4 Nov 2008 : Column 115
4 Nov 2008 : Column 115
4 Nov 2008 : Column 115
Tuesday, 4 November 2008.
The House met at half-past two: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Chelmsford.
Leave of Absence: The Lord Speaker
The Lord Speaker (Baroness Hayman): My Lords, the President of the Federation Council of the Russian Parliament has invited me to undertake an official visit to the legislature in Moscow prior to the meeting of the Association of European Senates in St Petersburg next week. Accordingly, I seek leave of absence from your Lordships’ House from 12 to 14 November.
Railways
2.36 pm
Lord Bradshaw asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What steps they are taking to ensure there is sufficient rolling stock available to the railways to meet demand.
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Lord Adonis): My Lords, we have committed to provide 1,300 additional passenger carriages for the rail network by 2014. Four hundred and twenty-three new carriages have already been ordered. Officials are in commercial discussions with train operating companies to secure the remainder over the agreed period.
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. The rolling stock is urgently needed. It has been the subject of many announcements, but few orders have been placed. Is he aware that the country’s only diesel train production line—Bombardier at Derby—will be closed down if new orders are not forthcoming shortly? There will be a large loss of skilled jobs and much damage will be done to the railway manufacturing industry.
Lord Adonis: My Lords, as I said, 423 of the 1,300 carriages have been ordered. The carriages are scheduled for completion by 2014, so we have not been slow off the mark. We are looking to place additional orders, although I cannot of course comment about particular companies that might benefit.
Viscount Tenby: My Lords, does the Minister, with his usual fairness, agree with me that the situation with regard to rolling stock can best be described as—I am trying to think of a parliamentary phrase I can use—unsatisfactory in the extreme? I invite him to travel at the earliest possible opportunity on some of those routes that experience the greatest overcrowding—for example, from Cardiff to Portsmouth via Bristol and on the lines north of Manchester.
4 Nov 2008 : Column 116
Lord Adonis: My Lords, I am well aware—indeed, I travel on some of these lines myself—of the degree of overcrowding and the pressure that there is, which in good part is because of the success of the railways. They are carrying more passenger traffic now than at any time since the late 1940s, so it is a remarkable success story. There are 11,300 rail vehicles in operation, which is an increase of 900 since 1995, so we are seeking to meet the additional demand. As I say, the 1,300 additional vehicles to that 11,300 are in the pipeline. We have ordered more than 400, but I am well aware of the urgency the noble Lord sets out.
Lord Berkeley: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that it was very unsatisfactory last year when many of the trains around the Bristol area were so overcrowded that somebody fainted standing up and there was no room for him to sit down? That was mitigated by borrowing trains from the Welsh valleys. Those trains are required back next year. Who is going to faint first—the Bristol people or those in the Welsh valleys? What can my noble friend do about it?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, the 1,300 additional vehicles will benefit the Bristol area. The High Level Output Specification Plan update of July this year, which sets out the progress being made in planning and providing additional rolling stock, states that 52 of the additional vehicles will be for First Great Western, including provision of additional vehicles for the Bristol area. Therefore, I hope that we will be in a position to meet some of the additional demand to which my noble friend refers.
Lord Tanlaw: My Lords, I declare my interest as the proprietor of a private group of railway engineering companies. Can the Minister give a categoric assurance that the six-year programme as specified in his department’s White Paper, Delivering a Sustainable Railway, will remain intact regardless of the current uncertainties about the economy and the outcome of the general election and beyond? If he cannot give such an assurance, will the Government then issue as a matter of urgency gilt-edged railway bonds or their equivalent, which would be dedicated entirely to heavy and light rail programmes to maintain current employment levels in the railway industries up to 2014?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, the noble Lord is asking me to give a large number of assurances on issues, some of which are within my control and some of which are not. Alas, with all my great powers, I personally cannot determine the outcome of the next general election, although I have a good idea what it will be. Therefore, I cannot give him an assurance on that issue. However, as regards all the matters about which he asked which are within my power to address, I give him the assurances that he seeks. In particular, I give him an absolute assurance that we intend to stick by the rail investment strategy, which will see £15 billion worth of additional government investment in the rail network over the next five years and the provision of 1,300 additional rail vehicles.
4 Nov 2008 : Column 117
Earl Attlee: My Lords, does the Minister not understand the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, that delays in government ordering of this rolling stock create boom and bust for the manufacturing industry rather than a steady state and efficient demand?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, I do not accept that there have been delays. We have ordered more than 400 of these vehicles already, other orders are in the pipeline and we are committed to providing the 1,300 by 2014, so we are getting on with the ordering with all deliberate speed.
The Earl of Mar and Kellie: My Lords, the Minister will have seen the Rail Regulator’s determination. Does he agree that the rolling stock plan is an incomprehensible muddle, as stated in paragraphs 9.82 and 28.22?
Lord Adonis: No, my Lords, it was all crystal clear to me.
Lord Glentoran: My Lords, I am very concerned about the 2014 date. Does the Minister not realise that the greatest influx of tourists this country has ever known will happen between 2011 and 2012 for the Olympic Games, followed by the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014? I beg him to do something to bring that date forward to enable us to deliver what we are expected to deliver in looking after and transporting tourists throughout the kingdom, not just round London.
Lord Adonis: My Lords, we are seeking to move as rapidly as we can, but as I say, the provision is to be made by 2014. We have ordered 400 of these vehicles already and we will move ahead as fast as we practically can.
Lord Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, in contrast to the slightly churlish point made by the noble Earl on the ORR’s determination, does my noble friend agree that the investment that the ORR is authorising Network Rail to spend will make a huge difference to solving overcrowding problems over the next six years?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, I do agree. Last week’s determination will ensure that £28.5 billion is available for investment in the rail network over the period up to 2014. That is a huge sum of money and will make a huge difference, not least—talking of causes close to my noble friend’s heart—with regard to the doubling of the Cotswold Line, for which he has campaigned for many years.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire: My Lords, the arrangements whereby railway leasing companies own the stock and the Government order it appear to have provided substantial and reliable revenue and profit for banks over the past few years. Do the Government intend to revisit the arrangements whereby rolling stock is acquired, owned and leased?
4 Nov 2008 : Column 118
Lord Adonis: My Lords, we intend to keep the existing structure in place, but the department has a very keen interest in ensuring that these 1,300 vehicles are procured as rapidly as we practically can. I would not want to close particular options for the way that we might procure those vehicles.
Gold Reserves
2.44 pm
Lord Glentoran asked Her Majesty’s Government:
How many tonnes of gold have been sold from United Kingdom reserves since 1 May 1997; how much revenue was received from the sale of those gold reserves; and what the gold would be worth at current prices.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, in view of the volatility of gold prices, 395 tonnes of gold were sold from the reserves as part of a restructuring programme to reduce the risk exposure of the official holdings portfolio between July 1999 and March 2002. The total proceeds were around $3.5 billion, equivalent to £1.9 billion. On 3 November, the current market value of the gold sold was around $9.3 billion, equivalent to £5.7 billion.
Lord Glentoran: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that informative Answer. What replacement investment did the Government make to ensure that the UK had a significant reserve for the inevitable rainy day, and how did this investment fare?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, given that gold is not a liquid asset, the Government invested the proceeds in dollars, euros and yen, which are interest-bearing, which gold is not, and have reaped the benefits from that. The present position reflects the volatility of all prices. To take the most obvious factor, the price of gold itself has gone down by something like 20 per cent in the past six or seven months.
Lord Higgins: My Lords, the Question is very simple:
The Minister has not given the answer. What is it? Is it not high time that the Treasury stopped putting up stonewalling Answers?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the Treasury has given straight answers to the question ever since the sale of gold concluded way back in 2005. The Government undertook at that time to reduce the risk factor in the portfolio by selling tranches of gold, and they made clear the amount being sold. They made it absolutely clear that those were the sums and that nothing was to be sold subsequently, and nothing has been.
Lord Newby: My Lords, given that the balance of payments deficit has risen as a proportion of GDP by 100 per cent over the past four years and now stands at
4 Nov 2008 : Column 119
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, as the noble Lord is all too well aware, particularly with the advantage of yesterday’s debate, we live in challenging economic times. All aspects of the economy are under pressure, including the reserves. But he knows what the reserves are there primarily for, in relationship to the currency; and the Government do not intervene on exchange rates.
Baroness Noakes: My Lords, the Minister has told the House that if we had held on to our gold, we would have another $6 billion-worth in reserves. I am sure he would agree that if an investment manager had made a transaction like that, he would probably now be out of a job. So can the Minister confirm that it was the Prime Minister who authorised the sale of the gold?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it was the Chancellor of the Exchequer who authorised the sale of the gold. Let me make this point clear. The Conservative Front Bench is being wonderfully predictive after the event, basing its position on where the gold price is now. It did not advance those criticisms to the same extent at the time; nor was it the case that other informed analysts suggested that this was anything other than a perfectly proper transaction by the Government. The then Governor of the Bank of England, Eddie George, thought that it was a perfectly reasonable strategy for the Government to follow.
Lord Grocott: My Lords, if we are in the business of trading blows with the opposition Front Bench on the value of assets sold some years ago as compared with what they might be worth today, can my noble friend remind us—if he does not have the figures to hand, perhaps he could place a copy in the Library—of the value of all the privatised industries sold between 1979 and 1997, including the railways that we have just been discussing?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I cannot follow my right honourable and noble friend in trading blows with the opposition Front Bench, because our relations are entirely cordial. Through these exchanges we merely seek to enlighten the public. The Opposition are worried about a small amount of gold, but the country was worried about the huge amount of family silver that they sold.
Lord Dykes: My Lords, does the Minister concede that the inexorable logic of recent turbulence is that the British Government should now join the eurozone?
4 Nov 2008 : Column 120
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, that proposition was put forward from the Liberal Benches in the debate last night and was received marginally more enthusiastically than it has been today. There were fewer groans.
Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville: My Lords, does the Minister recall the boast of Poo-Bah in “The Mikado” that he could so manage things as Paymaster General that the Lord High Auditor would not be able to detect what he had done, and that he held both roles?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, Poo-Bah is not answerable for Treasury activities in this country but Her Majesty’s Treasury is answerable to Parliament. As the noble Lord will know, all these transactions are open, identifiable and, of course, subject to scrutiny. Not only the Treasury Select Committee but the Public Accounts Committee has examined the position, and it was regarded as an entirely reasonable position at the time.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, is the Prime Minister no longer the First Lord of the Treasury?
Japanese Knotweed
2.52 pm
Baroness Sharples asked Her Majesty’s Government:
The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change & Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): My Lords, in 2003, the cost of eradicating Japanese knotweed from Great Britain was estimated at £1.56 billion. Eradication is, therefore, beyond any realistic prospect. My department has supported research into the potential for safe biological control of Japanese knotweed. If successful, this could limit its growth or natural spread, and enhance the effectiveness of its management.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. It is 20 years since I first asked this question, and nothing much has happened. Does he accept that the 2-millimetre Japanese insect, Aphalara itadori, which is a type of psyllid, could more effectively control the spread of knotweed, Fallopia japonica, which can push its way through concrete? This is a real and considerable problem.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the noble Baroness is right to say that it is a considerable problem. Japanese knotweed was introduced to this country in 1855, it has no natural enemies and it is a great nuisance in most parts of the country. From the research, I agree that there seems great potential in the psyllid she mentioned. This is a knotweed specialist whose juvenile nymph sucks the sap from the plants and is capable of causing significant damage to the knotweed
4 Nov 2008 : Column 121
Lord Krebs: My Lords, does the Minister agree with the Government’s estimate a year ago that dealing with non-native invasive plants costs the country some £2 billion a year? Does he also agree that 60 per cent of non-native invasive plants are escapees from gardens or garden centres? If he does agree, can he tell us how many of these non-native species are banned from sale and how the situation in England compares with that in Scotland?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the noble Lord is absolutely right to suggest that invasive non-native species should be considered very seriously. That is why the Government, with the Scottish Executive and the Welsh Assembly, produced the Invasive Non-Native Species Framework Strategy for Great Britain in May. Because eradication can be very expensive once a particular species has taken root, the strategy ensures that measures are taken at a very early stage. That is the strategy that we are pursuing. My department is responsible for England but we work closely with the Scottish Executive on this.
The Duke of Montrose: My Lords, if no sanctions are available, are the Government considering introducing sanctions under the Wildlife and Countryside Act for anyone found to be spreading Japanese knotweed? Is the Environment Agency compiling a list of the sites that are currently identified and, if so, how frequently will it review that list?
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, the situation is quite complex regarding sanctions. There is no statutory requirement for landowners to remove the plant but it is regarded as controlled waste and local authorities have powers to require landowners to clear up land that is adversely affected. The weed is listed in the Wildlife and Countryside Act, so it is an offence to plant it or to cause it to grow in the wild. Its illicit dumping is illegal. The Environment Agency can prosecute; there can be fines; and indeed, if it goes to Crown Court, imprisonment is a possibility. Most developers deal with this problem responsibly, although there are cowboys and it is clear that we need to take action against them.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, when I asked a Written Question about this matter on 25 June last year, I was told that the four-year scientific research project was due to report before the end of the year. I believe that that report is now on the Minister’s desk. The Answer that I was given by the then Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, was that, if a proposed control agent is found,
- “it will be necessary to produce a pest risk assessment and obtain a derogation from European plant health legislation”,
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |