§ 19.Mr. Cryer asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received about transport subsidies, and if he will make a statement.
§ Dr. GilbertI have received a number of representations about the size and distribution of transport subsidies, in the context of the transport consultative 1714 document and of the recently announced cuts in public expenditure. I cannot anticipate the statement on the transport review that my right hon. Friend will be making later in the year.
§ Mr. CryerDoes my hon. Friend agree that it is important to retain transport subsidies both for buses and railways, particularly in the latter case, in respect of freight services, so that there is a genuine shift from road to rail? Will he comment on the general position where taxation proposals on company cars have been modified in the light of possible reductions in transport subsidies for bus and train services?
§ Dr. GilbertAs my hon. Friend will be aware, the modification of the proposals on company cars was related to the need not to damage the British car industry at this particularly sensitive time— but I wholly take his point about the necessity of retaining subsidies. He will be aware—I said this in reply to an earlier Question—that we intend to maintain the railway passenger transport subsidy at its current levels and to continue a considerable subsidy to bus services, which at the moment is running at record levels in real terms. As for the switching of freight from road to rail, we are doing all we can to make industry aware of the sidings grants that are available. A particularly significant one was announced recently in respect of Shell.
§ Mr. GowDoes the Minister recall that last year the National Bus Company made a record loss of £19 million and the National Freight Corporation made a record loss of £31 million? Will he now tell the House what proposals he has to relieve the taxpayer of the terrible burden of subsidising nationalised industries?
§ Dr. GilbertThe hon. Gentleman was given a comprehensive reply yesterday on the National Bus Company, when the House took a view in respect of his proposals that the National Bus Company be denationalised. The National Freight Corporation has indeed been passing through a very difficult period, largely due to the downturn in trade.
§ Mrs. DunwoodyDoes my hon. Friend accept that we realise that he is 1715 trying to perform a Solomon-like task of keeping a balance between road and rail, but that it will not be possible to keep the rail system working efficiently if it is cut down any further? All the subsidies that are used to that end are in the interests of the general public, because there are still some of us who use public transport.
§ Dr. GilbertI am grateful to my hon. Friend for her remarks. The Secretary of State has made it clear that he has no proposals whatever for massive cuts in the railway network.
§ Mr. Norman FowlerThe hon. Gentleman has not answered the question put to him by the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) in respect of subsidising freight. Does he remember the Government's own consultation document, which says that there is no case for subsidising freight operations? Bearing in mind the tens of millions of pounds that are going in subsidising British Rail freight operations and the National Freight Corporation, will he say whether that is still Government policy?
§ Dr. GilbertAll these matters are being considered, because, as the hon. Gentleman himself mentioned, they are in the consultation document. He will also be aware that with our present system of taxation, which it is difficult to change quickly, freight travelling on the roads also gets a considerable subsidy from the taxpayer.