Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Tuesday 8th October 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I am today announcing a review of the way in which the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) delivers services to its customers. This includes services to motorists, businesses, the police, the courts, local authorities and others.

We are committed to delivering better quality and better value motoring services to the public, business and other interested parties. In line with the objectives we set out in the Department for Transport’s motoring services strategy last year, we will undertake a review of the DVLA commencing this month. The review will focus on the DVLA’s current operation, services and change portfolio and make recommendations for a future business strategy which will enable digital service transformation and a step change in efficiency, while supporting economic growth and meeting statutory obligations. I am placing a copy of the terms of reference in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Department’s website.

Mary Reilly, a non-executive director of the Department for Transport, will lead the three-month review before submitting a report to Ministers outlining formal recommendations for transformation within the DVLA. We will then consider those recommendations fully before making any decisions and any further announcements.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 12th September 2013 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

3. What his plans are for future investment in London’s transport network.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

As the Chancellor announced at the spending review, the Government are providing more than £5.8 billion in capital grant and a further £3.8 billion of borrowing power between 2015-16 and 2020-21 to Transport for London, which will enable it to continue to invest in critical transport infrastructure, including Crossrail and the tube upgrade programme. This is in addition to more than £10 billion that has been provided to TfL over the current spending review period up to 2015.

[Heidi Alexander]

Can the Minister assure me that, in considering the case for Crossrail 2—which would link south-west London and north-east London—the Government will not forget that south-east London, the area I represent, barely makes it on to the tube map at the moment? Does he agree that the proposal to extend the Bakerloo line to Lewisham should form part of the strategic review of London’s future transport needs and how they can be met?

[Stephen Hammond]

As the hon. Lady knows, the Government are making £2 million available to TfL for the Crossrail 2 study to take place. Any proposal to extend the underground is primarily a matter for the Mayor and TfL. To date, the Mayor has made no representations that suggest that the Bakerloo line extension is a priority for him.

[Gareth Johnson (Dartford) (Con)]

Last week, a security scare closed the Dartford crossing and led to six-hour tailbacks along the M25 for local residents. Will the Minister explore ways of mitigating such problems in the future and helping the residents of Dartford, who are sick to the back teeth of problems arising from the Dartford crossing?

[Stephen Hammond]

My hon. Friend is right about the significant repercussions for the residents of Dartford, but he will appreciate that security is our first priority. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already called for an in-depth report into the incident, the implications, and what can be done to mitigate such effects in the future.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham East (Heidi Alexander) is right to highlight the fact that south-east London is not served by the underground system and therefore is heavily reliant on the rail system. The plan to develop a road crossing at Silvertown, next to the Blackwall tunnel, will not sufficiently provide the extra river crossings and access to docklands that south-east London needs. I stress the need for extra public transport options—including, if we build the Silvertown link, a docklands light railway crossing—that will reduce the capacity on the roads.

[Stephen Hammond]

I have listened carefully to the hon. Gentleman’s case, and I accept the point about the Silvertown link—indeed, the Mayor has made a commitment to look at that. As I said to the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Heidi Alexander), any proposal to extend the underground and the rail system in that part of London is primarily a decision for the Mayor.

[Mr Iain McKenzie (Inverclyde) (Lab)]

6. What his policy is on the privatisation of InterCity East Coast rail services; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[George Freeman (Mid Norfolk) (Con)]

9. What plans he has to ensure that the roads spending programme supports a) the A47 and b) other routes of strategic regional and national economic importance.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

The development of route-based strategies by the Highways Agency will provide much smarter investment planning for the strategic road network. On 20 August, the Government announced that the Department would undertake a feasibility study on the A47 to identify ways to improve performance and support economic growth in East Anglia. I of course look forward to visiting my hon. Friend’s constituency and the A47 on Monday.

[George Freeman]

I thank the Minister for his commitment to the roads budget and for his agreement to visit Norfolk next week; his visit is widely anticipated and welcomed. As he knows from the Adjournment debate that we have had, the dossier that he has seen and the business plan prepared by the A47 Alliance, the A47 is a key economic artery linking our offshore energy cluster, the research park and the midlands. Assuming we have a successful visit next week, what opportunity might there be to access some funding to begin the process in the next few years?

[Stephen Hammond]

The announced study will focus on the route-based solutions that will unlock the potential for local transport innovation and for economic and housing improvements. I thank my hon. Friend for his support for the Government’s investment, and I am sure that the visit next week will be successful.

[Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)]

Does the Minister agree that improvements to A roads that are minor in cost terms can have considerable benefit strategically? In my constituency, the A509 bypass and the A45 dualling would help us enormously. Will he look at those projects?

[Stephen Hammond]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why the Government have had two tranches of pinch-point improvements for the national strategic road network, and have provided £170 million for local pinch-points as well. I would be delighted to meet him at some stage in the near future to discuss his schemes.

[Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) (Con)]

10. What progress his Department has made on procuring new rolling stock for the east coast main line.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con)]

11. What assessment he has made of the (a) cost and (b) reduction in service of ferries between the Isle of Wight and the English mainland; and if he will make a statement.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My hon. Friend will remember that I visited the Isle of Wight earlier this year, as did my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. We are of course aware of the fares for the ferry services and of the level and frequency of service provided by the island’s three ferry operators. There has been no formal assessment. This is a competitive market, and it is for the ferry operators to decide the level of fares and services based on market conditions.

[Mr Turner]

The island’s ferries provide lifeline services and the repeated cuts damage our quality of life. Wightlink has enormous debts, which are paid for out of the island’s economy. I plead with my hon. Friends to enter into dialogue to consider how public service obligations can be introduced so that we have the certainty to build our economy and create more jobs.

[Stephen Hammond]

My hon. Friend will remember that I met him and a delegation from the island earlier in the year. I promised then to meet Wightlink, and have done so. There are more than 200 sailings to and from the island each day, so there is no apparent market failure. I hear my hon. Friend’s plea to put public service obligations in place and we will continue to keep them under review, but at the moment there is no case to do so.

[Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alok Sharma (Reading West) (Con)]

T9. I recently met my constituent John Letch, owner of Car Contacts Ltd, which sells second-hand cars, many of which it imports from Northern Ireland. Mr Letch tells me that in recent months the company has experienced severe delays in the re-registering of cars by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, delaying their onward sale and putting the company under financial strain. Will the Minister meet me and Mr Letch, and other traders, to discuss this matter urgently?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My hon. Friend refers to applications that were centralised at the DVLA in Swansea in July. There were initially some delays, but on 9 August a special team was created to deal with the more complex applications, and I think that that is now beginning to resolve the situation. However, I would of course be happy to meet him and his constituents.

[Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP)]

The consultation on the potential closure of the Driver and Vehicle Agency office in Coleraine and the moving of 300 jobs to Swansea closed this morning. Although I do not expect the Minister to have the answers to the consultation yet, will he agree to meet me, my hon. Friend the Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) and a small delegation of workers who would be affected by the closure? More importantly, will he take this opportunity to remove the smear levelled at workers that there were sectarian issues that would lead to the closure of the office when none has ever been reported?

[Stephen Hammond]

The hon. Gentleman is, of course, right that I will not comment on the result of the consultation. He is referring to the package of documents that were published as part of the consultation, including an equality assessment. I apologise for any offence that was inadvertently caused and accept that the wording could have been clearer. I must stress that there was no intention to imply that any of the staff at the DVA might be biased in any way. Indeed, the equality assessment concludes that there is nothing in the proposal on the centralisation plans that would give rise to any bias or any perception of bias. Finally, I would, of course, be delighted to meet him, the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) and a group of their constituents.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

My constituents look forward to the electrification of the Great Western main line. When does the Secretary of State expect to begin a consultation on any reconfiguration of services, especially in the Bristol travel-to-work area, that will be made possible by electrification and the new trains that come with it?

Road Network (Economic Growth)

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Tuesday 10th September 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

This statement is to inform the House that I am today publishing policy setting out the role of the strategic road network in enabling economic growth.

The new policy will replace circular 02/2007 planning and the strategic road network, and DFT circular 01/2008 policy on service areas and other roadside facilities on motorways and all-purpose trunk roads in England.

The new policy removes some constraints and burdens from local authorities and other local decision makers, creating greater scope for addressing local needs when considering proposals for new developments.

In reducing regulation, the new policy will encourage growth by making it easier for businesses and communities to develop through increased opportunity and reduced cost, while at the same time ensuring that the road network continues to operate efficiently.

EU Directive 2007/46/EC

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Wednesday 4th September 2013 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) on securing this debate. He said in his opening remarks that he had a passion for manufacturing and for small and medium-sized enterprises, and he was generous enough to suggest that he suspected I shared those passions. He was right. He was also right that tonight’s debate provides an opportunity for us to discuss the effect on businesses of directive 2007/46/EC. I would like to thank him and his office for their assistance on some of the thoughts he might express tonight; I hope that my response will thus be more informed.

I am aware that the hon. Gentleman has recently asked a number of questions about this directive, so I am pleased to respond to this evening’s debate. Before I talk about the directive, it would be right and proper to reflect on the significant progress made by the UK automotive sector. This is explained in the automotive strategy that was published in July, which was the culmination of work led by the Automotive Council. It is very encouraging for all of us to note and learn that the UK car industry is currently vibrant, particularly at a time when other European markets face significant challenges.

The UK produced 1.58 million vehicles in 2012, with £6 billion of investment in the industry by vehicle manufacturers over the last two years. That is good news for the UK. Some challenges have been presented at ports, and I am pleased to help the industry overcome them. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman—and, indeed, the Associate Parliamentary Manufacturing Group—would welcome that.

I turn, if I may, to the matter in hand. Clearly, the hon. Gentleman is concerned that the directive could have a detrimental effect on businesses. Just as he set out his concerns, I shall set out exactly how I think on the issue and briefly explain what the directive is all about. It concerns the approval of new road vehicles at EU level. It covers new road vehicles with four or more wheels, and there is a mandatory obligation on the UK, as on all member states, to apply its provisions.

The directive was implemented in the UK on 29 April 2009 by the Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2009, SI No. 717. The hon. Gentleman was right to point out that the key element of the directive was to establish a single European market for motor vehicles, meaning that a vehicle approved to pan-European standards can be registered anywhere within the European Union, without further testing or obstruction to placing it on the market anywhere within the EU. The dates of application depend on the vehicle category: it has already been implemented for most vehicles, and will be fully implemented in October 2014, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, for the largest goods vehicles.

Approvals under the directive are available from member states’ approval authorities. In the UK, this means the Vehicle Certification Agency, supported by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency and the Driver and Vehicle Agency in Northern Ireland. Approvals are enforced through the registration scheme operated by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. Only motor vehicles with the appropriate certificate can be registered for use in the UK. Manufacturers can choose whether to use the UK approval authority or one from another member state for the pan-European approval.

Approval of the directive is a regulatory simplification matter, as it avoids manufacturers having to comply with potentially 28 different sets of national regulations and requirements. On that basis, it was supported at the outset by the high-volume producers. Producers of specialist and low-volume vehicles are also covered by the small series or the individual approval schemes created by the Department. These are essential provisions and are key to helping overcome the burden of EU-wide rules for UK SMEs, and throughout the process the Department has always sought to provide clear advice and assistance to such companies. If the hon. Gentleman has evidence that companies, including SMEs, have not considered that to be the case, I shall be delighted to consider his representation.

Prior to implementation, during 2007-08, officials worked closely with the various sectors affected by the new requirements. That included hosting, in conjunction with the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, a road show involving 12 events around the United Kingdom to build engagement with industry.

At the time of the implementation of the national regulations, a full impact assessment was undertaken and published by the Department. Its objective was to determine how to implement the directive in a way that would minimise the burdens on UK businesses while maximising the safety and environmental benefits. Two options for implementation of the recast framework directive were assessed, the first being to implement only the pan-European scheme and to accept and issue only European approvals, and the second being to implement the pan-European scheme together with national schemes for small series approval and individual approvals.

A “small firms impact test” considered the financial and business implications for the companies. Some 250 SMEs were consulted as part of a telephone survey, and face-to-face interviews were conducted with 20 members of an overall group of 35 SMEs that had been carefully selected from the sub-sectors to provide a representative and balanced assessment. In addition, the Department sought the views of the Small Business Service and its successor, the Enterprise Directorate, in the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, as well as the views of the Federation of Small Businesses and a number of other stakeholders.

The SMEs that were consulted advised the Department that type approval would be too onerous for some companies, and it was therefore important to have the option of national approval schemes. It was clear that the EU-wide scheme could have a fairly major adverse impact on SMEs, which are defined as businesses with fewer than 250 employees, so UK regulations were developed to incorporate option 2—the national approvals option—alongside the mandatory pan-European scheme.

I accept that, on the face of it, the provision of national schemes under option 2 would appear to be gold-plating, as it goes beyond the EU minimum. However, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the last Government adopted the correct course of action, which the present Government have continued. It does have a beneficial impact on SMEs.

I have engaged in correspondence with the hon. Gentleman about Truck Craft Bodies Ltd and the effect that the directive has had on its business. As he will recall, I explained in a reply to him in May that the cost that the company had incurred for the approval of its vehicles was significantly less than the original estimate. I think he will accept the macro-point that the cost burden on UK business of accepting option 2 is significantly lower than the pan-European option would have been.

Officials at the VCA met representatives of Truck Craft Bodies Ltd on 8 November 2012. I believe that they have supported the company and helped it to prepare the relevant documentation for its product range. Two more other site visits were made to the company’s premises in April and May 2013 to carry out approval work. The company now has seven vehicle types approved, with a fee cost for work by VCA of less than £11,000. On the basis of its current rate of production, that indicates an average certification cost of £18 per vehicle over three years. It is worth noting that the VCA fees are set on a cost reimbursement basis, following the public consultation. That reflects the cost of providing the approval service to industry.

The hon. Gentleman made several comments about the impact assessment. I can assure him that the VCA does not request information that it already holds. Again, I make the offer that if he can produce evidence that the VCA has asked for information that he believes it already holds, I will be happy to consider that. However, we do not believe that the agency requests information it already holds. It is also true that every vehicle converter must have a commercial relationship with the original vehicle manufacturer, and there are competition and confidentiality issues if information supplied to one company is made freely available to another. That would have an impact on any decision to undertake a further impact assessment.

This is a matter that the wider motor industry and trade associations may wish to address, rather than have Government create more rules or regulations. The Department and its agencies continue to work with industry, both directly and through its trade bodies, to identify any matters where there is a lack of clarity in the application of regulations or a need for administrative adjustments.

It is important to recognise that the directive was finalised six years ago and the UK regulations were created four years ago, so the opportunity for any changes before the regulations are fully implemented is relatively minimal. However, the Government are not complacent about our commitment to removing unnecessary regulatory burdens, and if there is evidence that that is not happening I will instruct officials to redouble their efforts. Indeed, there will be a meeting between the VCA and the industry trade bodies to discuss that on 30 September.

The hon. Gentleman should also by now have received a reply from my colleagues at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills about whether any funding was available to help mitigate the costs that Truck Craft Bodies Ltd has incurred. I understand that information has been provided on checking for possible sources of funding and on the business link helpline, which provides advice to those who wish to improve and grow their operations.

To summarise, under its European obligations the UK had to implement the directive. The Department worked towards doing that in a manner which offered a high level of consultation and of assurance in respect of safety and environmental aspects, while limiting the burdens on UK businesses. There is a long history of regulating certain aspects of safety and environmental protection on road vehicles to provide a level playing field for industry, and in order to protect consumers, road users and society in general.

I hope I have satisfactorily explained the Government’s position on the approval of new vehicles. I have invited the hon. Gentleman to write to me about any evidence he feels he has about any specific occasions, and I will be delighted to see it. We are aiming to limit the impact of the directive wherever possible. We are aiming to limit the burdens on industry, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will be reassured by what I have said, but if he has any further issues he wishes to raise, I will gladly respond to them.

Question put and agreed to.

Crossrail Station at Woolwich

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Monday 2nd September 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My noble Friend, the Earl Attlee, made the following written ministerial statement in the Lords on 25 July:

I am pleased to inform the House that the Crossrail sponsors (the Department for Transport and Transport for London) yesterday instructed Crossrail Ltd to complete the Crossrail station at Woolwich. This instruction will allow the station at Woolwich to open alongside the rest of the central section of the Crossrail route, currently scheduled to happen in December 2018.

The then Secretary of State for Transport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), made a statement in February 2011 confirming that an agreement for building the station box at Woolwich had been finalised—16 February 2011, Official Report, column 88WS. Since then Berkeley Homes has proceeded with construction of the box, in line with that agreement. This work was completed ahead of schedule in March this year and the box has now been handed over to Crossrail Ltd.

Government had always made it clear that completion of the station would be conditional upon receiving sufficient funding contributions from those developers and businesses that stand to benefit from a Crossrail station at Woolwich.

The instruction to complete the station, therefore, follows the conclusion of an agreement to fund the fit-out works.

Crossrail Ltd is receiving fixed additional funding of £54 million. This is made up of contributions from the royal borough of Greenwich, through local developer contributions and a grant from the Greater London Authority; Berkeley Homes, the site developer; and Transport for London, whose contribution will be repaid through the additional farebox revenue generated by the station.

The remainder of the funding will be provided by Crossrail Ltd. Crossrail Ltd had made budgetary provision for works that were required to allow trains to run through the station box. This will be reallocated to the works required to complete the station.

A fully operational station at Woolwich will support the regeneration of this part of south-east London, supporting the local borough’s growth ambitions as well as significantly improving connectivity and access to job opportunities. It will also provide jobs during construction.

Crossrail Ltd will now begin the process of procuring the fit-out works and will be publishing an OJEU shortly.

HGV Road User Levy Bill

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 18th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I am today correcting a figure that I quoted during the Ways and Means resolution debate on the HGV Road User Levy Bill, on Tuesday 23 October 2012, and during the Second Reading debate on Tuesday 20 November 2012. There will be significantly fewer vehicles paying more than £300 a year extra when the levy is introduced than I previously stated.

The reason for the additional costs once the levy is introduced is because some vehicles currently pay close to or below EU minimum rates of vehicle excise duty (VED), and so VED cannot be reduced by the same amount as the levy, or indeed in some cases VED needs to be increased.

During the Ways and Means resolution debate I stated that

“our analysis of 7,000 rigid vehicles that tow a trailer has found that 40 vehicles would probably suffer a penalty of some £300, but that is only 40 out of 7,000, which is a significantly small part of the overall haulage fleet of the United Kingdom”—[Official Report, 23 October 2012, Vol. 551, c. 884.]

I also stated on Second Reading:

“there are a small number—about 7,000 of them on the road—of rigid vehicles with a trailer. Of those we estimate—the Department has done some analysis—that fewer than 50 will face potentially more than £300 extra in costs”—[Official Report, 20 November 2012, Vol. 553, col. 497.]

However, as a result of the Government continuing to consider and refine the analysis for these vehicles, an error in the source data was corrected, and improvements were made to the methodology used to set the VED rates that will apply from 1 April 2014. By making this improvement, it is possible for Her Majesty’s Treasury to amend the VED rates to reduce the number of vehicles paying over £300 more to just one vehicle. Even this additional cost represents less than 0.4% of the annual cost of running an HGV, which is normally in the range of £80,000 to £100,000.

There is no change to figures quoted in Parliament of 94% of vehicles paying no more than now, and 98% paying no more than an additional £50 per year, as a result of these changes. The Department for Transport will be republishing the full updated analysis on the consultation pages for “Charging Heavy Goods Vehicles” hosted on the gov.uk website:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/charging-heavy-goods-vehicles-consultation.

The updated analysis will enable vehicle operators to see the revised details of how much will be paid for each type of vehicle.

These figures will remain provisional, until Her Majesty’s Treasury confirm the new table of rates in the “Overview of Outstanding Legislation And Rates” document accompanying Budget 2014.

This once again reinforces the Government’s commitment to introduce the HGV road user levy in April 2014 at as minimal a cost to the UK haulage industry as we can realistically deliver.

Dartford/Thurrock River Crossing (Fees)

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 11th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

On 5 November 2012 the Highways Agency published detailed proposals to introduce post-payment and enforcement measures that would support the introduction of “free-flow” charging at the crossing. To support this change simultaneously the Department published detailed proposals to provide fair and effective enforcement of free-flow road user charging in accordance with the Transport Act 2000. Both consultations ran for a period of 12 weeks, and closed on 28 January 2013.

The Dartford crossing is vital to the local and national economy and introducing a free-flow charging arrangement will reduce congestion and improve journeys for the thousands of motorists and businesses who use the crossing every day. Following careful consideration of all the points made during both consultations I am today announcing the Department’s and Highways Agency’s conclusions and the intended actions.

The majority of respondents were supportive of the proposals to enable enforcement against drivers who do not pay a road-user charge. We are now able to take forward the legislation to make sure charges will be able to be effectively enforced when free-flow charging is introduced at the crossing next year.

Subject to the completion of the necessary parliamentary processes, the Department intends to implement the road-user charging scheme regulations and the agency will implement the new Dartford/Thurrock river crossing charging scheme order.

The full response to the agency’s charging scheme order consultation can be found on the Highways Agency’s website, and the Department’s response to the enforcement regulations consultation can be found on the Department for Transport’s pages of the Gov.uk website. Both these documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Motoring Services Strategy

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 11th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I am pleased to announce today the next phase of the project to explore establishing a new commercial model for the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA).

Departments have been challenged to think about how they commission and deliver services with a view to looking at innovative options. We have looked at the VCA business model and have tested a range of options that would enable the business to grow and contribute to the wider UK economy while continuing to deliver its statutory functions, providing high-quality and valued services to its customers. We set out this proposition for consultation in the motoring services strategy late last year. The new commercial model should also seek to offer new opportunities to VCA staff, who will be essential to the continued success of the business going forward.

The Department for Transport is now going to start a market engagement exercise to further test the preferred option of a joint venture with a private sector partner. We expect to make a decision in the autumn on whether to proceed with a formal procurement.

London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Wednesday 10th July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Chope]

Whether it was a meaningless rubber-stamping exercise or something of substance would depend very much on the Minister. Although we would say that the code would be approved by the Secretary of State for Transport, in practice it would be brought before a more junior Minister, who would carry out the approval in the name of the Secretary of State. It is not for me to comment on the assiduous way in which various junior Ministers operate, but I have no doubt that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond), would be extremely assiduous if he was the Minister charged with this responsibility. The paper would be put before him by his officials and he would ask probing questions, perhaps on an iterative basis, whereby it might take a few days or weeks before the matter went through. He would take the responsibility seriously and examine the code, raising any concerns he had and suggesting any modifications that he wanted to have.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My hon. Friend rightly says that I would be entirely assiduous should this onerous burden be placed upon me, as I am with any such instrument; I carefully read these things and scrutinise them. I can tell him that the Government’s view, having examined the amendment, is that there would be no need for the Secretary of State to approve the code of practice; the code could stand by itself.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Chope]

Is not the point that provision is already set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to deal with such issues? That is national legislation but the Bill seeks to modify it for London. My amendment would ensure that there is a proper safeguard for that proposed modification for London through the Secretary of State. My hon. Friend refers to localism, but surely such things should apply equally to all local authorities, not just those that bring forward Bills such as this.

[Stephen Hammond]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Mr Chope]

I am making an intervention.

Crossrail

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Tuesday 9th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

The Crossrail project has made significant progress over the last year and has now moved firmly into its main construction phase. There are currently around 8,000 people working at over 40 construction sites across London and six tunnel- boring machines are active underground, with the final two due to launch soon. As of 3 July over 14 km of tunnelling had been completed—representing around 33% of the final total. The project is now over 40% complete. Many significant milestones have been reached including two successful tunnel breakthroughs at Canary Wharf station. The project is well on the way to achieving the target of completing the first tunnels by the end of this year.

While we remain focused on the delivery of the infrastructure, work is now also well underway on planning for and delivering an operational railway. In March a change was announced to the funding of the procurement of the rolling stock and depot contract from one which involved a significant element of private finance to one that is fully publicly funded. This step was taken to ensure that the trains are ready for the opening of the new railway. The overall schedule for the award of the Crossrail rolling stock and depot contract remains unchanged, with a targeted contract award date of mid-2014.

Transport for London (TfL) will be responsible for the operation of the Crossrail services and is leading the procurement of the Crossrail train operator (CTOC). The procurement process has already begun with the pre-qualified bidders having been announced in June. The next step will be the publication of the invitation to tender in September this year, with the aim of awarding the concession in September 2014 and the start of operations between Liverpool Street (high-level) and Shenfield in May 2015. The Department is also working closely with TfL to ensure that the requirements of CTOC are reflected in the new or extended franchises which will operate on the Great Western and Greater Anglia routes.

Crossrail services via the central tunnel are on schedule to be operational from December 2018 with full services operating from late 2019.

The Crossrail board continues to forecast that the costs of constructing Crossrail will be within the agreed funding limits. We expect Crossrail to cost no more than £14.5 billion, excluding rolling stock costs.

All major contracts (excluding the rolling stock and depot contract) have now been awarded. To date, Crossrail Ltd has awarded direct contracts with a value of approximately £6 billion. UK businesses have benefited from the award of 97% of the contracts in the Crossrail supply chain, with 58% of contracts awarded to small and medium-sized enterprises and 43% awarded beyond London and the south-east.

During the passage of the Crossrail Bill through Parliament, a commitment was given that a statement would be published at least every 12 months until the completion of the construction of Crossrail, setting out information about the project’s funding and finances.

In line with this commitment, this statement comes within 12 months of the last one which was published on 10 July 2012, Official Report, column 22WS. The relevant information is as follows: