East Midlands Rail Franchise

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 11th April 2019 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Jones]

This is the very earliest of stages, so I am afraid I cannot provide all the details on that. However, I am extremely keen to see further environmental improvements on our rail network, and it is with great relish that I will be taking the first opportunity to bring a hydrogen-powered train on to the network.

[Mrs Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

The Minister paints a very glowing picture of this new franchise—it almost sounds too good to be true. As somebody who will be travelling on these trains every week, as he will not be, can he assure me that the quality of the brand-new trains that he has promised us, which will apparently be amazing, will be at least as good as the ones we have now and better than Abellio usually has, or will they be of inferior quality? When will they come into the franchise, and will they be stopping more frequently between London and Belper?

[Andrew Jones]

The quality of the rolling stock will be upgraded. The rolling stock in this area is indeed quite old. I am fully aware that I do not travel on the line as frequently as my hon. Friend, although I am quite a regular passenger. As we replace trains across our network, we are seeing a much improved service. In this instance, there will be more seats and free wi-fi across the franchise, which should benefit her and those she serves. On stopping at Belper, I will need to do some further investigation and reply separately on that point.

Oral Answers to Questions

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 13th July 2017 Commons Chamber

[Chris Grayling]

First, I absolutely support the need for the capacity improvements that Crossrail 2 will bring to London—indeed, not just to London, but to areas outside. We are working our way through the business case. I do not think it is any secret that the Transport for London funding package has not quite lived up to initial promises, but I want this to work. I am seeing the Mayor next week, and we will do everything we can to make it work.

[Mrs Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Belper, in my constituency, which is part of the world heritage site, is a great place to live, apart from the traffic? The A6 is far too clogged. Could we look at a bypass for Belper and at a new cycleway right up the Derwent valley?

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

Not only can we look at it, but we would be delighted to receive an application for a bypass. I look forward very much to cycling that section of the Derwent valley when I come to visit it on a future occasion.

Oral Answers to Questions

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 12th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Andrew Jones)]

We have no plans to review the drink-drive limit. The level of 80 mg per 100 ml of blood is one of the higher ones, but no country has a better record than us on road safety and improving performance in tackling drink-driving. Taken together, it is the combination of the right limit and enforcement and the cultural belief that drink-driving is wrong that makes progress.

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

Before Christmas, a parent at Morley Primary School in my constituency was badly injured when driving in the school’s vicinity, because another car was going too fast, which is a regular occurrence. I have consistently requested that the county council change the speed limit and move the signs—only move them—but it consistently refuses to do so because, it says, nobody has been killed yet. I do not want a child, parent or anybody else to be killed. Is there any way that the Minister can change the criteria by which councils decide to change such speed limits?

[Mr Speaker]

Let’s hear from the fella.

Cycling: Government Investment

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd February 2016 Westminster Hall

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

It is a delight to serve under your chairmanship again, Mr Bone.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Chris Green) on securing this important debate. I wish to follow on from my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Alex Chalk), who talked about women and children cycling. In my constituency, I have literally hundreds and hundreds of cyclists, but they are not families. Families are frightened to go out on bicycles. The most amazing world heritage site—the Derwent Valley Mills—is in my constituency, but cyclists cannot get to it. We cannot encourage tourists in, because they cannot get to it. To reach it, cyclists have to go up the main A6. There is no sensible place to put a cycle route, so we need an off-road, dedicated cycle route, but one that can be used by walkers and others as well, so that it is multi-use.

I have got a group of local people working towards plotting such a cycle route. They are working with all the local authorities, who are mainly on board, apart from Derbyshire County Council, which does not like to do anything in a Conservative area. Everybody else is on board.

We need that cycle route, so that we can encourage tourism into Belper and other places. We can get people cycling for leisure, instead of having to put their bikes on their cars to drive out into the countryside to go on the various trails. I do not have a cycle route in my constituency at all, which is a real deficit for people who genuinely want to get out and take their families out, without having to make a major journey to do it. They want to be able to just take their kids out for a cycle on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon. That dedicated route would help that happen and encourage more and more people to cycle.

[Mary Robinson (Cheadle) (Con)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Chris Green) on securing this debate. I wholly agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Pauline Latham) on this point. It is great that we get the investment—in Greater Manchester there has been £40 million of investment in 100 km of cycleways, and there have also been smaller schemes, such as the cycle friendly district centres scheme—but it is crucial that we also have the feeling of safety. Perhaps we could increase driver awareness —their consciousness of cyclists on the road and their safety.

[Pauline Latham]

My hon. Friend is right that we need to raise awareness, but with a road such as the main A6, which is just a two-lane road with huge lorries—sometimes those lorries are coming from quarries and going all over the place—it is dangerous for anyone, whether man or woman, and definitely so for a child.

I implore the Minister to look at how we can get more people off the road in my constituency and on to cycle routes, because I know that there is demand. That would not only help the leisure cyclist, but commuters coming into or going out of Derby—some do commute out for work. Removing cyclists from the main road could benefit the whole population by making cyclists’ lives safer and helping prevent traffic congestion caused by cyclists weaving in and out. They can cause hold-ups. I would like to see that dedicated cycle route happen, so I hope that the Minister will give us a crumb of comfort that he might look at investing in that route in Mid Derbyshire.

Midland Main Line (Electrification)

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Wednesday 16th September 2015 Westminster Hall

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

I am delighted to serve under your chairmanship again, Sir Roger. I am pleased to be able to contribute to the debate, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough (Harry Harpham) on securing it. I was interested that he covered the costs involved in pausing work on the midland main line route, as well as the environmental aspects. I was also pleased that the hon. Member for Sheffield South East (Mr Betts) mentioned the extension of the East Midlands Trains franchise, which is very welcome. That is good news for the service and it will provide a lot of continuity.

The outcome of the Hendy review into Network Rail spending will have real consequences for my constituents. The line is essential for business and leisure travellers. We are keen to promote tourism in the area, but it will be affected if the service is not as good as it could be.

When it became clear that Network Rail’s programme for railway upgrades was behind schedule, I supported the Secretary of State’s decision to take action to get it back on track and to ensure that it delivered, in a financially responsible way, the improvements passengers want.

Much of the work that is needed on our railways should have been done decades ago. Governments of all hues have let the railway system down. It is a shame it has taken so long to focus on electrifying the majority of Britain’s railways—something that was started in the 18th century.

I agreed that bonuses to Network Rail’s executive directors should be suspended after the organisation failed to meet targets. That went some way to making up for previous years, when the company paid out £1 million in bonuses at the same time as being fined £53 million by the Office of Rail Regulation for failing to meet train punctuality targets. I have to say that, on Monday, every other train was cancelled because of rather poor signalling, which caused a lot of disruption for a lot of people.

With that in mind, I am waiting to see what Dame Colette Bowe’s review says later this month. Later today, like many other Members in the room, I will be meeting representatives of the East Midlands chamber of commerce, as well as local economic partnerships and councils from across the region, to discuss the paused electrification and the potential outcomes of the Hendy review.

In Derby, we have the largest rail forum in Europe, and the business community is understandably nervous about what the review will say about not just the electrification of the midland main line, but the other proposed upgrade projects. While the pausing of the midland main line electrification was disappointing for those of us looking for that long overdue project to get under way, it should not prevent other improvements from being made to the main line, because those can and must be undertaken.

In his statement on Network Rail’s performance before the House on 25 June, the Secretary of State said that better services can be delivered on the midland main line before electrification. Those include a four-track railway line from Bedford to Kettering, which will create a six-path on the midland main line, so more trains will be able to use it—something we desperately need.

Our trains are a victim of their own success, because they are pretty full most of the time. In addition, changing the layout of the tracks at Derby train station to separate the Birmingham and Leicester routes will make a big difference. The only problem I have with it is that we will never go into platform 1—the easiest one from which to get out of the station—again. However, that pales into insignificance against the fact that we will not always have to wait outside the station, which is the only one on the way up from London to Derby where trains wait outside and people cannot get off until they go in.

[Mr Betts]

The hon. Lady is demonstrating that we are mounting a cross-party argument today, with everyone behind it. She is right to mention the other works that are planned. Over the last few years, the journey time to Sheffield has been cut by 10 minutes for less than £100 million—great value. Will the Minister give a commitment today that the other improvement works will continue while the pause in electrification is in effect?

[Pauline Latham]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: this is a cross-party issue that is important to all of us. It is important for businesses across the whole of the east midlands that there should be a much better service.

The proposals can clearly help to increase capacity on the main line route and provide economic benefits to the businesses that rely on them. I hope the Minister can inform us whether a clear green light to proceed will be given in the Hendy review. That will allow businesses and investors to make plans about investing in the necessary skills and capabilities needed to implement the improvements, without any concern that the rug might be pulled out from underneath them at a later date.

The business case for the upgrades and electrification remains strong. As well as creating an expected £450 million of economic benefits, the quicker and more reliable service would cut journey times by up to 15 minutes and improve freight access to the network. Numbers on the midland main line have increased by more than 130% over the last 15 years. A further 30% rise is expected in the next 10 years. All of us who travel on the trains will know that it is much harder to get a seat at peak times now.

I am hopeful that the Hendy review will give a clear answer about when electrification will be given the go-ahead again. A lot of companies in the supply chain part of the rail forum in Derby are waiting for the announcement. They need certainty to be able to plan, and so as not to have to reduce their workforce. The less ambiguous the answer, the better, because a lot of work has already gone into the electrification plans—for example, on the advanced design work for electrification and the re-building of a number of bridges. The longer we delay, however, the more uncertainty builds and the higher the costs will be if we decide to go ahead at a later date.

I am happy to continue working with the large number of stakeholders, including our local rail forum, who are looking to see the main line improvement go forward. Pausing it was the right thing to do, but I do not want this to be another project that is kicked into the long grass. I hope the Minister can inform us of when we will know for certain which projects are to be given the green light and what factors are being taken into consideration to determine that.

Vehicle Speed Outside Schools

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Wednesday 9th September 2015 Commons Chamber

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

I want to start this adjournment debate on road safety by reading from a letter written by one of my constituents, Lydia Morley, who is a 10-year-old pupil at Morley primary school in my constituency of Mid Derbyshire. She starts by recognising the two top priorities a school must have. It must provide

“an extraordinary place for developing the minds of young children”

and

“safety”

for those who attend. Her next words summarise effectively what today’s debate is about.

“Not all motorists adhere to the speed limit outside our school, and some drivers don’t see the danger in driving over the 30 mph speed limit. This is such recklessness as this could cause a fatal accident. The evidence clearly shows that the proximity of the 40 mph sign is far too close to the pelican crossing which all the parents and children use on a daily basis.”

She says she strongly agrees with the campaign to move the 40 mph sign to the other side of Church Lane, Morley. Lydia ends with words I want everyone in this Chamber and the decision-makers at Derbyshire County Council to hear:

“Your actions could change the lives of the pupils at Morley School and we will no longer have to look left and right in fright.”

It is for the reasons raised by my young constituent that I am grateful to have secured this debate on road safety outside Morley primary school. After visiting the school in June and on several other occasions and after speaking to staff about the problem of speeding traffic and poor traffic safety measures, I knew that a debate was vital to ensure that something was done. I fear, however, that a child will be killed before any action is taken.

The problem is simple: Morley primary school is located on a busy A-road, the A608, which runs to and from the centre of Derby. I believe it is the only school in Derbyshire to be located on an A-road with no drop-off area on the school side. Parents have to park at the pub opposite, leaving children no option but to cross the A-road at the puffin crossing. As an added safety precaution, the school has purchased and installed safety railings near the puffin crossing, where the children wait for the beeping and the green man to appear, but they are still at severe risk given the speed of cars going past the school.

There is currently a 30 mph speed limit on the road outside the school, but it is ignored by a worryingly high number of motorists during the peak hours in the morning when motorists travel into and out of Derby for work. A survey of traffic speeds conducted by the casualty reduction enforcement support team, undertaken between 3 June and 18 June, showed that over half the vehicles driving past the school during the day did so above the speed limit, with 85% moving at an average speed of more than 36.3 mph. The total number of cars surveyed was 192,802, meaning that over 163,000 cars were speeding.

During the morning school run, between 8 am and 9 am, when we should be keeping children safe on their way to school, 85% of traffic travels at an average of 33 mph, which, while not as fast as in the rest of the day, is still above the speed limit. It only takes one speeding car to hit a child for us to have a preventable tragedy on our hands. I do not want the death of a child on my conscience. All the county council can say is that there have been no fatalities outside the school so far.

Of course, the morning run is not the only time children have to cross the road. They do so when they leave school at the end of the day and for any outside activities, such as swimming lessons. That is a minimum of 200 crossings a day. The school, whose campaign I will get to shortly, has conducted its own checks. In a 40-minute period, while a police van was visible and children were using the crossing, one vehicle showed a maximum speed of 59 mph and four travelled in excess of 40 mph. I have been outside the school and witnessed the heavy traffic and the speed at which it travels. Some cars did not even stop at a red light, and parents had to grab their children to prevent a fatality.

The facts on speeding cars are stark. The risk of death from being hit at 30 mph is 50%. It is approximately four times higher at 40 mph. On rural A-roads, such as the A608, fatal accidents are four times more likely than on urban A-roads. These statistics relate to adults. Children are much more likely to die from being hit by a vehicle—even one travelling at 30 mph. The campaign I am supporting and wish to promote here calls for a reduction in the speed limit outside the school to 20 mph and an expansion of the 30 mph speed limit zone in the surrounding areas. Reducing speed limits to 20 mph has been shown to reduce the number of child pedestrian deaths by 70%, and 20 mph zones are now relatively widespread, with more than 2,000 schemes in operation in England alone.

A speed limit of 20 mph puts people, not cars, first, which is important when thinking about road crossings for young children. These zones are also low cost and high benefit. For example, Portsmouth converted 1,200 streets in the city to 20 mph zones, at a cost of just over £500,000, and here in London, Transport for London estimates that 20 mph zones are already saving the city more than £20 million every year by preventing crashes.

Vital to this plan is better signage leading up to and inside the 20 mph zone. At present, motorists travelling at 40 or 50 mph on the A-road do not have enough time or distance to reduce their speed safely. It is also confusing for motorists to see signs for 40 mph followed quickly by signs saying they have to travel at 30 mph. An increase in the size of the 30 mph zone before it goes into a 20 mph zone would go a long way towards reducing confusion and giving motorists enough time to reduce their speed.

The other necessary measure is better enforcement of the speed limits, with those going over them knowing that they will be fined. I think attitudes towards speeding outside the school would change very quickly if motorists knew they would be seen and fined. It is no good fining people after the event. Just as an unworn seatbelt is pointless, so an unenforced speed limit makes almost redundant any efforts to keep children safe. It will take only one child to be killed for this to go from a hypothetical problem to a conversation with a grieving parent to explain why we had done nothing.

Derbyshire County Council recently promised it would look into installing cameras at school crossings to replace school-crossing patrols. The problem, as highlighted by my Conservative colleagues on the council, is that there is a big difference between people saying they will do something and actually doing it. The parents of pupils at the school who drop their children off in the morning and collect them are behaving very responsibly, parking away from the road to avoid congestion and giving children a safe place from which to exit their cars. The children are well trained on road safety, waiting patiently at the crossing for the beeping to start, but when the all clear is given, they understandably rush in excitement to get to the other side of the road and into school. If a car has not stopped by that point, they will run straight into it.

I reiterate that this is not a concern solely of parents and pupils at Morley primary school. A 2011 study by the campaign group, Living Streets, showed that speeding traffic scares over a third of children and young people walking to school, and that one in five is concerned about the lack of safety crossing-points on their journey. No change is going to stop the possibility of injuries completely, but let us reward the sensible behaviour of children and pupils with sensible behaviour on our behalf.

This Government have already led the way in focusing on encouraging children to walk to school and making provisions for that. In July, the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Andrew Jones), commenced the cycling and walking investment strategy, which will look at how to get more children walking to school. I look forward to seeing the results of that study.

A number of policy proposals are out there, including park-and-stride schemes, but the county council will really have to listen to what is happening in the area it purports to represent. There is another problem—this does not concern the school—because Broomfield Hall college is based further down the same road, and students have to cross it with cars going in excess of the speed limit of 40 mph. They are taking their lives in their hands as well. This road is very dangerous so I would like to force the county council to look at the problem again. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.

Cycling

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2014 Commons Chamber

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

I congratulate the all-party parliamentary cycling group on securing this debate. However, given that it is an all-party group, I think that some Opposition Members have been rather churlish in not representing all the parties, but instead making a lot of party political points and having a go at the Minister when he has not even spoken. They could have resisted that urge and made this an all-party Back-Bench business debate in which everybody could speak and be positive about cycling.

As a non-cyclist, I have been contacted by a lot of local members of various cycling organisations and long-standing cyclists who want me to do something about the problem of cycling right up the A6. Families and elderly people cannot cycle on it because it is very dangerous. Even the keenest cyclists are nervous about going on that very busy main road. I contacted all of them to set up a meeting and we established a group to look at how we could get cyclists off the road. There is some off-road cycling in Derby along defunct train lines, but one has to drive to them. That is fine for leisure cycling, but not for commuting. It is also not good for families with young children who want to go out for an hour or so on a Saturday afternoon, because they have to get in a car to get there. It would be better if they could get on to a route near the A6 from their own homes. That route would go through the Derwent Valley Mills world heritage site, so it would bring in tourism as well.

The Derwent Valley cycleway group has been working for a year with Derbyshire county council and Derby city council to identify a route that could be realised. The route is almost in place. The landowners are mostly supportive. There is one who is not too keen because he is concerned about the livestock in his fields, but that can be overcome. The group is very passionate. It celebrated its first anniversary last week and we had a meeting to see where we had got to. I want to praise the amount of work that all its members have done voluntarily to help the local authorities come up with a scheme that can be funded.

Derby city council has £2 million to spend on cycle routes over the next five years, which is great. We only want it to fund a small portion of the route from the Silk Mill in Derby city, which comes from one of the earliest parts of the industrial revolution, up through Belper, with its Arkwright mills from the start of the industrial revolution. The route would go right up to Matlock and beyond. At the moment, I am concerned with my constituency, but it would carry on into the constituency of the Secretary of State for Transport.

As many people know, Derbyshire is a hugely hilly county. It is hard work cycling in Derbyshire, which is great for keen cyclists, but not for families who are trying to get their children cycling. The group has therefore looked at bringing the cycle path alongside the river all the way up, which would take it close to all the old mills that used water power during the industrial revolution.

The scheme is a very practical one. What is needed now is for the funding to come forward. I am therefore pleased that the report suggests funding of £10 per head. I am also pleased to note that the Government would like to get to that amount as soon as possible.

If we could get the cycle route going, it would contribute not only to people’s health, but to their education, because they would see a world heritage site. It is pretty impressive to see the enormous Arkwright mills in Belper and further north. It would make a big difference by educating young people in particular about where the industrial revolution started. Healthwise, the route would help many people to get the exercise that they do not normally get. I have even promised that I might take to a bicycle if we get the route going, because I might be able to go along that fairly flat route. Although I used to cycle a lot as a child, I have lost confidence and wobble all over the place, so I would not dare to cycle on a road.

Many groups in the area cycle for sport. They cycle quite long distances at speed. This would be a great route for them. They tend to go out early in the morning, whereas leisure cyclists tend to go out a bit later, so they should not clash unduly.

Businesses would welcome the route. This relates to the third recommendation of the report. Many people who live in Belper in my constituency work in Derby—quite a lot of people also work in Belper, and I would like there to be more employment in Belper—and they would like to cycle into Derby, but there is no safe route. It is important that we provide safe routes for people to cycle to work. Again, the people going to work, who will be professional, Lycra-type cyclists, are more likely to travel early in the morning and come back in the evening, whereas leisure cyclists, such as older people and families, would go at times when the route is less congested.

The report is very welcome. The fact that the Backbench Business Committee has granted this debate shows that everybody in the Chamber and the Government takes the issue seriously. I commend the report to the Minister, and ask for more off-road cycle routes that could be combined with routes for walkers and horses. We do not have enough bridlepaths in this country, and the two can go side by side—there is no reason for that to be dangerous as long as people are courteous and accept that there will be other users on the route. If we could have a multi-use cycle route, bridlepath and walking route, we would get far more people out and about, working hard to get fit, and we would introduce more tourism to the area. That would bring money to the area, which will always be welcome, and I would like more of that to be developed. I hope that the Minister will reflect on that, and perhaps come up with a strategy for how we in Derbyshire can progress that scheme—with funding at some point—so that we can have a better route for millions of people to come and enjoy our world heritage sites.

Oral Answers to Questions

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr McLoughlin]

We are investing record amounts in the rail industry. I will certainly look into the point the hon. Lady makes, but it is one of many demands as far as rail services are concerned.

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

18. Will the Secretary of State join me again in welcoming the fantastic order won by Bombardier, but could we also encourage Bombardier to use its local supply chain industry, because we have a centre of excellence in Derby for engineering and knock-on industries and it would be very good if it could spread the load and invest in the local area?

[Mr McLoughlin]

I very much agree with my hon. Friend and I know she will be delighted at today’s announcement. It is worth pointing out that in Derby we have got not only Bombardier but Rolls-Royce and Toyota and just over in Staffordshire—but I almost regard it as Derbyshire—JCB, all providing an engineering centre of excellence. It is true that some 71% of this new contract will be based on small and medium-sized industries in this country. I forgot to say that JCB is also in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Heather Wheeler).

Oral Answers to Questions

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2013 Commons Chamber

The hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, representing the House of Commons Commission, was asked—

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

8. What discussions the Commission had prior to the establishment of the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy on how that body would engage with other interested organisations and Committees of this House.

[John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)]

The announcement made on 27 November that you, Mr Speaker, intended to set up the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy is entirely in keeping with the House of Commons Commission’s objective of encouraging public participation in the parliamentary process. The Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy will encourage involvement by all.

[Pauline Latham]

What steps will be taken by the House of Commons Commission to ensure that the Speaker’s Commission does not overlap with the work of the outreach service and the remits of the Procedure Committee, the Select Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform and the Administration Committee?

[John Thurso]

All those very important issues will indeed be covered by the Committees of the House and I fully anticipate that at its inaugural meeting the Speaker’s Commission would look at exactly how best to maximise the work of all the bodies the hon. Lady has mentioned. We see it as being entirely complementary and not in competition.

Oral Answers to Questions

Pauline Latham Excerpts

Thursday 7th November 2013 Commons Chamber

The hon. Member for Aberdeen North, representing the House of Commons Commission, was asked—

[Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con)]

1. If the Commission will establish a Members’ consultation group for the work on the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster.

[Mr Frank Doran (Aberdeen North)]

I shall answer for the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (John Thurso).

Last year the House of Commons Commission invited the right hon. Member for Saffron Walden (Sir Alan Haselhurst) and my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and West Fife (Thomas Docherty) to join two Members of the House of Lords as an informal consultation group for the pre-feasibility study on the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster. That group is not a decision-making body; its purpose is to ensure that the programme team has a good understanding of the range of Members’ views and requirements, and that that is reflected in the final formal proposals.

[Pauline Latham]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that answer. I am not sure whether he said that there are Members of the House of Commons on that advisory body, as I could not quite hear. If there are not, would it be possible to include them? I have strong opinions on this issue as, I am sure, do many other Members of the House. I would like an assurance that the House will be consulted and kept up to date on progress.

[Mr Doran]

There are already two Members of the House of Commons on the informal committee, and there may be a third. There are currently three Members of the House of Lords. The hon. Lady is right and it is crucial that Members are kept advised. That will be done through the normal channels, and all relevant committees will be advised. If she is interested—I know her commitment to this issue—and would like to meet the project manager, that would be perfectly possible.