Railways (Hansard, 27 October 1976)

§ 8. Mr. Cohen
asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a state- 452 ment on the progress made towards working out a new plan for the railways, as outlined in Volume I/7.6 of the recent transport policy consultation document.

§ Mr. William Rodgers
Plans for the railways are an important part of transport policy. They are much in my mind as I consider responses to the consultation document.

§ Mr. Cohen
Will my right hon. Friend accept that the time factor in terms of the White Paper will be regarded by many of us as disappointing, but that at least there is an indication that the Government are prepared to consider seriously a timetable for this very important question? Will he assure us, as we have waited since 1948 for a definitive statement on the framework of transport policy, that it will be seriously considered, since it will be the subject of careful scrutiny by many hon. Members on both sides of the House and throughout the country?

§ Mr. Rodgers
I share all my hon. Friend's views on the matter. I am completely aware of the vital rôle of the railways in the life of the country and also of the uncertainty which has inevitably been with the railways during a period of contraction, but it would be wrong to try to forecast now what conclusions the White Paper will come to. Like my hon. Friend, I believe that a longer process of consultation and decision-making is more likely to produce the right answers.

§ Mr. Hoyle
Will my right hon. Friend consider making investment available for new rolling stock on branch lines, a lot of which is in poor condition and difficult to maintain? In the case of North-East Lancashire, unless something is done we shall not have an efficient rail service at all.

§ Mr. Rodgers
I am willing to talk to the Chairman of British Rail about any matters that are properly my responsibility rather than his, but I must add that all decisions on investment anywhere in the public sector must be considered very carefully in terms of the revenue they will produce and of the alternative possibility that they would entail increased subsidy at a time when subsidy cannot be increased.

§ Mr. Moate
In the context of co-ordinating policies for road and rail, can the right hon. Gentleman explain why increases in bus fares are subject to public inquiry whereas increases in rail fares are not?

§ Mr. Rodgers
No, I do not think I can. It is an interesting question, and I shall find a better answer next time.

§ Mr. Bagier
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the present size and structure of the railway system is a national asset? Does he further agree that it would make national sense to have it fully utilised? Does he appreciate that the present costing policy of British Rail is tending to have two effects—first, that in the commuting areas, such as the highly industrialised areas of South-East England and Birmingham, it puts a heavy cost on the commuter, with effects on the social contract, and, secondly, that in country areas it tends to put lines in danger by driving customers away from them?

§ Mr. Rodgers
My hon. Friend has vividly described the acute problem faced by the railways. There are problems here which no one has been able to solve, and the situation affects all those who travel by rail and others who might like to do so. We shall have all these things in mind when we formulate our policy.

§ 16. Mr. Thorne
asked the Secretary of State for Transport what are the prospects for expansion of British Railways over the next two years.

§ Mr. William Rodgers
It is difficult for me to say. Expansion is really a matter for British Railways commercial judgment, based on their assessment of traffic prospects.

§ Mr. Thorne
Does my right hon. Friend recognise that it is part of the Government's responsibility to invest in British Rail? Would it not solve some of our employment problems, as the multiplier would apply in this case? Will my right hon. Friend take this up as a matter of urgency now that he is a member of the Cabinet?

§ Mr. Rodgers
I agree that we should always look for opportunities in British Rail for worthwhile investment, but to invest irrespective of the likely return is not in the best interests of anyone. It 454 does not meet the necessary criteria of having a transport system which contributes both to economic growth and social need. We have to be discriminating, whatever the final decision may be.

§ Mr. Neubert
Does the Minister agree that to maximise revenue at the expense of the volume of traffic would result only in contraction? Would it not be better for British Rail to concentrate on cutting costs and boosting traffic by more attractive fares?

§ Mr. Rodgers
That is a difficult question. I would like to believe that if fares were cut there would be such a surge of additional passenger traffic that revenue would increase, but the facts do not point in that direction. The substantial increase in fares over the last year resulted in only a small falling off in passenger miles. I do not recall the exact figures, but there was a 50 per cent. increase in fares and only a 5 per cent. falling off in passenger miles. I would like to believe otherwise, but I ask the House to accept the realities of life even when they are uncomfortable.