| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, they are certainly more comfortable than the Pacer units, but they were designed for an entirely different role from that which the Pacer units fulfil. The noble Lord, Lord Greaves, is arguing the case for the improvement of those vehicles rather than the employment of InterCity vehicles that performed an entirely different service. However, I hear what my noble friend says. I am sure that he will recognise that rolling stock will not be left idle if it can be brought into service effectively.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, the Strategic Rail Authority has projected the level of public subsidy for the new Northern Rail franchise to be £2.4 billion over the eight and three-quarter years of the franchise. That works out to be about £300 million a year. Can the Minister tell us whether that is an increase or decrease of public subsidy on an annual basis?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we all recognise that the running of the railways will require, in crucial areas, adequate public support. That is why the Government have done two things. First, we have changed the nature of the relationships between government and Network Rail, so that we have in place an effective mechanism to deal with the overall strategy. Secondly, we have sought to ensure that the new franchises are conducted on a value-for-money basis. There have been charges that the only consideration is
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1286
cheapness. However, that is not so. The considerations are to ensure value for money and that the service provided meets passenger needs.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, given that the Minister has not answered my noble friend Lord Astor's question, will he undertake to write to him about whether that is an increase or decrease in subsidy?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, let us be absolutely clear that the franchise arrangements are changing and that a new franchise is coming into play. We are, therefore, not precisely comparing like with like. I am not furnished with figures that apply to one franchise when a new franchise involves a different arrangement. I shall be only too happy to write to the noble Viscount, Lord Astor, if he thinks that my answer is unsatisfactory. However, as he will be the first to recognise, the new franchise is being awarded on different terms and negotiated on that basis.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lord, the Minister mentioned the phrase "fit for purpose". Is this new franchise fit for purpose? I see that it is costing £2.43 billion and will last eight years, nine months. What provision is there for enhancement in services across the north of England in the period to 12 September 2013? If we get a timetable in December, can we keep it until then, because there will not be any changes?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the concept of the franchise arrangements is not to etch in stone one particular timetable for a year, but to establish what is the best value for money in the first year and then in the subsequent years of the franchise. That may involve significant enhancements to the service. I point to the obvious example of the Question that I answered yesterday on the West Coast Main Line. The significant improvements in service this year have little to do with the direct operators and more to do with the fact that we have been able to guarantee that the track has been improved in many crucial areas. Such changes are effected over the course of time and all form part of the negotiations on the franchise.
I want to give the noble Lord this assurance. The Government are committed to ensuring that rail services improve in this country. That is the basis on which the rail franchises are being negotiated at present.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, the Minister said that the rolling stock on these branch lines is "fit for purpose", but it is inferior rolling stock. Why should people in the north of England be regarded as inferior passengers by giving them inferior rolling stock?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I would be scandalised if that concept had ever entered the mind of anyone in authority. The people of the north deserve equal treatment with all others in the country. The point I wanted to make, partly in response to a question raised by my noble friend, was that the term "fit for purpose" relates to the distance over which
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1287
these trains must travel. They relate to the nature of the northern franchise—which, on the whole, provides relatively short-range services, although there are one or two longer-distance services as well. The units that make up that provision are necessarily different from those which serve the national lines such as the West Coast Main Line and the East Coast Main Line. I sought merely to reflect the nature of "fit for purpose" in those terms.
Football Hooliganism
Lord Faulkner of Worcester asked Her Majesty's Government:
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the Government are satisfied with the progress made, but of course we are not complacent. Our tough banning order legislation is the cornerstone of a multi-faceted and multi-agency strategy for tackling English football-disorder domestically and overseas. The strategy is proving to be successful in combating football-related disorder. Home Office statistics published on 23 October show a 10 per cent decrease in the number of arrests at football, while 2,599 individuals are currently subject to banning orders—the highest number ever.
Lord Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that positive Answer. Does he agree that the reduction in the number of arrests last season and the almost complete avoidance of trouble involving England supporters at the European Championship in Portugal this summer is one of those rare success stories that reflects credit on all the parties involved: the Football Association, the police and Her Majesty's Government? I also mention in particular my noble friend who chaired the Home Office working party on football hooliganism and who piloted the legislation through this House to establish banning orders in the face, one must say, of opposition from people who argued either that banning orders would not work or that they were an affront to civil liberties. Both of those arguments have been proved entirely false.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his kind words. Tribute has to be paid to all those involved, not least the Home Office, the police, the Football Banning Orders Authority and supporters' groups who all played their part in contributing to tackling the problems of hooliganism. Regarding the championship in Portugal this summer, I pay tribute to the England football fans' embassy, which did a good job in keeping the 50,000 England supporters over there well informed and well advised about what was a very good-natured tournament.
Lord Moynihan: My Lords, I have lasting memories of the tragic scenes I witnessed at the Hillsborough
27 Oct 2004 : Column 1288
football ground on that evening in 1989 when 96 fans died. No one in the House could feel more strongly than I about today's reports alleging abusive chanting connected to the Hillsborough tragedy from a small section of mindless thugs. That appears to have been the probable cause of the violence and the hospitalisation of a wheelchair spectator during the Millwall v Liverpool game last night. Does the Minister agree that that behaviour is as intolerable, unacceptable and vile as racist chanting is at some football matches? Although I appreciate that it is difficult, will he immediately call on the Football League to see whether severe action can be taken against this small group of thugs who do not deserve to be associated with football and who it should be possible, through CCTV, to identify and then to ban from football grounds?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I concur entirely with everything the noble Lord has said. I too have read the reports with considerable alarm. I understand that riot police had to be deployed last night and that four arrests were made. The allegation of the distasteful chanting is one that should be followed up and no doubt will form part of the police investigation and inquiry into those incidents. I hope that the football authorities will look closely at the events at that particular game last night and undertake their own careful investigation to see what action should be taken to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice.
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, noble Lords on the Liberal Democrat Benches welcome the progress that has been made so far. However, does not the Minister agree that what happens on the football field is as important as what goes on outside the football ground? Does he condemn the behaviour of players like David Beckham and Ruud van Nistelrooy for unacceptable fouls during play and, more important, the behaviour of managers like Arsene Wenger and Sir Alex Ferguson that resulted in the fracas which took place in the Old Trafford tunnel? If neither the Football Association nor those in charge can take appropriate action, will the Minister recommend to the police the Government's much-publicised anti-social behaviour orders against some of these people?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |