no provisions under the Railways Act 2005 to allow such a referral to be made.

Road Traffic Control: Urban Areas

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information local authorities provide to his Department on their traffic management in conurbations; and if he will make a statement. [277239]

Paul Clark: English local authorities outside London provide information on their delivery of traffic management measures, and relevant outcomes, through the Local Transport Plan (LTP) process. LTPs, and LTP progress reports, are available on local authority websites. At the request of the Department for Transport, LTP progress reports from 2006 and 2008 included information from these authorities on their delivery of the Network Management Duty, as introduced by the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Roads: Per Capita Costs

Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how much per head of population was spent from the public purse on roads in (a) rural and (b) urban areas in (i) 2007-08 and (ii) 2009 to date; [276461]

(2) how much his Department spent on (a) new building, (b) maintenance and (c) lighting in respect of roads in (i) rural and (ii) urban areas in each of the last 11 years. [276462]

Paul Clark: The information is not available in the form requested.

Funding for investment, maintenance and operation of strategic roads is the responsibility of the Highways Agency. These roads pass through both rural and urban areas, but it is not possible to allocate the spend between them. Details of Highways Agency expenditure are included in their Annual Report and Accounts at:

http://www.highways.gov.uk/aboutus/documents/Revised_Annual_Report_Accounts_25_07_08.pdf

Expenditure on non-strategic roads is for local authorities and Transport for London. The Department for Transport provides some support for this expenditure, but it is for local authorities to decide the proportion of their overall available resources to be spent on roads, and the allocation of resources to different parts of their area. Statistics on local government expenditure are available at:

---