Network Rail
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 1 month ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
Today the Office for National Statistics announced that, following a review, Network Rail will be classified as a central Government body in the public sector. This is an independent statistical decision taken by the Office for National Statistics in light of the European system of national accounts 2010 (ESA10) manual from Eurostat which comes into force across the EU from 1 September 2014.
The Government welcome the ONS review and have always been committed to the transparent reporting of public liabilities. The change in Network Rail’s classification will mean that the company’s net debt, currently some £30 billion, will appear on the Government’s balance sheet. The Office for Budget Responsibility noted in its “Economic and fiscal outlook” published on 5 December, that this will likely increase public sector net debt by about 2% of GDP and public sector net borrowing by 0.2% of GDP on average. The Government remain committed to their plans to reduce the deficit and will continue to do so by taking difficult decisions to cut public spending and prioritise investment in infrastructure to deliver a stronger economy and fairer society. The new classification will be implemented from 1 September 2014 and will apply from April 2004. Until then Network Rail remains in the private sector.
I am committed to ensuring that Network Rail maintains the operational flexibility to continue to deliver a safe, punctual rail network and increased capacity for our busy railways and that it is able to attract a high calibre of staff, while still providing value for money and being accountable to Parliament.
My Department will agree appropriate accounting and governance adjustments for Network Rail to ensure it can continue to deliver world-class railway infrastructure when the company is reclassified for statistical purposes on 1 September 2014. I have accordingly agreed a memorandum of understanding with Network Rail that sets out how we will work together to develop and agree that framework. This memorandum has today been published on my Department’s website and copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
This Government remain committed to the railway. The ONS decision on the classification of Network Rail does not affect the planned improvement and investment in the railways, including Network Rail’s £38 billion settlement for the planned running of and investment in the railway in the five years from 2014. This Government’s plans for HS2 and the rail franchising programme set out in March this year are unchanged. The Office of Rail Regulation will remain the economic and safety regulator for the railway and the ONS decision will have no effect on rail fares, performance, punctuality, timetables, or safety. My Department will continue to consider how to best secure the benefits of private investment in rail infrastructure and work with Network Rail to deliver the best possible railway for the benefit of the whole industry, its passengers, and the taxpayer.
Lower Thames Crossing
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
On 21 May 2013, Official Report, column 74WS, the Department for Transport announced the launch of a public consultation on “Options for a New Lower Thames Crossing”. The consultation document set out the case for additional road-based river crossing capacity in the lower Thames area and the relative merits of three potential locations with one variant. It invited views on where to locate a new crossing.
The three options on which we consulted were:
Option A—at the site of the existing A282 Dartford-Thurrock river crossing;
Option B—connecting the A2 with the A1089; and
Option C—connecting the M2 with the A13 and the M25 between junctions 29 and 30.
Option C—variant: additionally widening the A229 between the M2 and M20.
The consultation closed on 16 July 2013.
I am pleased to announce this consultation resulted in a very good response. We received more than 5,700 consultation responses expressing a range of opinions. These have been analysed and I am publishing a report on the consultation on the Government website. A copy of the report will also be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Respondents raised a number of important points, which deserve due attention. At the same time we are committed to reaching a decision on location as speedily and effectively as possible.
The Department’s review of options showed that option B has the weakest case. Consultation feedback has additionally shown that option B receives limited support and instead raises serious concerns that it would jeopardise major redevelopment of the Swanscombe peninsula, a key part of the growth strategy for the Thames gateway area. A number of stakeholders have urged me to discard this option as swiftly as possible.
I have therefore decided that there are sufficient grounds to discard option B and that Government should focus on the choice between options A and C. The consultation evidence has persuaded me that this decision is one that has far reaching consequences for local people and users of the crossing. It is therefore not a decision to be taken lightly.
To assist Government in considering the consultation feedback and weigh up the relative merits of options A and C I am obtaining further advice on:
Potential scale of further improvements which may be required on the M25 and A13;
Potential implications for air quality in terms of compliance with national and European targets;
Potential scale of mitigation relating to possible impacts on protected habitats.
I will make a further announcement regarding the consideration of options A and C as soon as possible. This need not delay the delivery of the crossing as development of the remaining options continues.
In the meantime, we remain committed to introducing free flow charging at the Dartford-Thurrock crossing by October 2014. This will help alleviate congestion on the crossing in the short term.
Christopher Irwin (Indemnification)
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
The Government have decided to indemnify Mr Christopher Irwin, head of the UK delegation to the Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission (IGC) for damages and legal costs incurred in the exercise of his functions in relation to liabilities incurred or proceedings brought in any jurisdiction, whether in the United Kingdom, France, or anywhere else in Europe or in the world. This will cover legal representation, costs and civil liabilities.
A departmental minute providing full detail of the indemnity and the reasons for it has been laid in the House of Commons today.
The contractual position of Christopher Irwin is complex. This is due to the dual role of the IGC, as representative of the British and French Governments and independent regulator under EU law. Chris is appointed by me but, under a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), the independent regulator, I must consult the ORR first. The head of the UK delegation can be dismissed by me, but the MoU restricts my ability to do so to a limited number of cases where he would clearly not be fit to act. Under the MoU, the head of delegation is remunerated by the ORR, but his remuneration comes from the money that the concessionaires of the tunnel (Eurotunnel) are required, under the concession, to pay towards the IGC’s expenses. Chris’s contract is with the ORR—his letter and terms of appointment characterise him not as an employee but as an individual providing services to ORR. He is remunerated on a fees for service basis.
I consider that it is only right and proper for Chris to be afforded an indemnity similar to that enjoyed by senior civil servants—SCS employees—in the course of their duties; given that Chris is an appointee of mine, even though, in order to protect his independence, the ORR “hosts” him.
The terms of the indemnity follows the precedents set for managing public money as well as the civil service management code.
The Treasury has approved the proposal in principle. If, during the period of 14 parliamentary sitting days beginning on the date on which this minute was laid before Parliament, a Member signifies an objection by giving notice of a parliamentary question or by otherwise raising the matter in Parliament, final approval to proceed with incurring the liability will be withheld pending an examination of the objection.
High Speed Rail (London - West Midlands) Bill
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
Later today the High Speed Rail (London - West Midlands) Bill will receive its First Reading. This is a significant step forward in the Government’s strategy for a high-speed rail network that will address the critical capacity constraints that we face and improve connectivity between our great cities. This is vital to ensure that the country is equipped to compete economically in the 21st century.
The Bill includes the powers necessary to construct and operate phase 1 of HS2 between London and the west midlands. Alongside the Bill I will also be publishing several other related documents.
As required by Standing Orders I will publish an environmental statement (ES) alongside the Bill. This ES describes the railway, the alternatives considered to it, the significant environmental effects that are likely to arise from its construction and operation, and the measures proposed to avoid or reduce these effects. It has been informed by the consultation on the draft environmental statement held earlier this year and includes HS2 Ltd’s response to that consultation.
Following publication of the ES a public consultation will be held that will close on 24 January 2014. A report summarising the responses will be produced by an independent assessor appointed by the House authorities.
I will also publish the Command Paper “The Government response to the HS2 Design Refinement Consultation”. In October I announced my decisions in relation to the proposals for tunnels at Northolt and Bromford, and this document sets out my decisions in relation to the remaining 12 design proposals that were consulted on between May and July this year.
I will also publish two Command Papers addressing issues outstanding from the October 2012 property and compensation consultation. “HS2 Property and Compensation for London-West Midlands Decision document—Impact on Social Rented Housing” sets out the Government’s approach to the replacement of lost social rented housing. It affirms our commitment to working with key stakeholders in order to ensure that where social rented housing is lost as a result of HS2, it is replaced in a manner sympathetic to local needs and reflective of the relevant local authority’s strategy for social housing.
“HS2 Property and Compensation for London-West Midlands Decision document—Properties above Tunnels” addresses our policies relating to properties above tunnels and other underground excavations, providing clarity and reassurance for property owners and the wider market.
Copies of these Command Papers and the ES will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses. The documents can also be found on: www.gov.uk/dft.
Airport Security Scanners
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
Security scanners are currently in operation at 10 of the UK’s largest airports. They were deployed in response to the threat to aviation posed by non-metallic improvised explosive devices, such as the device used in the attack on Northwest Flight 253 from Amsterdam Schiphol to Detroit on Christmas day 2009, and the device recovered in Yemen in spring 2012. These devices were designed to make detection by existing screening methods extremely difficult. More broadly, the UK threat level remains at substantial: an attack is a strong possibility.
It is for these reasons that, after careful consideration, I have decided that a further 11 airports will be required to deploy security scanners, and I will be issuing directions to that effect to the following airports:
Stansted | Luton | Bristol |
Liverpool | Newcastle | Aberdeen |
Leeds Bradford | East Midlands | Prestwick |
Cardiff | Belfast City |
In parallel, work is under way with those airports which already deploy security scanners to consider the case for increasing their deployment of security scanners.
In the UK, all security scanners now use millimetre wave technology, which has no known health risks, and which is quite different from X-ray technology. Furthermore, all security scanners deployed now use automatic threat recognition software, which means that no image of a passenger is produced, thus alleviating any residual health or privacy concerns.
The overwhelming evidence from airports is that nearly all passengers accept the use of security scanners and find the process quick and convenient. However, I appreciate a small minority may still prefer to request an alternative procedure for a variety of reasons.
In the past, passengers who refused to be scanned by a security scanner were not offered an alternative, and were not allowed to fly on that occasion. This was a security and operational decision: only a private search (a thorough hand search in which the passenger may be asked to loosen or remove clothing) would offer a broadly similar security assurance to a scan, and it was considered that offering this as an alternative would be too operationally disruptive to the airport and to other passengers.
However, experience of operating security scanners for several years has shown that the vast majority of passengers are content to be screened by a security scanner if selected. Consequently the number of passengers refusing to be scanned is very low. As a result, and having reviewed the current position, I have concluded that from tomorrow, Friday 22 November, passengers who opt out of being screened by a security scanner will be allowed a private search alternative. This is a method of screening which we consider is of an equivalent security value to a security scan. These revised arrangements will be kept under review to ensure that high levels of security are maintained while avoiding disproportionate impacts on airports and passengers.
In addition, where it can be demonstrated that another security process, or combination of processes, offer the same level of security as a scan, then I will consider allowing further alternatives to a private search to be offered to passengers.
If a passenger does not accept this alternative method, and still refuses the security scan, they will not be allowed to fly on that occasion.
This approach will allow the small minority of passengers who continue to have concerns about the use of scanners to request an alternative method of screening while maintaining high levels of security at UK airports.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield) (Con)
2. What procedures are available to communities to seek mitigation of the effects of the High Speed 2 route with respect to visual, aural and vibration disturbance.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
There has already been widespread consultation on phase 1. In addition, there will be a consultation on the environmental statement following the deposit of the hybrid Bill and the opportunity to petition the Select Committee established as part of the hybrid Bill process. For phase 2, the route consultation is currently under way and is due to end in January 2014.
Michael Fabricant
A few months ago, I and a group of people from Lichfield came to see the Secretary of State to discuss the monstrous 20-metre high viaduct planned for the HS2 crossing over Lichfield. He will know that this affects not only Lichfield, but the constituencies of my hon. Friends the Members for Tamworth (Christopher Pincher) and for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy), because of the height of the line. A plan for mitigation was developed together with HS2 engineers, and this has been completely ignored. When can we have some hope that there will be any mitigation for us in Staffordshire?
Mr McLoughlin
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He rightly says that he never loses an opportunity to make clear his objection to this viaduct. It was part of a route realignment which was done initially to help mitigate some of the effects around Lichfield, but once the Bill is deposited and following Second Reading there will, of course, be an opportunity for those directly affected to petition the Select Committee.
Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab)
Does the Secretary of State know of any other countries which, on building their second high-speed railway line, have chosen to connect it to the first via a single-track railway line with a capacity of three trains per hour?
Mr McLoughlin
The important thing is that there will be a connection between HS1 and HS2. That will allow direct access for trips right through Europe from places that at present do not have those connections. That is important. We believe the three trains per hour that will be able to go directly from Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds to Paris or Brussels or other European destinations is a very positive move.
Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con)
As my right hon. Friend knows, the preferred route for HS2 phase 2 goes straight through the village of Hopton in my constituency, as well as Ingestre, Yarlet and Marston and close by to Great Harwood. What measures can HS2 take to mitigate the effects on these communities, either through extra tunnelling or realignment of the route?
Mr McLoughlin
What I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) in my original answer was that the consultation for phase 2 is still ongoing and it would be wrong of me at this stage to pre-empt it. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy) will be making strong representations through the consultation process, and I will consider them in due course.
Christopher Pincher (Tamworth) (Con)
Pursuant to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant), I know that the Secretary of State takes these matters very seriously, but does he agree that where mitigations are small scale, such as those proposed by my constituents in the Knox Grave Lane community, HS2 should be able to move ahead with them quickly and not give conflicting messages to the community affected? I have written to him on this matter. Will he give the letter careful consideration?
Mr McLoughlin
Of course I will consider any points that my hon. Friend has written to me about. Consistency in HS2’s responses on these lines that directly affect people is very important. I am disturbed to hear that inconsistent advice has been given by HS2, and I will want to look into it.
Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con)
3. What assessment he has made of the potential of High Speed 1 domestic services in Kent to expand.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
I recognise the importance of domestic High Speed 1 services to the people and economies of Kent. The Department is currently negotiating a direct award with Southeastern, which operates them, in which we will consider what improvements can be made to services. We are also undertaking an evaluation study of the High Speed 1 infrastructure, which is due to report in spring next year.
Charlie Elphicke
I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. High-speed services are economically transformational for east Kent. Constituents of mine in Deal, and those in Sandwich, wish to have an all-day Javelin high-speed service. Will Ministers help to make that happen?
Mr McLoughlin
I know how very important the high-speed service has been to my hon. Friend’s constituents. Although high-speed rail does not run right down to Deal or Sandwich, his constituents get the benefit from HS1 as the Javelin train from St Pancras carries on to serve them. There are ongoing negotiations about the franchise extension, which we will be doing with Southeastern, and I will certainly bear his comments in mind.
Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con)
4. What plans he has to extend railway electrification.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
In the rail investment strategy the Government are investing in more than 800 miles of electrification up to 2019. This includes lines in the north-west, north trans-Pennine, midland main line, electric spine, Great Western main line and Welsh valley areas. That is a substantial advance in electrification of the railways in this country.
Andrew Jones
I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. A couple of weeks ago, I launched the business case for the electrification of the Harrogate to Knaresborough rail line, which would bring more frequent and quicker services for passengers, and a great return for taxpayers from public money. Will he meet me to discuss this opportunity?
Mr McLoughlin
I will be delighted to meet my hon. Friend, who wastes no opportunity to raise this case for electrification with me. He has been a doughty campaigner for it. We have received a copy of the business case for the electrification of the Leeds, Harrogate and York line. The case looks promising and I am more than happy to discuss it further with him.
Mrs Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab/Co-op)
Plans for electrification are very welcome, but when will rolling stock be available for the electrified lines in the north, now that that there has been such a delay in the procurement for the Thameslink project?
Mr McLoughlin
I hope that that delay, on which there was a Public Accounts Committee report recently, will not lead to long-term delay. I am confident that once we have done the electrification the rolling stock will be ready to fulfil the needs we all want it to fulfil.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
The Secretary of State will be aware that people in Cumbria very much welcome the plans for electrification of the lakes line to Windermere and the benefits that will bring to the economy and the environment. Will he also consider the electrification of the Furness line from Lancaster to Barrow, which goes through my constituency? That would link the industrial centres of Barrow and the western Lake district to the main line.
Mr McLoughlin
Indeed, and when I was in my hon. Friend’s constituency in the summer I was made very much aware of the desire for that line to be electrified. One great thing that has happened in the railways is that the constant request of any Secretary of State now is for more services and better services. That just shows how important the railways are now to our national life, and I will look at the case he makes.
Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State tell me why under the current arrangements the electrification of the route to Hull will stop at Selby, which, as I am sure he knows, is several miles short of Hull? Will he do everything he can to support the Hull trains proposal to extend the electrification to Hull?
Mr McLoughlin
I could point out to the hon. Lady how much of the line was electrified by the previous Labour Government in 13 years: 10 miles, as opposed to the 880 miles that we are planning to electrify as part of our commitment to the railways. She is making yet another case for further electrification of an important line and I shall certainly look at the case again in detail.
Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con)
The Secretary of State will know that the welcome electrification of the midland main line will miss out the two stations in my constituency at Langley Mill and Alfreton. Will he consider the plans to complete that little section so that the whole line is electrified?
Mr McLoughlin
I had a meeting on Monday morning with the people operating the midland main line franchise and that particular issue was pointed out to me. We plan to electrify the whole line from St Pancras up to Sheffield, but my hon. Friend is right that part of it, which goes through his constituency, is missed out. I have no doubt that we will want to look at that as we are doing the rest of the line.
Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)
Last November, I asked the Secretary of State whether one of the intentions behind the electrification of the midland main line was to speed up journey times, in which case the line would need the new inter-city express trains and not the transfer of old rolling stock from the east coast line, which would be slower and would increase journey times. The Secretary of State could not answer me then. Can he tell me now whether the electrified midland main line will get the new rolling stock needed to speed up journey times, which is what we both want to see?
Mr McLoughlin
I travelled down on the line—in the cab, as it happens—on Monday morning and I saw some of the work that is going on for the planned electrification. A number of bridges are being replaced, which is necessary. That work is well under way and has started well. I will consider the questions about new rolling stock in due course when I come to consider the remaining period of the franchise.
Mr Robert Buckland (South Swindon) (Con)
5. What progress he has made on reviewing the structure of rail passenger fares.
Mrs Anne McGuire (Stirling) (Lab)
10. What recent assessment he has made of East Coast Main Line Ltd’s financial performance.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
My officials regularly meet representatives of East Coast Main Line and Directly Operated Railways to discuss the performance of the franchise. DOR’s financial accounts are published on its website annually. On 24 October, I announced the start of the competition for a new private sector partner for InterCity East Coast and published a prospectus for the East Coast Main Line business, which included an assessment of its financial performance.
Mrs McGuire
I thank the Secretary of State for his answer. Will he confirm that while German, Dutch and French railway companies will be allowed to tender for the new franchise, a successful British company that is currently operating the franchise will not be allowed to do so?
Mr McLoughlin
I refer the right hon. Lady back to the time when she was a supporting member of the previous Government, when the then Secretary of State said:
“I do not believe that it would be in the public interest for us to have a nationalised train operating company indefinitely…because of our recent experience on rail franchising”.—[Official Report, House of Lords, 1 July 2009; Vol. 712, c. 232.]
Rail franchising has led to the biggest growth in rail usage in this country that we have ever seen—up from 750 million to 1.5 billion passenger journeys. I want that improvement to continue, and that is why huge investment is going into the east coast main line.
Graeme Morrice (Livingston) (Lab)
12. The publicly run east coast main line franchise will have returned £800 million to the taxpayer by the end of this financial year, and all its profits are reinvested in the service. Why are the coalition Government privatising this successful public operator, given that the previous two private operators failed?
Mr McLoughlin
As I pointed out to the right hon. Member for Stirling (Mrs McGuire), I am following the policies that have taken the rail industry from 750 million to 1.5 billion passenger journeys. I am happy to speak for the passengers and for all the people who work on the railways; it seems as though Labour Members are happy to speak just for the union barons. They can speak for the barons; I will speak for the workers, the consumers and the people who use our railways.
Heidi Alexander (Lewisham East) (Lab)
T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
We have started consultations on our plans to reform the Highways Agency into a Government-owned company, backed by legislation, to achieve greater efficiency as we treble our capital spending on the strategic road network. Significant efforts have been made this year across road, rail and aviation to boost resilience and preparedness for the winter months. This week, the Highways Agency began its “Make time for winter” campaign, with practical advice for drivers. Local highways authorities are holding robust salt stocks and will enter the winter with a healthy supply.
Heidi Alexander
The Government’s policy on rail fares will offer scant consolation to my constituents, who not only have to travel on unbearably overcrowded trains into central London but in the past two years have been asked to pay £100 more for their annual season ticket. What guarantee can the Secretary of State give that above-inflation increases in rail fares will be matched by a comparable increase in capacity?
Mr McLoughlin
There is a problem, but we are investing record amounts in the rail industry. Over the next five years, Network Rail will invest some £38 billion in the railway network. Those are very significant investments that are bringing on new rolling stock and better capacity and efficiency to try to help people who are suffering. I do accept, particularly where there is overcrowding, that we need to try to do more to help those consumers.
Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)
T2. The electrification of the midland main line through Kettering is extremely welcome, but the immediate consequence for Kettering residents is the complete closure of the Pytchley Road bridge as it is changed to accommodate the new overhead wires. That means that the main access route into Kettering from the south will be completely closed for three months over the Christmas period. Will the Secretary of State ensure that Network Rail completes this job on time by the end of February 2014?
Mr McLoughlin
I well understand the concerns raised by my hon. Friend. This is one of the problems when major work is done on the railways. As he may have heard earlier, I travelled in the cab of one of those trains on Monday to see some of the work that is already ongoing in preparation for the electrification of the whole line. There will be some disruption—that is unavoidable. Nottingham station was closed for five weeks over the summer, but the whole job was done on time and it actually came in £5 million below budget.
Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab)
T3. The Secretary of State will be aware that there has been significant disruption on the east coast main line because of infrastructure failure. I think we have now had three Mondays on which there has been significant disruption, and a fortnight ago 30,000 passengers were stranded, some for five or six hours, while repairs were carried out. The east coast main line was electrified on the cheap—many engineers tell us that, and there has been severe disruption. Can we do something about it, please?
Mr McLoughlin
I understand the hon. Gentleman’s point. It relates to what we are doing with HS2 to increase capacity in the longer term, although that is not the short-term answer he wants. I was disturbed to read the reports about the delays on the line, and I will talk to Network Rail to see if there is anything we can do.
Peter Luff (Mid Worcestershire) (Con)
T4. The high speed of High Speed 2 will depend on the high technology of a new generation of civil engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers and many others. May I challenge a member of the ministerial Front Bench to come upstairs with me, after Question Time, to the Bloodhound supersonic car simulator to see whether they can beat the very creditable speed of the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Richard Burden) and learn about what the product is doing to inspire a new generation of children about the opportunities for British engineering?
Steve Rotheram (Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)
T7. I am basically supportive of HS2 proposals, although I am becoming increasingly concerned about the project the more I read the specific detail of regional benefits. Will the Secretary of State assure me that Liverpool will get a spur to increase capacity and ensure greater connectivity with our ports so that the whole city region can benefit?
Mr McLoughlin
I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman seems to be having second thoughts. The mayor of Liverpool is certainly not having second thoughts and is a big supporter of the project. The truth is that once the high-speed line goes to Manchester, it will then go on to Liverpool. That will be very important for Liverpool, but it will also get the benefits from phase 1. Parts of Kent that are not served by the line benefit from the capacity and the trains.
Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)
T5. I am extremely grateful to have got here, having been stuck outside Clapham Junction station. May I seek assurances from the Department that it will work closely with major transport infrastructure such as Gatwick airport and those who operate the M23 and the London to Brighton rail line to ensure that there is winter preparedness?
Andrew Percy (Brigg and Goole) (Con)
T6. The Secretary of State has been very kind to the East Riding in respect of pinch-point funding. I urge him to extend his kindness to the other side of the Humber and support the pinch-point funding bids from North Lincolnshire council, of which my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Martin Vickers) and I are very supportive, and in particular the bid that relates to Humberside airport.
Mr McLoughlin
I have visited my hon. Friend’s constituency to look at one of the pinch-point schemes that has received funding and will take any representations about other schemes into account.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)
Although the reduction in road accident fatalities is warmly to be welcomed, what plans does the Department have to make cycling safer, given the increase in cycling fatalities not only in London, but beyond, which has been mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Richard Burden)? When will the Secretary of State encourage the creation of segregated cycle paths?
Mr McLoughlin
We all want local authority highways agencies to give greater consideration to cycling. After meeting British Cycling a few weeks ago, I instructed the Highways Agency that all the highways schemes that it comes forward with must be cycle-proofed. There are some irresponsible drivers and some irresponsible cyclists. We all have a responsibility to get the message across to everybody: “Be careful on our roads.”
Charlotte Leslie (Bristol North West) (Con)
T8. How can the Secretary of State reassure the people of Bristol, who want enhanced branch lines, that having HS2 for London and the north will not mean that the south-west is left out? Will he look positively at bids to reopen the Henbury loop line in north Bristol?
Mr McLoughlin
The development of HS2 does not mean that the people of Bristol and the south-west will be left out. HS2 is part of a bigger boost to our transport system and will make up less than a quarter of the transport investment in the next Parliament. I am always interested in talking to my hon. Friends about the schemes that they are promoting in their constituencies and I am more than happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss her scheme in greater detail.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Does the Minister agree that as we approach the Christmas period, more use should be made of the media, and television in particular, to underline the zero-tolerance message on drink-driving? Will he consider running such a campaign in conjunction with all the regions of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
Phil Wilson (Sedgefield) (Lab)
The A67, which runs through my constituency between Darlington and Barnard Castle, is a major bus route. It recently suffered from a major landslip at Carlbury banks, which is severely disrupting bus services. Will a Minister meet my hon. Friends the Members for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman) and for Darlington (Jenny Chapman) and me to see whether any funding can be made available from the pinch-point fund?
Mr McLoughlin
I was in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency last Friday for the start of work on the new Hitachi site, which will build new trains for the east coast and Great Western lines. I am sorry to hear about the problems that he is having with part of his highways network. We will be happy to talk to him in due course.
Nick de Bois (Enfield North) (Con)
The Secretary of State will be aware that the M25, which spans my constituency from junction 23 to junction 25, has had a serious spike in fatal accidents, which included the tragic deaths of three people and two young girls during the course of one week. Will he urgently investigate the causes of those accidents, which might include the road management measures during the road expansion works, and let me know what he finds as soon as possible?
Mr McLoughlin
My hon. Friend has already written to me about this issue, and brought my attention to those appalling incidents that caused the death of those people, and the families who were affected, as well as incredible disruption to his area. I want a full investigation into whether the points he has raised had any bearings on those accidents.
High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mrs Gillan
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. Of course, it echoed the words of Lord Mandelson, who really does know an awful lot about the genesis of this project. It certainly has that vampiric touch about it, as I think Members on both sides of the House can appreciate.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
If HS2 is going to suck the lifeblood of the northern cities, as the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr Sheerman) suggests, why are the leaders of those northern cities, such as Sir Richard Leese and Albert Bore, the loudest demanders of this service?
Mrs Gillan
Oh simple, simple question, Secretary of State! What leader of any council of any political colour or persuasion would turn down the millions and millions of pounds being thrown at their areas? It would be completely stupid of them to do anything other than support it.
Mr McLoughlin
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
Let me begin by thanking all Members who served on the Public Bill Committee. In particular I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr Burns), not only for his work on the Bill, but also for the hard work that he put into the Department for Transport during his time there. It was a great pleasure to work with him.
For a project as important as this, everyone should have their say—indeed, it sometimes feels as if they do. At the same time, however, we need to move the debate forward, which is what the Bill does. This is the point at which the debate starts moving from “if “ to “when”. The House has already voted overwhelmingly in favour of the principle of a new high-speed, high-capacity rail network. I hope it will do so again this evening because the decisions we take today will benefit our country for decades to come.
Just this week, with the storms that hit the south and east, we have seen how crucial our railways are to national life. When trains are crowded and disrupted, life for hard-working people gets more difficult. That is why the new north-south line is not some expensive luxury.
Mr McLoughlin
I will, but I do so reluctantly because of the number of hon. Members who want to take part in Third Reading.
Mr Cash
I understand why the Secretary of State is reluctant to give way. Throughout the whole of this land, people are deeply disturbed by the manner in which the Bill is being rammed through. Furthermore, as he well knows, the arrangements he has described as benefits are not accepted by my constituents and many other people, nor by the many reports emanating from the Public Accounts Committee and others that demonstrate that HS2 is not a straightforward benefit, and is in fact quite the opposite.
Mr McLoughlin
I know my hon. Friend is not in favour of the new line—he loses no time in telling me that. I dare say that similar comments were made in debates on railways in the House over the centuries. The truth is that the line will be the first line built north of London in 120 years. I understand the concerns of hon. Members whose constituencies the line goes through. I do not dismiss them and have never done so. I want to ensure that we have a fair compensation scheme in place. I believe that the scheme is, without any doubt, right for the future of the UK.
I find it rather ridiculous that I can go from London to Paris on a high-speed train, and that my hon. Friend can go from London to Brussels on a high-speed train—I know he keeps a close eye on what goes on there—but we cannot go from London to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds on a high-speed train. The time has come for a steep uplift in our transport system.
I should tell my hon. Friend that there is still a long way to go. We must take the hybrid Bill through the Commons. There will be plenty of opportunities to debate it in detail. As the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr Straw) said, HS2 will be debated in far more detail than roads that now go through various constituencies when they probably caused greater environmental damage.
Mr McLoughlin
I do not want to take too long because I know many hon. Members want to speak. I will give way—for the last time—to my hon. Friend.
Andrew Bridgen
I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. It is true that this is a high-speed debate. Does he agree that an hour is completely insufficient parliamentary time for a Third Reading debate on the largest infrastructure project the country has ever seen?
Mr McLoughlin
My hon. Friend has taken part in the Third Reading of many Bills—they have always been hour-long debates. In fact, it is only recently that we have had debates on Third Reading. Back in the days when the right hon. Member for Blackburn was Leader of the House, we sometimes did not have debates on Third Reading because we simply did not have the time. The Government are trying to help everybody we can—[Interruption.] I do not want to get any more partisan now that I have the right hon. Gentleman on side.
The Bill is about helping communities and businesses, and helping the cities of the north and the midlands to compete on equal terms with London. Nobody begrudges the money we are spending on Crossrail or Thameslink. They are huge investments in our capital city, but it is time we looked at what is happening in the rest of the country.
Three important words—room for growth—sum up why the project is so important. They are at the core of the strategic case we published on Tuesday. The responses to the report show the crucial message of growth. The British Chambers of Commerce states:
“This report bolsters the economic case for HS2…HS2 is the only scheme that can transform capacity on Britain’s overstretched railways.”
The CBI has thrown its considerable weight behind the project. It did so because the new line is part of the answer to the infrastructure deficit that faces our country. The leaders of our great cities back HS2. Sir Richard Leese, leader of Manchester city council, has said:
“It’s straightforward and simple. We need more capacity and the only way is through this new network.”
Since 2008, the country has learned some tough lessons, but we must make ourselves more resilient and competitive as an economy. That will not happen if we do not take the long-term decisions on investment and stick to them. Our society is changing, our population is growing, people are travelling more, and demand for inter-city rail travel has doubled in the past 15 years and will continue to increase.
As I have said all along, I welcome suggestions for creating more capacity, but the so-called alternative suggestions from the critics simply do not add up. We have looked at the case for building new motorways and dramatically expanding domestic aviation. Neither does the job. Some people believe we can carry on squeezing more room out of our current railways, patching up our problems. The work we published this week shows that, if we tried to create the capacity we needed by upgrading the three current main north-south lines, we would face 14 years of weekend closures. That is not an alternative to the new line, it is disruption on a nightmare scale.
We are already investing record sums in the existing railway. Network Rail will spend £38.3 billion in its next five-year control period, and the Government have a £73 billion budget for wider transport investment over the next Parliament. Despite all that, we will still need new rail capacity. If one accepts that—and that we need room to grow—there is no choice about how to provide it. As the strategic case makes clear, a new high-speed north-south line is not just the right way, it is the only way.
The new north-south line will be the backbone of Britain. It will have 18 trains an hour, each carrying up to 1,100 passengers, transforming the available space on inter-city lines. As long-distance services transfer to the new line, capacity will be released on the existing network. Of course, not every city across Britain will benefit in the same way, but Network Rail estimates that more than 100 cities and towns could benefit from released capacity. It would mean significantly more commuter services, better connectivity and more routes for rail freight, taking lorries off our most congested roads.
We know that HS2 is the best answer to our transport problems, but as with any large infrastructure scheme, we also know we will face opposition. I respect the fact that some people are concerned about the impact on the places they live, and I respect those with serious proposals for improvements. Already, the environmental impact of the new line has been vastly reduced thanks to such improvements. But I also respect what Sir John Armitt said in his recent report on infrastructure—that big schemes need “broad political consensus” as well as “resolution” from political leaders.
HS2 must be a national project with support across the parties, or in the end it will be nothing. Labour leaders in our great cities across the north and the midlands know that HS2 is right. To those who say that there is no blank cheque, I say that there never has been and there never will be. I know that hon. Members want costs controlled. Here are the facts. The target price for the first phase is £17.16 billion. That is the price for construction agreed with HS2 Ltd. For the whole Y-route, the agreed budget is £42.6 billion, including a contingency of £14.4 billion, which we are determined to bear down on. Sir David Higgins—the man who built the Olympics on time and on budget—will make sure that happens. As the new chairman of HS2, he will bring his penetrating eye and expertise to the task to get the best value for our country.
As the strategic case published this week shows, our updated benefit-cost ratio has fallen slightly from 2.5 to 2.3. We have been open about that, but it means that the business case for the new north-south line is still strong, with more than £2 returned for every £1 invested—about the same as Crossrail and Thameslink, and nobody seems to doubt those projects. In fact, the ratio for HS2 could increase to 4.5 if rail demand continues to rise until 2049.
It is still important to recognise that the benefit-cost ratio cannot take account of unpredictable factors. That was true of the Jubilee line extension in London, for instance, which did not include the 100,000 jobs it now supports at Canary Wharf. It was true for High Speed 1, which did not include benefits from redevelopment at King’s Cross and St Pancras. When I first became a Member of Parliament, King’s Cross and St Pancras were places where people did not want to spend any time if they could possibly get away with it. They would try to turn up just before their train was due to leave. Those stations are now destinations in their own right. People go there and look with amazement at what has happened to the UK’s railway system.
Frank Dobson
I represent not just St Pancras, but Euston and King’s Cross. Does the Secretary of State accept that virtually all the people in my constituency who are now opposed to HS2 were strongly in favour—indeed, the first advocates—of the transformation of St Pancras and the improvements at King’s Cross?
Mr McLoughlin
Of course I do. I am more than happy to meet the right hon. Gentleman to discuss the particular issue of Euston station, because the redevelopment will bring specific problems. But we must also ensure that we get the very best deal for his constituents in the redevelopment of Euston station. I am meeting the leader of Camden council next week, although I do not know if the right hon. Gentleman will be there. I do not discount the concerns of local residents about the work on major infrastructure projects, and we have to take them into account.
Jonathan Edwards
Last week it was disclosed that the Treasury had made a mistake and awarded Barnett consequentials to Wales in the 2015-16 spending round. Subsequently, the Treasury said it would claw the money back in the next spending review and that it did not set a precedent. Will the Secretary of State confirm that there will not be a clawback, that the precedent has now been set and that Wales will have the consequentials? Unless he does so, we will vote against him on Third Reading.
Mr McLoughlin
It would be a brave Secretary of State who started second-guessing the Treasury, and I will not do that now. I understand the hon. Gentleman’s representations and will bear them in mind.
I will briefly explain the next steps. We intend to submit the hybrid Bill before Christmas. In February, the growth taskforce reports. I know the challenges ahead, but also the opportunities. We are not here to patch up our railway once again, only to spend far more later when it turns out that we should have invested properly at the start. It will take determination to strengthen our country. I urge this House to support the Bill. It is our chance to get ahead and to invest in our long-term prosperity.
HS2
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
The Government have today published “The Strategic Case for HS2”, an updated economic case and other supporting documents, including a technical report into possible alternatives to HS2 by Atkins and Network Rail
I regard the publication of these documents as an important step in my preparations for laying the hybrid Bill before Parliament later this year and I consider this to be an opportune time to explain the benefits of HS2 clearly and comprehensively.
Good quality transport is at the heart of our economic success and the decisions we take now about transport investment will determine our country’s economic future.
The case for the new line rests on the step change in capacity and connectivity it will provide.
The new north-south railway is a long-term solution to a long-term problem. Without HS2, the west coast, east coast and midland main lines are likely to be overwhelmed. With it, we will transform intercity travel. There will also be benefits for regional and commuter services. It will increase the amount of freight that can be carried by rail.
HS2 will provide a very significant increase in capacity on the rail network. It will deliver a 14 trains per hour capability in phase 1, rising to 18 trains an hour in phase 2— transforming intercity rail services.
Significant journey time improvements will be possible, such as reducing the journey time between London and Manchester from two hours eight minutes to one hour eight minutes. HS2 will connect eight of our 10 largest cities and bring two thirds of the population within two hours of London.
And HS2 could provide space for at least an extra 20 west coast main line freight paths, with each extra freight train typically taking 40 lorries off our roads; easing congestion and reducing carbon emissions.
These transport improvements will help support economic growth and make a major contribution towards rebalancing the economy.
Subject to parliamentary approval, the new railway will be built in two phases. It will be fully integrated with the rest of the railway network. It will bring benefits to places with stations on the new railway including Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham and London; to stations on the classic network like Liverpool, Darlington and Newcastle which will receive high-speed services; and to other places on the existing mainlines like Milton Keynes, Rugby and Peterborough, which will have better services from released capacity on the existing main lines.
Analysis by Atkins and Network Rail has considered whether we could meet the capacity challenge in other ways—for example through upgrades to the current railway. But HS2 emerges as the only option that provides not only the capacity and the connectivity this country needs, but is also deliverable, minimises disruption to existing rail services and allows us to leap ahead of demand and reshape the economic geography of the country.
The updated economic case scrutinises again the costs and benefits of HS2. The new analysis shows that the Y network delivers a good return on investment, with a standard cost benefit ratio of 2.3.
HS2 has been allocated a funding envelope of £42.6 billion in the 2015 spending review and will not exceed that allocation. It includes £14.4 billion of contingency, which I am determined to bear down on and I have put in place rigorous controls, including a target price for HS2.
We are continuing to work with the construction and supply industry and with local communities to ensure that this unprecedented investment in a new north-south line will deliver the best possible return to the British economy, and be built at the lowest possible cost and with the lowest possible environmental impact.
I am laying copies of these documents in the Libraries of both Houses.
HS2 Ltd
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 4 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
I am announcing the appointment of Sir David Higgins as chair of HS2 Ltd. Sir David will be taking over the role from the current chair, Sir Doug Oakervee, as of January next year.
A revised HS2 Ltd framework document which sets out the governance and sponsorship arrangements between the Department for Transport and HS2 Ltd has been published. Copies of the document will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Any future revision to the document will also be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
The document is available online at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/developing-a-new-high-speed-rail-network and http://hs2.org.uk/.
Fares and Ticketing Review
Lord McLoughlin Excerpts(11 years, 4 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin)
Today I am publishing “Rail Fares and Ticketing: Next Steps”, the outcome of the Government’s review of fares and ticketing. The review has been an opportunity to consider a range of options to address issues about fares and ticketing raised by passengers and others.
In conclusion, we are setting out our vision for a modern, customer-focused fares and ticketing system that will support our objectives of allowing even more people to travel by rail and ensure they have a better experience and which:
supports a passenger-focused railway, meeting changing needs and travel patterns;
promotes a vibrant future for our railways supporting economic growth and prosperity and helping to reduce the country’s carbon footprint;
enjoys the trust of passengers and the commitment of the rail industry; and
maintains its current strengths while embracing sensible change in the interest of passengers and taxpayers who fund our railways.
New track and trains are only part of the story for improving our railways. We remain committed to rolling out smart ticketing across the network. We want the whole experience of travelling by rail to be modern, seamless and easy, starting with buying a ticket to travel. We also recognise that the cost and complexity of train fares is naturally a key concern for passengers.
To help passengers, I can confirm that from January 2014 we will give rail passengers a better deal by capping the upper limit of any individual fare rise at 2% above the permitted average of inflation plus 1%, for all regulated fares. This will protect passengers from large fare increases which can have a significant impact on household budgets by taking 3% off the maximum.
We are trialling a scheme to regulate longer distance off peak tickets on a single-leg basis to remove the scenario where some single off-peak tickets cost nearly as much as return tickets.
We will also trial more flexible tickets that can provide a more attractive offer for commuters travelling fewer than five days a week or outside peak hours.
The report reconfirms the Government’s commitment to ensuring that ticket offices remain an important route for passengers to buy tickets. Reflecting changes in the ways that people are buying train tickets, the Government are at the same time setting out ways that train operators can make improvements to their ticket offer at stations providing that appropriate passenger safeguards are also put in place. We intend for passenger representative bodies to play a greater role in shaping the packages that are brought forward by train operators.
Other measures highlighted in the report include:
A ticketing code of practice—The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) will oversee the code to ensure that passengers are provided with the information they need to choose the best ticket for their journey and that this information is clear and not misleading;
A market review—The ORR will look into the sale of tickets and consider whether current markets are operating efficiently, effectively, and in the best interests of passengers and taxpayers. The Department has committed to consider any cost-effective recommendations that come out of the review;
Annual surveys—The Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) has agreed to release the information to customers from next year on how well ticket office staff, ticket machines and websites perform in regards to selling passengers the best ticket for their journey.
Our railways are a vital part of our nation’s future. The Government are determined to build on the continued success of our railways and that is why we are providing over £16 billion to support the network and make sure it can respond to increasing passenger demand, help economic growth and cut our carbon footprint.
While above-inflation fare rises in recent years have been necessary to help fund our record investment in the network, it remains our firm ambition to cap fare rises at the level of inflation, just as soon as economic conditions allow and savings have been made to the cost of running our railways.
The review document explains how we will blend the best of regulation with the best of market forces to deliver a fares and ticketing system that puts passengers first and our railways on a sustainable footing for the future.
I will place copies of the document, “Rail Fares and Ticketing: Next Steps” in the Libraries of both Houses.