| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
13. Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are the reasons for the delay in completion of the widening works of the M25 at Reigate; and who will meet the additional related costs.[17765]
Mr. Watts: The principal reasons have been the need to replace more of the existing road than was expected and the formation of ruts in the resurfaced carriageway. These costs of unforeseen works will be borne by the Highways Agency. I am happy to say that four lanes in both directions were opened on Saturday 8 March.
Mr. Mackinlay: Does the Minister understand that the people of Reigate are not interested in the petty squabbling and spite of the Conservative party but want to know why they have been frustrated in using the motorway between junctions 6 and 8, along with thousands of other people who use that road for commerce and for getting to and from work? Who will pay the additional costs that have been incurred by the inordinate and unacceptable delay over which the Minister has presided? What is the cost to the taxpayer of the absolute shambles and scandal over which he is presiding?
Mr. Watts: I have been inconvenienced from time to time in travelling from my home, and I know that the hon. Gentleman has also been inconvenienced. Throughout the roadworks, three lanes in each direction have been kept open. Until the contract is completed and the final accounts settled, the final cost cannot be determined.
14. Mr. Grocott: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of his policy of transferring traffic from road to rail.[17766]
Mr. Watts: I review the effectiveness of this policy regularly. Newly privatised train operators have ambitious plans to attract new passengers and freight by getting traffic off the roads and on to the trains.
Mr. Grocott: That was not an answer to the question. May I help the Minister? Since the Conservative party came to power, despite its declared support for the transfer of traffic from road to rail, the proportion of passenger traffic by rail has gone down from 7 per cent.--admittedly low--to 5 per cent., and the proportion of freight traffic has gone down from 11 per cent. to 6 per cent. I have a simple proposition which is common sense to everyone except the Government. If a national rail system is dismembered and fragmented, as the Government have done through their privatisation policy, any strategy of trying to transfer goods from road to rail, which is difficult at the best of times, is made almost impossible.
Mr. Watts: There might be a little more in the hon. Gentlemen's argument on the effects of restructuring if it were not for the fact that, in 1996, the level of rail passenger traffic was higher than at any time in the previous five years. I am sure that he will welcome the intention of the new franchisee for the west coast main line to investigate the feasibility of through services to Shrewsbury, which I believe would be of benefit to his constituency.
The newly privatised rail freight operators have been succeeding in winning new business. More than 150 rail freight grants have been awarded, securing traffic to rail--which is equivalent to more than 3 million lorry journeys per year. Last Thursday, I announced that we are introducing regulations to extend to piggyback operations the 44-tonne derogation that is currently enjoyed by lorries taking containers and swap bodies to railheads. That is a further measure to encourage the switch of freight from road to rail. Those are some of the actions of which we are justifiably proud.
Sir Teddy Taylor:
Is the Minister aware thatthe much improved service to Southend on the London-Tilbury-Southend line--it used to be called the misery line under British Rail--since privatisation is being helped further by the promise of new and faster trains? Is that not only one example of how we can get traffic from road to rail, and bring great benefits to the travelling public?
Mr. Watts:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The order for new rolling stock placed last week will be widely welcomed by passengers on a line that used to be called the misery line but is now among the most popular lines on the entire railway network.
35. Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Lord President of the Council what proportion of the Government's legislative programme he plans to complete by Easter.[17787]
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): As much as possible.
Mr. Hughes: I suppose that is about par for the course. On my calculation, 25 Government Bills are still before one or other House of Parliament. It would be helpful if the Leader of the House would give us a slightly more accurate estimate of how many of those he proposes should be completed--he must have a timetable. Just a postscript: will the extraordinary and possibly farcical change of party by the hon. Member for Reigate(Sir G. Gardiner) have any effect on the composition of the Committees considering any of those Bills?
Mr. Newton: It is not for me to determine the composition of Committees, as that is done under an order of the House which was passed only about two years ago. The hon. Gentleman will also be aware that relatively few Bills are now in Committee.
On the hon. Gentleman's general question, I am no more able to give him an answer now than I was when he asked it on a previous occasion, when I said that the number of variables involved would make any estimate merely speculative. That remains the case.
Sir Patrick Cormack:
Does my right hon. Friend expect to be able to give us a better answer this Thursday? Will he give us some indication of whether the House is likely to sit until 27 March or to come back after Easter and a short recess?
Mr. Newton:
I am mindful of the interest in that question.
36. Mr. Cohen:
To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will establish a Grand Committee for London.[17789]
Mr. Newton:
I have no plans to do so.
Mr. Cohen:
Why have the Tories brought nothing but decline to London? They abolished the Greater London council and will not allow Londoners to have any strategic say in their own affairs. Consequently, traffic chokes up the capital; the health service and public transport have been run down; and there is large-scale homelessness, crime and unemployment. It has also damaged London's prosperity and prospects. As Labour will establish a new democratic authority for London and raise London's status, is it any wonder that discerning Londoners are turning in droves to Labour?
Mr. Newton:
According to my information, London already has 84 Members of Parliament, more than 2,000
Mr. Dykes:
Obviously every capital city needs some type of collective system of government for the entire capital territory. Which system does my right hon. Friend personally prefer?
Mr. Newton:
I personally prefer the position which the Government have adopted whereby there is, for example, a designated Minister for Transport in London, who was in the House only a short time ago, and whereby my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, as Minister for London, co-ordinates a Cabinet sub-committee for that purpose.
37. Mr. Llwyd:
To ask the Lord President of the Council how many recent representations he has received on the length of the annual summer recess; and if he will make a statement.[17790]
Mr. Newton:
I have been asked about this on a number of occasions during questions on my weekly business statement.
Mr. Llwyd:
With respect to the Lord President, that was not a very good answer, was it? I am interested to know whether the right hon. Gentleman has received any
Mr. Newton:
I have been asked about that a couple of times during business questions in the past six or seven months, or perhaps a little longer. I have commented on the matter fairly frequently and referred to the report of the Jopling Committee, which made no recommendations for changes along the lines suggested by the hon. Gentleman.
38. Mr. Steen:
To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will bring forward measures to ensure that all European directives are debated on the Floor of the House.[17791]
Mr. Newton:
I have no plans to do so.
Mr. Steen:
As it has become the practice to get European matters in and out of Committee as quickly as possible and with as little debate as possible, will the Leader of the House consider dealing with all European matters on the Floor of the House until the general election, as happened years ago, so that the whole country can see the extent of Brussels' interference in our way of life?
Mr. Newton:
I note my hon. Friend's concern, but were we to proceed as he suggests and were all European matters to be discussed on the Floor of the House, I would want a signed undertaking from him that he did not wish to have an Easter recess at all.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |