| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
14 July 2009 : Column 44WH—continued
12.21 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Chris Mole): First, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for City of York (Hugh Bayley) on securing the debate and giving us an opportunity to discuss rail services on the east coast main line. Clearly, the subject is of interest to many Members of the House.
In addressing the many issues that have been raised, I doubt that I will be able to cover the swathe of hypotheticals offered by the Opposition Front-Bench spokesman, the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond), which were invariably spurious.
The east coast main line is an exceptionally valuable asset in the national transport system. It provides the fastest surface transport between London and the Yorkshire and Humber region, north-east England, Edinburgh and beyond. It is also vital for freight, particularly as part of the link from major ports to distribution centres in large conurbations and to coal-fired power stations.
The east coast main line is a busy route, which is used by six of the 16 passenger train operating companies, two open-access operators, which my hon. Friend the Member for Selby (Mr. Grogan) mentioned, and freight operators. Its value is underlined by the demand to run additional services. Last year, for example, the Office of Rail Regulation considered applications for additional passenger services from not only National Express East Coast and the two existing open-access operators, but two aspirant open-access operators.
At this time, there is rightly a focus on the difficulties of National Express East Coast. However, before I talk about the Government's plans for the future of the franchise, it is worth reminding ourselves that the overall story of the east coast main line is one of success.
GNER was the first inter-city franchisee on the route and during its initial franchise it set the pace for the rest of the industry in quality and customer service. The
number of weekday services grew from 100 at privatisation to 112. In 2006, it grew again to the current 136, with the introduction of half-hourly services to Leeds.
The timetable is set to grow again, and my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Shona McIsaac) will be pleased to hear that from December 2010 there will be an additional 25 services a day, including a two-hourly service between Lincoln and London. For the first time in many years, that service will provide a regular direct train service to her area.
Shona McIsaac: Not my constituency.
Chris Mole: Not directly to my hon. Friend's constituency.
Punctuality, which is passengers' No. 1 concern, has improved dramatically. It has risen steadily since National Express East Coast took over the franchise, with the moving annual average rising from 81.7 to 87.6 per cent. Daily punctuality levels are now frequently above 90 per cent., and several 100 per cent. days have been achieved.
We have seen tremendous innovation on the route, with wi-fi being introduced first to 10 trains and then to the whole east coast inter-city fleet-I have ambitions to see that on the service that I use every week. Stations on the route have also benefited from substantial and sustained investment, with the quality of the facilities being offered being recognised at places such as Durham, which was declared station of the year at the 2008 national rail awards.
Finally, we should remember that the inter-city east coast franchise is one of those rare breeds that return a premium to the Department, and that premium is reinvested in the railway industry. Events of the recent past may have reduced the premiums available, but we can still confidently expect a significant return.
The Department for Transport recently appointed a new franchisee to the South Central franchise following a strongly contested competition. That demonstrates the market's belief in the franchise system. The recent events surrounding National Express East Coast, the current inter-city east coast franchisee, have generated significant interest and debate. None of us takes any pleasure in the failure of a business or in a company's inability to fulfil its contract to the Government. My hon. Friend the Member for City of York asserted that train operating companies take all the benefit while the Government take all the pain, but I draw his attention to the fact that companies normally have revenue risk for four years, after which Government revenue support comes into effect. However, the revenue share mechanism commences from day one, so excess profits are immediately shared with the Government.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: Will the Minister give way?
Chris Mole: I would rather not because I have limited time.
The National Express bid was predicated on growth rates that, although reasonable at the time, proved undeliverable in the current economic climate. That has led National Express to conclude that it will be unable to maintain the franchise into the foreseeable future. The Secretary of State has made it abundantly clear that the DFT does not renegotiate franchises. At a
point in the future, therefore, the DFT will take over the operation of the inter-city east coast franchise through Directly Operated Railways, a DFT company established for that purpose.
I should say to the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Jackson) that the departmental officials who originally evaluated the bid judged it to be deliverable. The National Express bid was not the highest. I also reject his assertion that we spent five months negotiating with National Express. We have not negotiated with National Express and we never renegotiate franchises.
We plan to operate the business for about 12 to 18 months while a competition is undertaken to select a new private sector operator. The Government's role in running trains is purely short term, as required by the Railways Act 1993.
This is, of course, the second time in three years that an inter-city east coast franchisee has been unable to continue for the full duration of its franchise. In both cases, external economic circumstances were a factor, as was the inability of the bids submitted to withstand those changed circumstances.
Some have argued that those two failures demonstrate that the franchising system is fatally flawed. I disagree with that view. Across the industry, passenger numbers are at their highest since the 1940s, punctuality is above 90 per cent. and customer satisfaction is rising. That all points to the fact that we are talking about an isolated failure in an otherwise successful system.
There are two important points to remember in the current situation. First, the Government are protecting passengers by taking control of the inter-city east coast franchise. Our aim is to secure a seamless transition from National Express East Coast to Directly Operated Railways and to a new franchisee in due course. Secondly, the Government are protecting taxpayers by holding franchisees to their agreements and not renegotiating contracts, which some could interpret as reward for failure. Risk sharing and risk transfer are part of the franchise system. Franchisees must be able to shoulder the risk in hard times, just as they benefit in good times.
The hon. Member for Peterborough asserted that other operators have received revenue support sooner than four years into the franchise. It is true that the First Great Western franchise included a provision whereby revenue support became available after two years, but that was an exceptional arrangement.
John McDonnell: A written statement on the First Great Western franchise is being made today. Is this another key being handed back in?
Chris Mole: No, there is no indication that that is what the statement is about. Hon. Members will find that it is about performance against the recovery plan that was put in place for First Great Western. Franchise bids must be sustainable and deliverable in the long term. Franchisees must be able to stand behind their bids for the duration of the franchise. We expect nothing less.
The east coast main line is a long route with many stakeholders who have clear views as to what the franchise should provide, and I have listened with great interest to the views expressed today. Hon. Members will be pleased to hear that the DFT is preparing for a full public
consultation on the new inter-city east coast franchise. I encourage all those associated with the route to participate in that valuable exercise, which will shape the next period in this important route's history. I think that that answers the five points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for City of York, as well as those raised by the hon. Member for Angus (Mr. Weir) on the service specification.
HM Prison Wellingborough
12.30 pm
Mr. Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Cummings. I thank Mr. Speaker for granting me this debate on an important and sensitive constituency issue. I am also delighted at the attendance of the Minister, and look forward to her detailed responses. She is known to be a rising star in the Government and is always willing to listen to a reasoned argument. The debate will not be party political, but I hope it will be constructive and deal with an extremely difficult situation.
In April, Her Majesty's inspectorate of prisons published a report on Her Majesty's prison Wellingborough. The report was damning and criticised many areas of the prison, including its cleanliness, governance and resettlement programme. After the publication of the report, whose findings followed an inspection in August 2008, the Ministry of Justice decided to put the prison out to market testing and has opened it up to bids from the public, private and third sectors.
Wellingborough prison had several problem areas, which were highlighted in the report, but I hope to show the significant improvements that the current team has made. I want to make it clear that I am not against the Secretary of State's decision to put the prison out to market testing. He is one of the very best members of the Government, and has kept me personally informed throughout the process. In fact, I received a telephone call at 6.30 one morning; it was the No. 10 Downing street hotline and I was told, "I have Mr. Straw on the line for you." "At that time in the morning?" I thought. "Downing street? Jack Straw?" Had there been a coup overnight? Had he become Prime Minister and was I about to be offered a job? Alas, the telephone call was about HMP Wellingborough.
Having received the report, the Secretary of State had to act; there was no way it could be ignored. He was right to put the prison out to market testing. However, I believe that the prison's current governance system could be the best equipped to improve standards there further. I shall do whatever I can to support the governor and prison officers in putting together the best possible bid. In the end, I want the bid that is best for the taxpayer and the inmates to win the contract to run the prison. I believe that a locally based business plan drawn up by the management and prison officers could be not only the best, but the most radical bid.
HM prison Wellingborough is a medium-sized category C training prison that was opened in the 1960s. Wellingborough has the capacity to hold 646 male inmates in nine residential wings. At the time of the inspection there were 635 inmates and 380 staff. When the prison opened, it was a borstal or young offenders institution, but it has since become a jail for adult male sentenced prisoners who are serving 18 months or longer. Much of Wellingborough's catchment area includes the London courts. At any one time about 40 per cent. of the prison population is from minority ethnic groups. The local Wellingborough population has a minority ethnic group of 11 per cent., but many of the inmates come from south of Wellingborough.
Despite the large amount of land surrounding HMP Wellingborough, the prison has not expanded as it could have to house the growing population. There is a
major problem with overcrowding in the prison-a situation that is, of course, common across the country. Yesterday, the prison population was 83,776, which is only 34 lower than the highest head count ever.
The report on Wellingborough by Her Majesty's chief inspector of prisons listed a number of areas that were poor in performance and needed improving. Several of those weaknesses were causes for real concern. They included failure to provide the basics of training and resettlement of prisoners. The report stated:
"We found 200 prisoners, around 30 per cent. of the population, locked in their cells during the core of the day."
However, I believe that highlighting some things as weaknesses would aggrieve the law-abiding people of our society. The report recommended that all prisoners should be given a shower and a free telephone call on their first night in the prison. Many people will find it hard to believe that a prison is failing because only a percentage of inmates can have a shower on their first night. Many people will also be aggrieved to learn that one way in which the prison was failing was in not providing prisoners with their own kettle. It is important to remember that it is a prison, not a holiday camp.
Of the more serious weaknesses highlighted in the report, drug abuse and the availability of drugs were a concern. There was significant evidence of bullying resulting from drug-related debt. The inspection report stated that
"42 per cent. of prisoners, against a 30 per cent. comparator, thought that it was easy or very easy to get illegal drugs within the establishment."
"48 per cent. of prisoners compared with 27 per cent. in comparator prisons said that they had felt unsafe in the prison and 33 per cent. compared with the 21 per cent. comparator said they had been threatened or intimidated by another prisoner or group of prisoners."
However, it is important to state that the report's findings were gathered at the beginning of August last year-nearly a year ago. Since then, a huge amount of work by the governor and prison officers has resulted in major improvements.
Another concern from the report was that living conditions on the residential units on A to E wings were unsatisfactory and many areas of the prison were dirty and litter-strewn. There was also a problem with vermin. However, I understand that the cleanliness issues have now been resolved. Wellingborough is a training prison and it should prepare inmates for life outside following their release. The report found that there were
"insufficient activities for the 635 inmates and that these activities had not been planned or directed with a view to improving prisoners' skills and employability."
For a training prison that was a definite concern that needed to be tackled immediately.
I had hoped at this point to be able to give a list of improvements, as provided by either the governor's office at Wellingborough prison, the Ministry of Justice or the Minister's office, but unfortunately, despite several requests, the information has been refused. I received an e-mail from a civil servant that stated:
"Thank you for your e-mail. Unfortunately I don't think we are in a position to help you. As I am sure you understand, as Civil Servants it would be inappropriate to provide you with material that you would then use to argue against Government policy."
That is clearly absolutely unacceptable. Civil servants are there to provide information on a factual basis, not to provide only information that supports the Government's case. In a democracy it is vital that opposition parties should be given the fullest possible data so that they can create well argued critiques of Government policy. The e-mail implies that if I had been supporting Government policy those concerned would have been happy to supply the information, but because I might have been arguing against Government policy it was withheld. It was not as if I was asking for national security details.
The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Maria Eagle): I am not familiar with the e-mail that the hon. Gentleman cites, but I would be happy to take it away at the end of the debate and make inquiries. As a Minister, I would expect my civil servants to provide factual publicly available information to Members of Parliament who request it.
Mr. Bone: I am grateful. I did not want to get the civil servant into trouble, but I shall give the e-mail to the Minister. I merely wanted to know what improvements Wellingborough prison had made since the report was compiled. I know that those details are available, but I simply could not get hold of them. The information I am using today was either obtained as a result of research by my staff or provided by the Prison Officers Association.
I seek clarification on the criteria that the Government use to propose prisons for market testing. In a written answer, the Minister stated:
"Public sector prisons were short listed for market test if identified as either poorly performing or high cost. Final selection... was made on the basis of a number of operational criteria and took account of wider evidence, such as HM Inspectorate of Prisons reports."-[Official Report, 16 June 2009; Vol. 494, c. 265W.]
HMP Wellingborough is cost-effective. According to the Prison Offices Association, it is the 12th most cost-effective of 37 category C training prisons. In 2007-08, the average cost for a category C training prison was £23,471 per place per year. In the same period, the cost of Wellingborough was £21,311 per place per year. That is a saving of £2,160 per prisoner and 9.2 per cent. less than the national average.
I believe that the current local management team and prison officers at HMP Wellingborough should remain in place after the market testing exercise because of the prison's ability to make significant improvements at a time when funding for prisons is low. On the 2008-09 third-quarter weighted score card, Wellingborough was the fourth most improved state prison in the country. Given the current improvements, if the prison was inspected now it would not be considered for market testing.
In the improvement areas of reducing offending, decency, diversity, equality and security, Wellingborough met half the targets. On organisational effectiveness and maintaining order and control, it achieved 80 per cent. of the targets. Those currently involved in governance at the prison have worked hard to improve standards for the inmates and for the taxpayer. It is clear that this is not a high-cost prison, and given the recent improvements it is not poorly performing.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |