EU Bus and Coach Passenger Rights

Norman Baker Excerpts

Monday 16th July 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I will be publishing a consultation on Wednesday 18 July which puts forward the Government’s plans for applying the EU regulation on bus and coach passenger rights. This aims to ensure bus and coach passengers have rights similar to those using other modes of transport.

The regulation, which mainly applies to bus and coach journeys over 155 miles (250 km), lays out the responsibilities of operators and terminal owners in the case of delays, cancellations, accidents and other issues affecting passengers, including disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility.

The public consultation will offer the chance for those affected by this EU regulation to put forward their opinions on domestic enforcement measures, the use of available exemptions and the designation of terminals served by long-distance services where specific assistance has to be provided to disabled people and people with reduced mobility.

I believe that the approach outlined in the consultation strikes the right balance between passenger protection and operator competitiveness. I look forward to receiving responses from interested parties.

Fuel Quality Directive

Norman Baker Excerpts

Monday 16th July 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

Today I am publishing our response to the comments received in the consultation on our proposals to expand the scope of the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) Order 2007 to include non-road mobile machinery.

The fuel quality directive (articles 1 and 7a(2)) requires that suppliers of fuels used in non-road mobile machinery should be obliged to reduce the lifecycle greenhouse gas intensities of the fuels they supply. Our preferred approach for implementing this requirement of the directive is to amend the current RTFO Order 2007. However, given concerns about the sustainability of some biofuels, it is important that this change does not at this point result in an increase in the absolute volume of biofuel supplied in the UK.

Moreover, following concerns raised during consultation on engine compatibility and storage issues relating to biofuel used in non-road mobile machinery, we have, as announced previously, delayed making this change immediately so as to give industry and transport users time to prepare in terms of infrastructure and information. The requirement will come into force in April 2013. We understand the need for gas oil users to have accurate information on biofuel content. We hope the delay will give them time to engage with gas oil suppliers to ensure that biofuel-free gas oil will be available. DFT guidance on improving the flow of information between non-road mobile machinery users and fuel suppliers is available at the following link:

http://www.dft.gov.Uk/topics/sustainable/biofuels/use-supply/#blending.

I would like to thank all those who took the time to respond to the consultation.

Train Punctuality

Norman Baker Excerpts

Tuesday 10th July 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

In line with the Government’s transparency agenda, and the commitments made in the Command Paper “Reforming our Railways: Putting the Customer First”, additional information will from today be made available by the Office of Rail Regulation and Network Rail about the punctuality of train services.

In addition to the existing public performance measure (PPM), which indicates the proportion of train services arriving at their destination within 5 or 10 minutes, for short and long distance services respectively, information will now be published on trains which are “right time” at their final destination—that is, which arrive early or within a minute of the due time.

PPM is and will remain the Government’s and industry’s key measure of rail punctuality and reliability:

it recognises the different passenger expectations and operating practicalities between short and long distance services;

it incentivises the industry to ensure that the vast majority of services—significantly over 90%—get to their destination at or close to time; and

it gives the industry essential flexibility to manage minor operational disruption, which would not be possible with an absolute on time measure.

But the coalition Government recognise that passengers want more information about their services, including whether they are actually on time, and that is why Ministers have asked the industry to develop plans to provide this. We welcome the positive response which it has now made.

As a first step, the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) is today publishing annual statistics on right time performance at industry sector level—that is; long distance, London and south-east, and regional (including Scotland), going back to 2001-02. Network Rail (NR) will from now on be updating these figures for each industry period, alongside the main PPM measure.

These figures show that, for the network as a whole in 2011-12, 69.8% of trains arrived “right time”, compared with 91.6% meeting the PPM target. This is a high level of performance by historical standards and represents a significant improvement over the last five years, compared with 62.7% right time and 88.1% PPM in 2006-07. Overall, the average delay incurred by passengers is now around two minutes.

Results of the spring 2012 national passenger survey just published by Passenger Focus showed very high levels of satisfaction with rail travel in this country (Great Britain). Nationally the percentage of passengers satisfied with their journey overall was 83%, and for punctuality and reliability it stood at 81%.

Right time information is generated by existing industry signalling systems, but these were not designed for precise monitoring of time-keeping, and there is some uncertainty over the accuracy of the data at individual operator level, so ORR is commissioning an urgent independent study into this.

In the light of that study, it is intended that right time information will be published at operator level from October 2012. In addition, Network Rail announced on 28 June that it was making available real time information on the reliability of individual trains, making it possible to analyse train performance at a far more granular level.

This will put our railway in the forefront of the transparency agenda, providing more information on punctuality and reliability for passengers than any other European country.

A good deal of information is also published on other key transport modes in this country, and the coalition Government are keen to see further progress on transparency over time.

Personal Independence Payment and Blue Badge Eligibility

Norman Baker Excerpts

Monday 9th July 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I am today publishing a consultation document on personal independence payment and eligibility for a blue badge. The consultation period closes on Tuesday 2 October 2012.

The coalition Government are taking forward important reforms to the welfare system. One of these reforms will involve changes to disability living allowance and will affect eligibility for a disabled person’s parking permit or blue badge. About a third of all badges are currently issued to people who receive the higher rate of the mobility component of disability living allowance. My Department is therefore consulting on the options we have for dealing with the impact of the changes. The consultation covers arrangements for England only.

I am committed to ensuring that the blue badge scheme continues to be focused on those people who will benefit most from the parking concessions that it offers, and that it is sustainable in the future. The Government have identified three main options for responding to the implementation of personal independence payments. The three main options are:

Option 1—no legislative link between eligibility for a blue badge and eligibility to personal independence payment;

Option 2—establishing a legislative link between blue badge eligibility and the enhanced mobility component of personal independence payment;

Option 3—establishing a legislative link between blue badge eligibility and those who score eight points or more within the “Moving Around” activity within personal independence payment. This assesses a person’s physical ability to get around.

The Government’s preferred option is option 3 as it would mean that eligibility for a blue badge would be most similar to the current scheme and the potential impacts of this option are minimal. We will, however, consider this in light of views and comments sent in as part of the consultation. The Government are also asking for other suggestions for other practical and sustainable solutions.

The consultation concludes on 2 October 2012. Personal independence payments will be introduced for new claimants aged between 16 and 64 from April 2013 onwards. It will begin to replace disability living allowance for existing recipients aged between 16 and 64 from October 2013 onwards. Any consequential changes to the blue badge scheme will also be phased in and will affect existing badge holders when an existing badge expires and they need to apply for a new one.

A copy of the consultation document has been placed in the Library of the House.

Oral Answers to Questions

Norman Baker Excerpts

Thursday 28th June 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)]

1. What her policy is on the means-testing of concessionary bus travel for pensioners.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I believe that you, Mr Speaker, and the Opposition Front-Bench team will know that my ministerial colleague, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), is unable to be here today as he is abroad at a piracy conference—or, hopefully, an anti-piracy conference.

We have no plans to introduce means-testing to assess eligibility for concessionary bus travel for older people. The right to free bus travel for both older and disabled people is enshrined in primary legislation. In the 2010 spending review, the Government said they will protect the statutory entitlement to concessionary bus travel.

[Mr Betts]

I am pleased the Minister has dropped the Deputy Prime Minister’s ridiculous idea—presumably because he can envisage situations in which a pensioner who qualifies for a pass, under a means test, gets on a bus and produces their pass, and everyone can see that they are poor enough to qualify. We would end up with better-off pensioners not getting a pass because they would be means-tested out, and the poorer pensioners not using a pass because they would be too embarrassed to do so.

[Norman Baker]

I thought the hon. Gentleman might have wanted to congratulate the Government on giving £25 million to South Yorkshire yesterday, or on proceeding with the Rotherham to Sheffield tram-train trial, about which he has been so keen, and which his Government did nothing to advance over so many years.

The Deputy Prime Minister raised no such idea, and I made our position clear to the hon. Gentleman in a letter of 2 April. He is well aware of the Government’s position.

[Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood) (Lab)]

Before the election, the Prime Minister pledged to keep the free bus pass. We know the Deputy Prime Minister and his Lib Dem colleagues did not agree, and now we learn that the Work and Pensions Secretary wants it scrapped as well. Can pensioners be sure they will not face a means test in order to receive their bus pass, or is this going to be another U-turn the Chancellor has not told the Transport Secretary about?

[Norman Baker]

The hon. Lady clearly does not want to take yes for an answer. I do not know how many times we have to say from the Dispatch Box that the concessionary fares arrangements will not change over the lifetime of this Parliament: end of story.

[Maria Eagle]

After the shambles of the last week, I am not sure that pensioners will be reassured by that commitment. After all, the Transport Secretary began the week by ruling out a U-turn on fuel duty. The fact is that pensioners are being hit now by cuts to bus services, which Age UK and the National Pensioners Convention warn are leading to concessionary bus pass holders having no buses to get on. The Government were right to respond to our call to do something for motorists, but as the Department for Transport has now admitted to under-spending its budget by £500,000—the amount needed to restore bus funding—is it not time to show a similar commitment to public transport and restore the bus cuts?

[Norman Baker]

If I may say so, Mr Speaker, that question strays a long way from the tabled question about concessionary bus passes, and if I were the hon. Lady I would not have asked it, because the latest figures, out this week, show that bus passenger journeys in England increased by 0.6% between 2010-11 and 2011-12. They also show that bus fares outside London fell by 4% in real terms between March 2009 and March 2011. I think that, on this occasion, the Eagle has crash-landed.

[Angie Bray (Ealing Central and Acton) (Con)]

2. What recent assessment she has made of airport capacity in the south-east; and if she will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Rotheram (Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)]

3. What recent assessment she has made of the level of funding for road maintenance.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

The Department is providing £3 billion over four years to 2014-15 to local highway authorities in England for roads for which they are responsible. We also provided £200 million in March 2011 to repair damage caused by the 2010 winter. The Highways Agency is responsible for operating, maintaining and improving the strategic road network in England, and this financial year its maintenance budget is £755 million, excluding costs associated with private finance initiative projects.

[Steve Rotheram]

We know that the coalition’s manoeuvre of choice is the U-turn, so can the Transport Secretary or the Minister continue in that vein by reversing the Department’s decision to cut investment in Britain’s road network by £3.5 billion?

[Norman Baker]

Again, I thought that the hon. Gentleman might have welcomed the £20 million that the Department gave to Merseyside yesterday for investment in local transport projects. I thought he might also have welcomed the fact that in cash terms the Department is providing more for road maintenance over this four-year period than his Government did over the previous four years.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

May I welcome my hon. Friend’s announcement? North Yorkshire has the second longest rural road network, after Lincolnshire, and the most extreme winter conditions. How can we ensure that we get a fair slice of the extra money that has been announced?

[Norman Baker]

I am happy to say that North Yorkshire also qualified for funding from the Department yesterday to help the Harrogate and Knaresborough sustainable transport package. We continue to fund road maintenance through the standard arrangements from the Department, as I indicated a moment ago.

[Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North) (Lab)]

The requirement for large expenditure on road maintenance arises overwhelmingly from the heavy axle weights of lorries, so is it not sensible to look at schemes for transferring vast volumes of road freight on to rail? Will the Government look seriously at schemes for transporting lorry trailers and lorries on trains throughout Britain?

[Norman Baker]

I entirely sympathise with that question. We are taking steps to improve the amount of freight that can be transported by rail. The rail Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Mrs Villiers), is busy activating that. We have improved the gauge from Southampton and the rail line from Felixstowe, and we hope to make further improvements. Of course our high-speed rail plans will free up space on the existing north-south routes.

[Mr Greg Knight (East Yorkshire) (Con)]

4. What representations she has received on plans to increase the level of ethanol in automotive fuel.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

We have received representations on ethanol from a range of individuals and organisations. Ethanol can currently be blended in petrol up to 5%. I understand an industry standard for a blend of up to 10% is being developed. The Department has asked the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership to work with consumer groups, vehicle manufacturers and fuel suppliers to plan its introduction to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place and consumers have clear information.

[Mr Knight]

Is the Minister aware that the Government are absolutely right not to increase the level of ethanol above 5% until we have a better evidence base for its sustainability? Is he also aware—I declare an interest at this point—that there is evidence that ethanol levels above 5% play havoc with older vehicles’ fuel systems, including those of classic and historic vehicles? If we have to go above 5%, will he ensure that the pumps are properly labelled?

[Norman Baker]

I entirely sympathise with my right hon. Friend, who makes an important point. I expect that there is a possibility that the European Commission will review the matter before January 2014, when the requirement for petrol stations to supply a 5% blend officially ends. The UK Government also have a power to require a 5% blend to be supplied beyond that point. In any case, I would expect industry to ensure that a protection grade of E5 will continue beyond that point and I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend’s point about labelling.

[Mr William Bain (Glasgow North East) (Lab)]

5. What recent progress she has made on transport infrastructure projects announced in the autumn statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Sunderland West) (Lab)]

6. What steps her Department is taking to improve cycling safety.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

Last year I set up the cycling stakeholder forum, which comprises representatives from cycling groups, motoring organisations and local authorities. A sub-group has been established to look specifically at safety issues. Good progress is being made on coming up with ideas and actions to improve cycle safety. Earlier this week I announced a £15 million fund to improve safety for cyclists outside London by tackling dangerous junctions. This is in addition to the £15 million fund awarded to Transport for London in March for the same purpose.

[Mrs Hodgson]

Figures from his Department and independent analysis have shown that more cyclists are killed in collisions with heavy goods vehicles than any other kind of vehicle. Will the Secretary of State therefore stop the trial of longer HGVs that her Department has enacted and give serious consideration to the proposals from the cycling stakeholder forum for a proper plan to improve cyclist safety and to increase cycle use?

[Norman Baker]

I have already referred to the cycling stakeholder forum, which met yesterday and which I attended. We are looking at safety issues very seriously, as the hon. Lady would expect. I do not think it is a question of how long lorries are. The particular issue with HGVs is about lorries turning left and catching cyclists on the inside. That is one reason why I have now given permission for all local authorities across the country to install Trixi mirrors to pick up those manoeuvres. It is also why the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), is looking at issues relating to the information available to the driver in the cab.

[Mr Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton) (Con)]

7. What steps she is taking to invest in road infrastructure.

--- Later in debate ---

[Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

8. What progress she has made on her review of the use of brown tourist signs.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

The review of brown tourist signs is making good progress and we expect to publish our findings later this year. We are currently reviewing stakeholder comments on the existing requirements so that a package of options and a recommendation can be presented to Ministers.

[Julian Smith]

I am glad the Minister shares my passion for brown signs, but can he assure me that the Highways Agency will work much more closely with business before removing brown signs? The agency was reckless in removing the sign on the A1 upgrade in Masham. Would the Minister like to join me for a pint of Theakston’s or Black Sheep so that he can see the evidence for himself?

[Norman Baker]

My colleague, the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), might take that pint rather than me, although I am always happy to have a pint of Theakston’s—or anything else for that matter.

I agree that early involvement with business is helpful and desirable, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon on the work he has done on the issue. I know that my colleague, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead, wrote to him about it last week, and has challenged the Highways Agency to minimise the cost of the signs, including by engaging with local contractors and interest groups such as those my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon refers to.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

The Department for Transport purchases journey time data from the Trafficmaster satellite navigation fleet tracking and traffic information service, and provides it, free, to west Yorkshire’s local authorities. The data can be used to make assessments of road congestion in their areas. It is for the local highway authority—in this case, the city of Bradford metropolitan district council—to make any such assessment.

[Philip Davies]

Shipley constituency has some of the most congested roads not only in the Bradford district, but across west Yorkshire. Not least among those is the road between Baildon and Shipley. A Shipley eastern relief road would not only help local residents with that congestion but give a stimulus to economic growth across the Bradford district. What can the Minister do to ensure that that kind of scheme gets a share of the funding that his Department is giving out?

[Norman Baker]

My hon. Friend is assiduous in making the case for his constituents, and I understand why he puts the case for the road he mentioned. As part of the localism agenda, we consulted earlier this year on proposals to devolve funding for major local authority schemes for the period after 2015, so it will be for the new local transport body covering west Yorkshire to decide the priorities for available funding, and of course to involve the local enterprise partnership—Leeds city region LEP. That is the direction of travel that I recommend to my hon. Friend.

[Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West) (LD)]

The area north of Leeds and Bradford does indeed have some of the most congested roads in the country; that is a problem that is shared cross-constituency. When will we get a decision on the Leeds trolley bus scheme, which will help in that corridor?

[Norman Baker]

The Secretary of State and I are actively considering that matter at the moment. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Greg Mulholland) will understand that we are talking about cutting-edge technology, as there is no such scheme already in this country, so we have to be very careful in our assessment of the proposal, but we hope to make a decision very shortly.

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)]

12. What steps her Department has taken to publicise the consultation on the combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Julian Huppert (Cambridge) (LD)]

T3. The latest figures from Sustrans show a 40 million increase in the number of cycling trips in 2011 compared with 2010—a very welcome 18% rise. I and many others, including British Cycling, welcome the funding that has been provided by the Government, particularly most recently the £15 million that has been provided towards dangerous junctions around the country, a key feature of the safer cycling campaign in The Times. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to make sure that local authorities match this money to do even more work on more junctions, rather than ducking their responsibilities when the Government step up?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for this support for our measures, which include large sums of money allocated yesterday through the local sustainable transport fund, which will also benefit cycling. The sum of £50 million will be available to local authorities on a match-funding basis. We are encouraging them to contribute, and the more they contribute, the more likely it is that they will be successful in securing money from the Government for their dangerous junctions.

[Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)]

T9. Following last week’s publication of the east coast franchise, does the Minister think passengers on the east coast should expect an eye-watering 8% above inflation fare increase, which my constituents travelling on the west coast main line will face in years ahead?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ian Austin (Dudley North) (Lab)]

If we are to make real improvements in cycling, we must ensure that it is considered properly as part of all decisions and policies on road use, so will the Minister consider the Cycle Stakeholder Forum’s proposal to add a mandatory risk assessment and consultation on cycling to every policy review that affects road users? That would have no cost implications but would make a real difference to transport policy and would show that the Government consider cycling a key part of transport policy.

[Norman Baker]

The Cycle Stakeholder Forum is producing some useful suggestions and doing some good work. The process that is under way means that all its suggestions will be properly assessed by the Department, and we will respond to those in detail later this year.

[Neil Carmichael (Stroud) (Con)]

T6. Following the very welcome news that we have ended Labour’s fuel duty, may I ask the Secretary of State whether she will continue to promote the use of alternative fuels in heavy haulage lorries, as practised by Downton and Howard Tenens in my constituency?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con)]

T8. The Dutch now have two thirds of their minor rural road network covered by speed restrictions of 40 mph approximately, as they found those even more effective than 20 mph approximately zones in urban areas. Will the Minister please confirm that he will take this evidence into account when drafting the forthcoming guidance on setting speed limits and set out what other measures should be taken to protect rural cyclists?

[Norman Baker]

I am happy to confirm that the Department is giving local councils much more freedom in how they use the road network, including the classification of roads and the speed limits that are set. I hope that my hon. Friend will be aware of the extra freedom for 20 mph limits, in particular. Her point on 40 mph limits is well made and I will ensure that my fellow Transport Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), is made aware of her comments when he returns.

Local Sustainable Transport Fund

Norman Baker Excerpts

Wednesday 27th June 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I am pleased to announce today that I am awarding a further £266 million to support authorities in delivering local economic growth while cutting carbon emissions from transport. This funding unlocks further local funding sources to deliver £460 million investment in local sustainable transport schemes.

Today’s announcement is the third and final instalment of the local sustainable transport fund, which is now delivering over £1 billion investment in sustainable travel across England, and demonstrating that economic growth and carbon reduction go hand in hand. To facilitate today’s announcements, I have secured an additional £40 million for the fund, on top of the original £560 million allocation.

On 20 December 2011, the Department received 13 business cases for large projects for the local sustainable transport fund.

I have decided to announce £225 million for 12 large projects today, and I have also reserved up to £5 million funding for a small project from Tyne and Wear ITA, which my officials will progress with officers from Tyne and Wear during the coming weeks. The list of decisions made today regarding large projects is attached.

On 24 February 2012, the Department received 53 small project bids to tranche 2. On 24 May 2012 I announced £113 million to fund 30 small projects, and I am today committing a further £41 million to fund 15 more. The list of decisions made today regarding the remaining tranche 2 bids is also attached.

I am very pleased that every single eligible local authority across England has applied for funding to the local sustainable transport fund, either as a lead bidder, or as a partner authority to a large project. The fund has been well received by local government and I am confident that it will be effective in addressing the two key objectives of creating growth and cutting carbon.

All projects were assessed against published criteria. Successful projects were those judged to perform well against the twin objectives of supporting the local economy and facilitating economic development, while reducing carbon emissions. They also demonstrated potential to deliver wider social and economic benefits, to improve safety, to bring about improvements to air quality, or to promote increased levels of physical activity.

All large projects included a full economic appraisal based on the Department’s WebTAG guidance. The vast majority of funded large projects offer at least high value for money, with several offering very high value for money.

Cycle Safety

Norman Baker Excerpts

Tuesday 26th June 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

My colleague the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), and I are announcing today a £15 million fund to improve safety for cyclists in England (outside London). This is in addition to the £15 million support for cycle safety improvements within London announced by the Government in March.

This fund will provide capital support to improve safety at junctions identified as having a record of road incidents that have resulted in cyclists being killed or seriously injured.

The Department for Transport will now work in partnership with local authorities and the cycling stakeholder forum—which brings together cycling groups, safety experts, local authorities and other interested parties—to identify and prioritise junctions. This process will use Department for Transport analysis of official accident data to highlight potential targets.

Further identification on how the money will be allocated will be announced in the autumn.

Local Sustainable Transport Fund

Norman Baker Excerpts

Thursday 24th May 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I am pleased to announce today that the Department is awarding a further £112.941 million to support authorities in delivering local economic growth while cutting carbon emissions from transport.

On 24 February 2012, the Department received 53 bids to tranche 2 of the local sustainable transport fund from 48 lead authorities.

Proposals were assessed against the criteria as published in the “Guidance on the Application Process”, which was published on 19 January 2011. Successful proposals were those judged to perform well against the twin objectives of supporting the local economy and facilitating economic development, while reducing carbon emissions. They were also scored on their potential to deliver wider social and economic benefits, to improve safety, to bring about improvements to air quality, or to promote increased levels of physical activity.

Proposals were required to demonstrate financial sustainability with benefits enduring beyond the life of the fund, to incorporate a credible delivery plan, and to include a commitment to make a local contribution towards the overall costs.

In line with the published guidance, an assessment of value for money was undertaken. The Department is confident that the overall package of proposals approved in this second round represents high value for money.

I have decided to announce funding for 30 proposals in this round today, with a further announcement regarding the status of 18 more bids to be made soon. Twenty-six proposals will be funded in full and a further four proposals will be funded in part. The list of decisions made today regarding tranche 2 bids is attached.

On 20 December 2011, the Department received 13 business cases for larger projects (requiring up to £50 million funding from DFT). I intend to announce by the end of June which of those authorities have been successful.

I am very pleased that all eligible local authorities across England have applied for funding to the local sustainable transport fund, either as a lead bidder, or as a partner authority to a large project. The fund has been well received by local government and I am confident that it will be effective in addressing the two key objectives of creating growth and cutting carbon.

Tram Train Pilot

Norman Baker Excerpts

Thursday 17th May 2012 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I have today given final approval to proceed with a pilot of tram train technology in south Yorkshire. I have asked south Yorkshire passenger transport executive to lead the delivery of the vehicles and to sponsor the pilot in collaboration with Network Rail, Northern Rail and Stagecoach Supertram.

The pilot I am announcing today will allow us to determine the practical and operational issues of extending tram trains from the national network to on-street running and running trams and heavy rail vehicles safely over existing heavy rail infrastructure. It will also allow us to gauge passenger perception and acceptability of tram train.

The knowledge that we obtain from the pilot will enable us to understand the technical and operational challenges involved in this project so that the concept can potentially be rolled out elsewhere in the UK.

The pilot will see the introduction from 2015 of new tram train vehicles capable of using both light and heavy rail infrastructure, so providing continuous travel from Sheffield’s Supertram network onto Network Rail’s national rail network, as well as providing more capacity on the Supertram system itself

The new vehicles will provide three services an hour operating from Parkgate retail park in Rotherham, travelling through Rotherham central station and joining up to the existing Supertram network at Meadowhall where the services will then continue onwards to Sheffield city centre. The project is also expected to create 25 new driver jobs locally, plus around 10 additional jobs in maintenance and revenue protection.

The pilot will run for two years and alongside the additional capacity being provided for the Supertram system, is expected to cost £58 million, including the cost of the vehicles and infrastructure changes.

Lowestoft Train Station

Norman Baker Excerpts

Tuesday 15th May 2012 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney (Peter Aldous) on securing the debate and providing the House with an opportunity to discuss the necessary redevelopment of Lowestoft train station. The coalition Government understand that the quality of stations is an important issue for passengers and are committed to facilitating investment in station improvements through reforms to the way the railways are run.

To pick up directly on the first point my hon. Friend made, we are granting longer rail franchises in order to give train operators the incentive to invest in the improvements that passengers want, including better stations. I recognise that the present Greater Anglia franchise is only two years long, a point to which I will return later in my remarks. Further funding for major station improvements over the 2014-19 period—this relates to his third point—will be considered as part of the high-level output specification process, with an announcement expected in the summer. To give him some reassurance, I am always happy to lobby the Treasury for funds for transport schemes, although with more success on some occasions than on others. The Department is considering the need for future investment over the next five-year period, so his debate is well timed in that respect.

My hon. Friend also referred to the need for good management and investment in stations and suggested that full control of stations should be handed to train operators, coupled with a full repairing lease for the operator. I am happy to tell him that we are committed to giving train operators full responsibility for the management and operation of many stations. The Greater Anglia franchise, which started on 5 February 2012, is the first to implement that policy and does so for more than 160 stations. Until that franchise was let, stations were typically leased by a franchisee from Network Rail for the duration of the franchise, with responsibilities for maintenance, repair and renewals divided between Network Rail and the franchisee. He is correct that too often that resulted in inefficient working, because there were, in effect, two estate managers.

Although a franchisee could develop stations, they often have not done so in practice, because they have seen the period in which to realise benefits as too short and the compensation mechanism for securing value beyond the end of the franchise as not sufficiently attractive. Additionally, property interest is divided and the consent mechanisms are complex.

The new arrangements that have been agreed between the Department, Network Rail, the Office of Rail Regulation and the Association of Train Operating Companies—their umbrella body—are designed to give franchisees full responsibility for station operation and management.

I recognise the hard work that my hon. Friend puts in on behalf of Lowestoft residents and, particularly, those who use rail services, and I know that he has campaigned strongly to help secure the funding necessary for the implementation of the Beccles loop, to which he referred, the implementation of which—later this year, I am advised—should greatly benefit Lowestoft by allowing additional services to operate. Indeed, I understand that he made an appearance on local television only today in support of the matter.

My hon. Friend has also been a strong supporter of Suffolk county council’s bid for funding under the local sustainable transport fund, and I am pleased to confirm that I was able to approve £5 million of funding that should bring significant benefits for Lowestoft residents, including the improved bus-rail interchange at the railway station to which he refers.

As my hon. Friend will know, I visited Lowestoft on 12 October last year, when I was able to see with my own eyes the facilities available to passengers at the station and, therefore, to understand fully the case for improvement. It does help in one’s ministerial capacity to visit the places about which one talks, because then one understands more fully the remarks that are made. I did appreciate the iconic British Rail sign, which is one of the unique ones around the country—I suppose it is unique, if we are going to use that adjective; but I can also confirm that the station was looking a little sorry, and indeed I might even go so far as to say that in its present state it leaves a lot to be desired. So I well understand why my hon. Friend has brought this subject to the House tonight.

The good news is that, in addition to the improvements that I have mentioned, under the current Greater Anglia franchise there is a commitment to provide 110 additional car parking spaces at the station. I understand that Suffolk county council is developing detailed plans for consultation with interested parties, such as Network Rail and Greater Anglia, and I encourage all parties to work together to secure the benefits anticipated by the funding bid.

Lowestoft is also a fully accessible station, which is not something that can be said for all our Victorian infrastructure throughout the country, and that is beneficial to all passengers but, having said that, I certainly recognise my hon. Friend’s aspirations for an improvement in the general condition of the station.

This Government, as I have said, believe that train operators are best placed to understand the needs and aspirations of local rail users and stakeholders, and they have a clear line of accountability. Our policy of giving full maintenance responsibility at stations to a single entity—in this case, Greater Anglia—will remove the previous inefficiencies and duplications and allow the franchisee to focus on the efficient operation of the station and the development of maintenance and improvements plans that meet local needs. I certainly encourage the current Greater Anglia franchise holder to work closely with all stakeholders, including my hon. Friend, to secure in the short term the progress towards the improvements that local residents quite rightly wish to see delivered at Lowestoft station.

As my hon. Friend knows, the current Greater Anglia franchise has been let for a short period, and it is likely that if more significant investment is sought at the station, it might be delivered through the next franchise, which will be let for a long period. He and other key stakeholders will have an opportunity to respond to the Department’s consultation on the next franchise and to engage with potential bidders when they are announced in order to put the case for further investment at Lowestoft station. I know that he will continue to represent the interests of Lowestoft and the surrounding area in order to develop economic and environmental benefits for residents, visitors and tourists.

My hon. Friend referred also to the concept of a local delivery group, and I am very happy to say that we certainly support such initiatives, which are very much the coalition Government’s direction of travel in terms of devolving responsibility for the rail network to local areas. So we must not forget the good work that community rail partnerships have already done to bring new life to tired and sometimes derelict rail stations and, indeed, to branch lines up and down the country.

Through work with local people and volunteers, many of those stations have been transformed. Such schemes have included school artwork projects, rubbish clearance, which may be of particular interest to my hon. Friend, station gardens and a range of innovative, small-scale and cost-effective refurbishments that encourage passengers. Having seen what the community has done to transform Plumpton station, a small country station in my constituency, I very well understand the benefits that such community engagement brings to smaller stations and to branch lines.

About 4,000 volunteers work in community rail, contributing over 1.2 million hours of work and bringing around £27 million of extra value to the rail industry, with an estimated benefit-cost ratio of £4.60 benefit for every £1 spent. Recognising the value of community rail, the Department has formally designated over 30 community rail routes. Designation encourages good standards across the community rail industry. There are many examples of excellent community rail projects across the country. For example, as my hon. Friend will know, the Wherry line between Lowestoft and Norwich is a successful partnership promoting the railway and the surrounding area to develop economic and environmental benefits for residents, visitors and tourists. His idea of a local delivery group therefore builds on something that has already taken shape in the area. I certainly think that the idea of the local council, and indeed the wider community, working with the rail industry, be it Network Rail or the train company, is likely to be helpful and successful.

In summary, I hope that I have been able to demonstrate that the coalition Government are committed to improving and modernising stations across the network through a combination of substantial investment and reform of the way in which the railways are run. I encourage my hon. Friend to continue to engage with the local train operator to secure the further improvements that he understandably seeks for Lowestoft station.

Question put and agreed to.