House of Commons Hansard Debates for 11 Jan 1993

Hansard

House of Commons

Monday 11 January 1993

The House met at half-past Two o'clock

PRAYERS

[ Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]

Oral Answers to Questions

TRANSPORT

Channel Tunnel

1. Dr. Kim Howells : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he last met the chairman of British Rail to discuss rail links between Wales, the west of England and the channel tunnel.

The Minister for Public Transport (Mr. Roger Freeman) : The Secretary of State and the chairman of British Rail meet regularly and channel tunnel services from the regions, including Wales and the west of England, are often discussed.

Dr. Howells : Is the Minister aware that just before Christmas, Wales and the nation lost the Powell Duffryn wagon construction works in Cardiff and with it the expertise of a century's trading and the ability, among other things, to construct low-axle rail freight wagons which would have enabled areas such as south Wales and the west of England to trade directly with firms on the continent? Why does not the Minister recognise that the lack of orders from British Rail is doing incalculable damage to firms such as the one that used to operate in Cardiff? When will he do something to offer protection to the British rail industry?

Mr. Freeman : I regret the announcement by Powell Duffryn. I had the opportunity to visit its French subsidiary about two years ago and saw the value of its work. But under the rules for open procurement the responsibility rests with British Rail ; its decision about the procurement of freight wagons and the special axles and wheels required for them has nothing to do with the alleged dearth of orders.

As for the future for rolling stock orders, I am pleased that progress has been made on the new leasing arrangement of £150 million for British Rail. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport will shortly make a statement on that.

Mr. Adley : In wishing my hon. Friend and his colleagues--and you, Madam Speaker--a happy new year, may I ask whether my hon. Friend and my right hon. Friend would prefer the chairman of British Rail to be a man who was willing, regardless of his own views, to accept whatever the Government produced by way of plans for the future of British Rail--in other words, a yes man--or would they prefer someone who gave, publicly if

Column 590

necessary, his honest appraisal of the Government's proposals and stated how he saw the future for Britain's railways under those proposals?

Mr. Freeman : I can confirm that the chairman of British Rail discharges his duty with distinction and enjoys the confidence of the Government. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State wants a chairman of British Rail who will speak his mind, not someone who will meekly agree with any statement made by a Member on either side of the House. I can also confirm that the chairman of British Rail agrees with the broad objectives of the Government and I feel quite certain that he will help fully to implement them.

Mr. Wilson : Is not it becoming increasingly clear that these ill- thought-out and unworkable plans for privatisation are a blight on jobs, on safety and on the future of the railways in general? Has a route finally been advised to the Government for the rail link with the channel tunnel? If so, will the Minister undertake today to publish it in the near future as a basis for full public discussion?

Mr. Freeman : I can confirm that my right hon. Friend has received a report from British Rail on the route for the channel tunnel rail link from Folkestone to King's Cross. It will be for him to consider that report carefully ; but I can give the House the assurance that I gave on 14 December--the last time we debated this--that the Government will move as quickly as possible to commence the procedure of public consultation.

Transport Supplementary Grant

2. Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many road schemes will be able to start as a result of the support he is giving to local authorities by means of the transport supplementary grant.

The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. John MacGregor) : As I explained in my statement to the House on 15 December 1992, 41 new major schemes due to start in 1993-94 were accepted for transport supplementary grant. These schemes are listed in the Official Report.

Mr. Banks : I am grateful for that encouraging reply, which will do much for the country's infrastructure and for providing jobs. Is my right hon. Friend aware, however, that my constituents in the village of Spofforth, which lies south of Harrogate on the main link road between the A1 and Harrogate, suffer from increasing volumes of traffic and share my considerable annoyance that the bypass, due to start in September this year, was delayed by North Yorkshire county council until January 1994? It is to be delayed again into the 1994-95 financial year. Will the Minister be kind enough to look into this personally to see whether the start date can be brought back to January 1994?

Mr. MacGregor : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his opening comments. He is right that this is a major capital investment in the country's roads. It will be £1,047 million in the coming year, which is a record, in a difficult year. However, despite a good number of new schemes, as my hon. Friend knows there are always many more candidates than can be entertained. The problem about the Spofforth bypass scheme was that it was a doubtful starter in 1993-94. As my hon. Friend said, the forecast starting date

Column 591

was put back to January 1994, but in our experience forecast start dates are often optimistic and I am afraid that there were better candidates. I cannot accept any more schemes for this year, but I shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend said about next year.

Ms. Walley : Does not the right hon. Gentleman understand that there is a major problem about the way in which his Department is determining priorities? Is not it the case that the amount that local authorities can spend on local schemes rather than major schemes--on the sort of projects that local people want for environmental traffic calming measures--has been reduced from 7 to 5.7 per cent? When will he give local councils the real right to determine the priorities that they know are needed in their communities?

Mr. MacGregor : The hon. Lady is wrong. By and large, we follow the priorities advanced by local authorities for major schemes. As she will know, we have also increased substantially the amount available for local safety schemes, which often include traffic-calming measures, for this year and next year. The figures are up from £31 million to £50 million. I know that local authorities approve of those schemes ; we are responding positively to their priorities.

Motorway Repairs

3. Mr. Knox : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent representations he has received about the speed with which motorway repairs are undertaken.

Mr. MacGregor : I receive a steady flow of representations about motorway repairs, mainly concerned with individual cases.

Mr. Knox : Does my right hon. Friend believe that the public are satisfied that motorway repairs are undertaken in the minimum possible time? I appreciate that there has been an improvement in recent years, but has he any proposals to improve the situation further?

Mr. MacGregor : I hope that my hon. Friend will acknowledge that there have been substantial improvements, not least because the introduction of the lane rental scheme means that motorway repairs are completed faster here than anywhere else in the world. Our pioneering scheme has been copied around the world. I am happy to tell my hon. Friend that we shall be moving from a level of 50 per cent. of motorway repairs carried out through lane rental contracts to achieving our target next year of all schemes where lane rental is applicable being carried out in that way. We are also making fast progress in other directions.

A1 (Motorway Standard)

4. Mr. William O'Brien : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many properties are to be demolished to allow the A1 to be improved to three-lane motorway from the Barnsdale Bar area to the Boot and Shoe interchange ; and if he will make a statement.

The Minister for Roads and Traffic (Mr. Kenneth Carlisle) : On the basis of the present preliminary proposals, two residential properties and one commercial property would be demolished.

Column 592

Mr. O'Brien : Will the Minister consider the properties that will be blighted by the proposals, especially Ferrybridge school, which lies in an area where a 16-lane motorway will pass through a conurbation? When will the Minister consider bypassing towns? When will he stop acting like a vandal and make sure that we have motorways which take traffic away from towns and villages and not through them?

Mr. Carlisle : The hon. Gentleman will understand that we have gone through a thorough public consultation on this part of the A1 improvement. Almost 2,000 people visited the exhibition or wrote to us. About 60 per cent. of those people fully supported what we intend to do and only 16 per cent. opposed it. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the upgrading of the A1 to motorway standard from London to Newcastle will bypass many towns. We are also being especially careful to avoid areas of important countryside, such as sites of special scientific interest. Therefore, I strongly refute the hon. Gentleman's allegations.

Motorway Noise

5. Mr. Willetts : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what further steps he will take to reduce the levels of noise from motorways.

Mr. Kenneth Carlisle : We are proceeding on two fronts : ever- stricter noise limits on vehicles, together with the practical measures that are available when motorways are improved or constructed. These include noise screening by earthworks and barriers, quieter road surfaces and the provision of insulation.

Mr. Willetts : I welcome the steps that the Department is taking to reduce the level of noise from motorways. However, may I draw to my hon. Friend's attention the notorious roar produced by the experimental concrete surface on the A27 at Havant? Does not that make it a prime candidate for a new experiment, with a quiet noise-absorbent surface?

Mr. Carlisle : I well know the campaign for a quieter A27 that my hon. Friend has waged on behalf of his constituents. Unfortunately, when this road was built with concrete, it was over-textured. However, we are making some improvements to that road and we shall continue to do so.

I was pleased in the summer to announce a new policy on designing roads to ensure that they are less noisy. That entails providing porous asphalt where it will work and that will halve the level of noise. Before Christmas, I was delighted to be able to say that we are going ahead with porous asphalt on the A5 at Fazeley. Wherever possible in future, we shall meet the requirement for less noise. We shall look to better textures wherever we can.

Mr. Roy Hughes : Does the Minister appreciate that many homes are badly affected by motorway noise and that that is certainly the case with the M4 around Newport? Many people seem to be caught out by anomalies in the regulations. Will the Minister look into this to see whether the regulations can be relaxed a little?

Mr. Carlisle : I am happy to look at anything that we can do to improve the situation. As I said, noise is the one sector in which we must do better. I know that many

Column 593

people are concerned about noise when new roads are built. We now have extensive powers for insulation and the Land Compensation Act 1973 provides for compensation to be paid where the value of property declines.

Speed Cameras

6. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will take steps to ensure that speed signs are placed beside camera signs in zoned areas for spy cameras ; and if he will make a statement.

The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steven Norris) : Observation of speed limits has markedly improved where cameras, backed by warning signs, have been installed. This suggests that drivers are well aware of the speed limit in force and that signing arrangements are adequate.

Mr. Greenway : Does my hon. Friend agree that most, if not all, motorists are anxious to stick to speed limits, particularly where there are spy cameras? Will he assist them by eliminating small speed signs, which are often illegible, particularly where speed limits change rapidly? Will he also place visible speed signs alongside the spy cameras, further to assist motorists to stick to speed limits, as I am sure they are anxious to do?

Mr. Norris : My hon. Friend will know that the speed limit signage is in accordance with national criteria and where there are 40 mph or 50 mph speed limits in force, repeater signs are used. He raised a sensible question about why we cannot combine repeater speed limit signs and camera warning signs. There are two reasons for that. First, to display both items of information in one sign would require an impractically big sign. Secondly, camera signs are not intended to show exactly where the cameras are. Their purpose is merely to remind people of the need to observe speed limits over a wider area. For those two reasons, a conscious and deliberate decision has been made not to site the repeater speed limit sign and the camera sign on the same post.

Traffic Speed (London and Paris)

7. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has about calculations of traffic speeds in London and in Paris.

Mr. Norris : The most reliable comparison is for day-time off-peak traffic speeds. These are about 31 kilometres per hour in London and 28 kilometres per hour in Paris.

Mr. Taylor : My hon. Friend should note that that is one up for London. Given the positive joie de vivre with which his appointment as Minister responsible for London's transport was greeted, would he like to tell the Evening Standard what it can do with its criticisms of him? Will my hon. Friend do his best to accelerate the trend of people moving to trains and away from cars by introducing road pricing around London's perimeters?

Mr. Norris : My hon. Friend has asked an important question and I commend him on his perspicacity and thinking on the matter. There is a tremendous tendency to knock London. The great British disease is knocking our own achievements. My hon. Friend has elicited the fact that traffic in London is appreciably better than it is, for

Column 594

example, in Paris. Comparisons with many other, even leading, European cities are impossible because their authorities do not even attempt to record mean average speeds. I agree with my hon. Friend's observation that we must continue to encourage public transport. That is why expenditure on roads in London, as a result of the current public expenditure survey, is about a third of that on public transport. There is a substantial commitment to public transport.

Mr. Simon Hughes : In addition to the sensible suggestion of the hon. Member for Esher (Mr. Taylor) for improving traffic in London, does the Minister accept that another good approach would be to authorise the completion of works on the Jubilee line extension? Given that the approval was announced in the autumn statement, are the works to be authorised this year, next year, some time or never?

Mr. Norris : The hon. Gentleman, who has always taken a keen interest in the project, knows well the answer to his question, which is that the Jubilee line extension has always been a partnership between the Government and private developers. Negotiations on concluding the agreement are well advanced. As far as I am aware, they are continuing and good progress is being made. The hon. Gentleman, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will be extremely pleased when the project can commence, but that must depend on the signing of the agreement.

Mr. Simon Coombs : What progress has my hon. Friend made in reviewing the success of the red routes scheme in London? What plans does he have to discuss with his colleagues the possibility of providing similar schemes in other large towns and cities in the United Kingdom?

Mr. Norris : The red routes, including the pilot route, have been spectacularly successful. Accidents have been reduced by about 17 per cent., which is about three times the level that has been achieved in the boroughs through which the pilot route passes. Speeds have been improved, but fortunately not greatly so, for private cars. About 8, 700 more passengers a week are using the No. 43 bus service on the pilot route. I look forward to our being able to replicate those improvements throughout the priority network.

I am interested that Lothian, a Labour-controlled county in Scotland, is introducing and implementing a concept which it calls green routes, but which in every way is exactly the same as the red routes concept in London, even down to the fact that red paint will be used. Silly politicking has surrounded the red routes debate over previous months, but we have the clearest possible vindication in the general recognition that it is an extremely valuable concept.

Mr. Tony Banks : I am all for a bit of knocking, but there is no need to engage in it when comparing parking in Paris and in London. Parking in central Paris makes parking in London seem positively orderly and restrained.

The Minister did not answer part of the question of the hon. Member for Esher (Mr. Taylor) about road pricing. We understand that the Government will make an announcement about road pricing in London. Will the hon. Gentleman tell us when the announcement will be made?

Column 595

Mr. Norris : I shall not comment on the hon. Gentleman's propensity for knocking in any circumstances, except to say that in terms of parking he is wrong again. He probably knows that one of the major contributory factors in achieving better road speeds in London is that parking is much better managed in London--this is a general recognition--than in Paris, where recently there has been--

Mr. Banks : That is what I said.

Mr. Norris : I am grateful. If I misunderstood the hon. Gentleman, I withdraw. Perhaps I was too busy knocking him. I entirely agree with him.

My right hon. Friend has already made it clear that we are undertaking a substantial study of road pricing in London. That is something which the hon. Gentleman may have missed. He will know, if he has read the appropriate answer, that the research is to continue and that it is likely to take at least another year before the information is available. Much of it involves extensive attitudinal and survey research. The Government consider that road pricing is an important component in dealing with urban congestion in future and I shall be happy to keep the hon. Gentleman appraised of progress.

Mr. Mans : On the question of traffic speeds, can my hon. Friend say when the regulations associated with the Traffic Calming Act 1992 are likely to come into force? The Act has been in existence for nine months and many local authorities want to get on with producing schemes based on it, but are prevented from doing so because the regulations have not yet been published.

Mr. Norris : I congratulate my hon. Friend on having been the inspiration behind that Act. He is to be commended for having put it on the statute book. I understand that its provisions will be enacted shortly. It will certainly make a worthwhile contribution to road safety.

British Rail (Redundancies)

8. Mr. Janner : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what consultations he has had with the chairman of British Rail about the effect on performance of recent proposed redundancies.

Mr. Freeman : This is a commercial matter for the board. The redundancies concern staff positions where, judged by British Rail, loss is not expected to affect performance.

Mr. Janner : Does that answer mean that there were no consultations with the Minister? If not, why not? Surely matters of commercial interest and concern in public bodies such as British Rail should be considered by the Department. Do not they lead to great public expenditure in redundancy pay and other benefits? There should be consultation not only with the Minister concerned, but with the Secretary of State for Employment.

Mr. Freeman : Of course there were consultations between British Rail and the Department of Transport about the need to reduce the work force in line with falling demand. On Network SouthEast alone, during the 12 months to the autumn of 1992 patronage fell by about 8 per cent. Ministers were certainly aware that British Rail was discharging its functions correctly by planning to

Column 596

reduce services--and therefore employment-- at the margin. The precise number involved and the timing of the announcement were rightly matters for British Rail. We do not believe in interfering in matters that are not our direct concern. Until our reforms are in place, the management of British Rail is a matter for its board.

Mr. Couchman : My hon. Friend has assured the House that the redundancies will not affect performance. Is he aware that several thousand of my constituents commute daily on the Kent coast and Kent link lines in filthy, awful and old rolling stock, with unreliable services and little hope of any improvement? Is he further aware that British Rail has proposed cutting the already unacceptably bad service from May and is offering my constituents no hope of any improvement? When will my hon. Friend offer them some hope of improvement for their almost £2,000-a-year season ticket?

Mr. Freeman : My hon. Friend is absolutely right-- [Interruption.] I usually concentrate on listening to the question rather than turning away from Madam Speaker.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his very detailed support of the urgent need to improve rail services to his constituency. I repeat my earlier assurance that the 5,000 redundancies principally affect management and will not affect the safety of the railways. My hon. Friend is aware of the £800 million programme of improvements now being made on the Kent link line, which serves part of Kent. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will turn his attention to the Kent coast service as soon as British Rail has completed improvements to the Kent link line.

Mrs. Dunwoody : Is the Minister aware that already British Rail has removed all staff from a number of stations in my area? If that trend continues, many women will cease to travel by public transport because it will become even more dangerous and difficult for them. When does the hon. Gentleman intend to reconcile his supposed care for the safety of women passengers and the constant and increasing destaffing of British Rail stations?

Mr. Freeman : I share the hon. Lady's concern. However, that matter has nothing to do with the 5,000 redundancies announced by British Rail. The destaffing of stations has been taking place for some time. I firmly believe that with the introduction of franchising, which is a positive idea that will be welcomed by the House when we debate it tomorrow, there will be an improvement in the quality of services, including an improvement in the number of staff serving passengers both on platforms and on trains.

British Rail (Passenger Numbers)

9. Mr. Burns : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what targets he has set for the current year for the number of passengers using British Rail.

Mr. Freeman : The Government do not set targets for the number of passengers using British Rail, but we wish to see more travellers preferring rail to road for all types of travel, including commuting into London.

Column 597

Mr. Burns : Is my hon. Friend aware that the thousands who commute from Chelmsford to Liverpool Street station each day simply want an efficient, well-run service, and does he believe that franchising will achieve that?

Mr. Freeman : I certainly do, and I am sure that the House looks forward to tomorrow's debate on that very subject. My hon. Friend has long been concerned in particular about resignalling on the Great Eastern line, as others of my hon. Friends have been in relation to resignalling on the London-Tilbury-Southend line. I confirm that, following a review of the interdepartmental financing round settlement for British Rail, resignalling work on both lines will immediately continue.

Ms. Glenda Jackson : Is the Minister aware that many of my constituents are eager to use the services provided by British Rail, but that they are consistently being made too expensive by constant fare rises- -and that many services are not even accessible because of the continuing closure of railway stations? Far from pursuing privatisation, should not the Government take on board the concept that railways should provide a public service that is available to the majority of the public?

Mr. Freeman : The hon. Lady will know that the Government, on behalf of the taxpayer, provide £1,000 million a year in subsidies to British Rail to run socially necessary services. If she believes that fare increases should be moderated or that fares should be reduced, that would mean the taxpayer having to provide more money for subsidies to British Rail and a bigger burden on the taxpayer. The difference between the Opposition and the Government is that we believe that railway passengers should meet as much of the cost of providing the service as possible and that socially necessary services should be subsidised rather than the passenger.

Lady Olga Maitland : Is my hon. Friend aware that thousands of southern commuters suffer unnecessarily when trains do not run--which I understand is due to cancellations resulting from drivers not turning up for work? Will my hon. Friend therefore look into the trade unions' restrictive practices?

Mr. Freeman : My hon. Friend is right. Certain services are affected by drivers not turning up for work, but I pay tribute to British Rail-- [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) should be generous with his support where British Rail has made an effort to improve the quality of services. Under the passengers charter, there has been a real improvement this year on certain Network SouthEast lines. I hope that my hon. Friend will see continued improvement on her line.

Mr. Prescott : Is the Minister aware of the report published today by the Central Transport Consultative Committee, and of the Health and Safety Executive Commission's report on safety in a privatised railway, which make it clear that there will be serious cuts in passenger services and that they will be less safe due to the lack of adequate financial resources provided by the Government? No doubt that is due to the £3 billion that the Government have taken out of public support since 1983. Does not the Minister think that British Rail and the Secretary of State should switch their attention to that important issue rather than try to explain the confusion

Column 598

about whether the Government intend to privatise, semi-privatise, or commercialise--all of which are irrelevant to the needs of a good railway system?

Mr. Freeman : I will deal with the hon. Gentleman's two specific points, because we shall have an opportunity to debate the full issue tomorrow. As to public support for the railways, the hon. Gentleman is five years out of date. We increased the public service obligation grant in the past four straight years. The hon. Gentleman must get his facts right. He claimed that we removed support, whereas he should know that we have increased it in the past four years. As to safety, every time that there is an accident on the railways--and that happens infrequently--the hon. Gentleman immediately says that the Government and British Rail are skimping on safety. He should know that this year, British Rail is spending £200 million on safety--a significant improvement on previous years. Safety is the single most important factor for not only the Government but British Rail.

Networker Trains (Kent)

10. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received regarding the implementation of the new Networker trains on the north Kent suburban lines.

Mr. MacGregor : There has been a very positive response to the introduction of the new Networker trains.

Mr. Evennett : I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Naturally, my constituents are delighted with the new trains, which are improving the service. As my right hon. Friend knows, however, the Dartford line--which goes through Erith and Crayford, my constituency--has a long way to go before it provides a good service. Can he give my constituents any hope that his plans for the future of the railways will improve the service for commuters to south-east London?

Mr. MacGregor : I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. His question raised two points. The total route modernisation, plus improvements to track, infrastructure and stations, is costing about £800 million. It is the largest investment project to take place on Network SouthEast in recent years, and many of the benefits are still to flow through. For example, new Networker trains are now coming on to the line at the rate of one a week, and all 764 coaches will have been delivered by mid-1994. My hon. Friend can tell his constituents that the number of new trains will continue to increase week by week.

As for the second point, I am sure that franchising will lead to improved passenger services in 1994 and beyond.

Mr. Mackinlay : Who is to blame for the decay of the railway network in the south-east which has been mentioned by the hon. Members for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland), for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Evennett), for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) and for Gillingham (Mr. Couchman)?

Mr. MacGregor : A number of factors are involved. The fact is, however, that a substantial capital investment is being made. That, combined with all the organisational changes made by British Rail--changes which were very necessary--will produce better services in the future. I also believe that our privatisation proposals, including the

Column 599

proposal for the franchising of passenger services, will provide even more benefits than those produced by the management changes that have already taken place.

Mr. Dunn : Will my right hon. Friend accept my constituents' congratulations for his part in pushing British Rail to supply fresh rolling stock for the north Kent lines? Will he now turn his attention to the need for new signalling equipment, which would make the service not only of good quality but reliable in future? The need for such equipment is the last major impediment to the breakthrough that north Kent commuters require.

Mr. MacGregor I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I understand his point. Of the £800 million that I mentioned, £150 million will be spent on improving track, power and signalling equipment, as well as on extending platforms at 63 stations. My hon. Friend can be assured that work is going ahead on signalling.

Mr. Bayley : Will the Secretary of State pay tribute to the work force and management of ABB Transportation Ltd. in York, which built the magnificent modern Networker trains that are used on the north Kent line? Is he aware that the company has invested many millions of pounds in its factory in the expectation of orders from British Rail, but is now running at little more than two thirds of capacity? Further orders could be dealt with ; commuters in the south-east need the trains, and people in York need the jobs.

Mr. MacGregor : The hon. Gentleman will know that in the autumn statement we announced a £150 million leasing programme in the run-up to privatisation. Indeed, only the prospect of privatisation enabled us to do that. It is now for British Rail to decide what use it makes of that programme. Late last week I had a discussion with the chairman and board members of British Rail, and I know that they are considering how they may take full advantage of it. It is for them to decide on the rolling stock to which the programme will be applied.

Trunk Roads (Dorset)

11. Mr. Ian Bruce : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the trunk road building programme for Dorset.

Mr. Kenneth Carlisle : The national trunk road programme contains 12 schemes in Dorset, with a value of more than £90 million. The schemes most recently opened to traffic were dual carriageway improvements between Yellowham hill and Troytown, in December 1991, and between Mere and Wincanton--which serves north Dorset--in July 1992.

Mr. Bruce : I thank my hon. Friend for his answer, and for the enormous amount of investment that is going into Dorset--particularly that which benefits people trying to travel to and from London. Dorset has already spent a good deal of money on the A37, but the last link, which goes to Yeovil, must go through Somerset, and therefore receives no investment. Will my hon. Friend consider making it a trunk road, thus greatly improving north-south communication for my constituency?

Mr. Carlisle : My hon. Friend is always fighting for better roads in south Dorset. I pay tribute to him for that.

Column 600

I remind him, however, that it is unnecessary for a road to be a trunk road if it is to be greatly improved. On the two north-south routes in Dorset, the A350 and the A354/A37, in recent years four schemes have been approved for transport supplementary grant worth £30 million or more in total. Investment in these routes will continue.

British Rail Maintenance Ltd.

12. Mr. Milligan : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he has decided on the future ownership of British Rail Maintenance Ltd. ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Freeman : We are still considering the options for BRML depots. We have made it clear that we see benefits in involving the private sector in the heavy repair work currently carried out by BRML.

Mr. Milligan : I am grateful to the Minister for his answer, but is he aware of the extreme anxiety among the 1,500 employees of BRML in my constituency, particularly after recent job losses? They fear that the change of ownership could mean further job losses. Could my hon. Friend be a little more precise about when he expects to make a decision? And when he makes it, will he bear in mind both the need to maintain employment in what is an extremely efficiently run works and the need to ensure proper competition so that the works at Eastleigh, and elsewhere, can compete fairly for work on the railways and for other business?

Next Section

Home Page