House of Lords
Thursday, 14th February 2002.
The House met at eleven of the clock: The CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of St Edmundsbury and Ipswich.
Road/Rail Bridge Safety Barriers
Lord Greaves asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What modifications have been made to road approaches to rail bridges since the accident at Great Heck on 21st February 2001.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, following the accident at Great Heck, the Deputy Prime Minister asked the Highways Agency to review its standards for nearside safety barriers on major roads. The report will be published very shortly. Decisions on any actions to improve safety at particular locations are best taken by the relevant highway authority and rail infrastructure provider in the light of the findings of this report.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, can the Minister give the reasons for the report being delayed? According to a reply on 16th July last year by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, it was originally promised for last autumn. Will he confirm that the Government regard it as completely unacceptable that railway services and lines should be put in danger because of traffic on motorways over which the railway service has no control? Can he give an assurance that, rather than arbitrary standards being applied, each particular bridge over a railway line will be looked at individually to make certain that the kind of incident which took place at Great Heck could not happen again simply because the barrier was not long enough?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, we do not have long to wait for the reports, which will be published by the end of February. Once we have the reports before us, we shall be able to have a fuller debate. I can confirm that the Government's commitment to security on the railways is absolute and very strong, hence the clear action taken by the Deputy Prime Minister a year ago. Under the circumstances and given the weight of the issues and the width of the two inquiries that have been under way, I do not think that we have seen a particularly slow reaction. I accept that we wish to do all that is practicable to reduce deaths in such circumstances. However, they were very unusual circumstances indeed. Therefore one would expect to see a proper risk assessment process carried out by the relevant highway authorities and rail infrastructure provider.
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, over 1,600 accidents in which lorries hit bridges were reported over the past year. Of those, 31 were considered potentially serious. What action are the Government taking? All that has
happened so far is that a map has been published by the AA and lorry drivers are allowed to put a notice in their cabs. However, no real action has been taken to prevent these potentially very serious accidents.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, as the noble Lord says, incidents in which lorries hit bridges are an important and serious issue, but the issue is slightly wider in scope than the Question on which we are focused today, which essentially is the risk of vehicles coming off the highway and going on to railways. Without too much wishing to trade statistics with the noble Lord, the number of vehicles driven accidentally off the highway on to the railways is relatively small. The figure is higher than we would wish but amounts to only 12 a year. Of those 12 only one incident resulted in a train hitting the vehicle. As I am sure that the reports will say, one has to keep a sense of proportion when considering what is the best and most effective action to take.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, is the Minister aware that his right honourable friend the Secretary of State seems to have learnt nothing from last year? Is he further aware that the spin doctor in the transport department planned to release,
- "less than encouraging statistics on rail safety and punctuality",
Lord Filkin: My Lords, given the width of matters that could have been raised on the important issue of rail safety, I am slightly surprised that the noble Viscount has chosen this particular angle, which is essentially a very party political one. With regard to my right honourable friend in another place, I think that he knew a great deal a year ago and I am sure that, like all Members of both Houses, he is learning even more as time passes. I am delighted to say that I know nothing of the issue to which the noble Viscount has referred. I am therefore not in a position to give an answer.
Swanwick Air Traffic Control
11.12 a.m.
Lord Bowness asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether the transfer of national air traffic control services to Swanwick has been successful.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I am pleased to say that on 27th January the Swanwick centre in Hampshire, which is one of the most advanced air traffic control centres in the world, began successful operations.
Lord Bowness: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Would he be prepared to tell the House whether that successful transfer is in any way
threatened by the reported financial situation at NATS? It has been reported that the banks have threatened to withdraw their support if the Government do not guarantee the company's position. Furthermore, NATS itself has been reported as having given warning of its possible financial collapse if it cannot raise very substantially its own charges; to say nothing of further reports about the need to modernise the NATS computer systems such a short time after the opening of the new centre. Is not this a matter on which the House should be advised, if only to allay those worries?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I can state categorically that there is no threat to safety or air traffic security as a result of the challenge that has been posed to NATS in the light of the tragic circumstances of 11th September. As one would expect, the volume of air traffic has reduced consequent on the 11th September tragedy. We do not know for how long that reduction in traffic will persist. There clearly is a challenge to the board and shareholders of NATS to ensure that their investment plans in the future can be sustained at the level that they would wish. All shareholders, with the Government—who of course are shareholders—are working well and positively to address that issue by a variety of means. I can assure the noble Lord that he should not believe everything that is written in the papers on this matter.
Lord Hughes of Woodside: My Lords, I apologise to my noble friend for not giving him advance notice of this question. Can he tell the House what is happening at Prestwick? The project has apparently been postponed because of what happened on 11th September, but, as air traffic is expected to increase, would it not be highly dangerous not to proceed with Prestwick? As the passage of the Bill on NATS was contingent on Prestwick going ahead, will that promise be kept?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I am delighted to hear the implication that I always get advance notice of any supplementary question from the Benches behind me. I hope that all noble Lords will pay attention to that because it would be most helpful. In practice, the Government's commitment to the two-centre strategy for air traffic control is still strongly in place. We believe that it is right and necessary. Quite clearly there has been a reduction in air traffic volumes and there is not the same level of urgency for the second centre to be brought on-stream immediately. Nevertheless, some of the preparatory work is going ahead at present. Site works and piling are under way and a new radar processing system is currently being installed. We expect that, in good time, the second centre, at Prestwick, will be opened.
Lord Glenarthur: My Lords, has there been any increase in capacity as a result of the transfer of the London control centre to Swanwick? If not, when does the Minister expect that increase in capacity to arise?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, there has been a very substantial increase in capacity. As I signalled, this is one of the most advanced air traffic control systems in the world, which, as far as we can predict, should make it possible to cope with traffic growth for the next 30 years. Over the past few weeks there has been a sensible process of progressive implementation of the system to ensure that air traffic controllers are fully conversant with the new systems and the new environment and have confidence in them before volumes are raised to the full level. So far, it is going extremely well.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, will my noble friend define what he has said a little more? He said that Prestwick would be available "in good time". What does he mean by that? When will work start there? Will he be a little more specific than he was in the debate on the air traffic control system? Will my noble friend take it from me that the work that has been done at Swanwick is admirable? It places British air traffic control in a very good situation.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page