HC Deb 25 February 1981 vol 999 c872
14. Mr. Leadbitter

asked the Secretary of State for Transport what process he uses to satisfy himself of the safety standards of the railways.

Mr. Fowler

British Rail is required to report to my Department a wide range of accidents and incidents. The information collected is used to compare one year's safety record with another, and by this means a watch is kept on long-term trends. A full analysis is then published annually in the chief inspecting officer's report on railways safety. The provisional results for 1980 show that, for the third time in five years, not a single passenger was killed in a train accident, and the incidence of potentially serious accidents was the lowest ever recorded.

Mr. Leadbitter

The Secretary of State and the House will agree that that is a highly commendable record for British Rail, and one that should be made widely known. However, will he bear in mind that there is increasing concern in British Rail about the ability to keep up that record? There is a considerable backlog of track maintenance. I shall not dwell on the question of investment—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not dwell on anything. He should ask a question.

Mr. Leadbitter

Will the Secretary of State take into account the need for British Rail and, indeed, his Department, to examine the efficiency and the long-term advantage, as well as the viability, of steel sleepers in order to cope with the backlog of track maintenance?

Mr. Fowler

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the investment ceiling has been maintained in real terms at the same level as under the previous Government. Track renewal is extra to the investment ceiling. We shall look at the question of steel sleepers.

Mr. Bagier

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that maintaining this sort of safety record is extremely expensive for British Rail? Will he not agree that the fire at Taunton on the sleeping car train, which cost some lives, led to a tremendous amount of money being spent by British Rail to put matters right? Will he ensure that when he considers the Armitage report he will insist on the same strict adherence to safety in relation to lorry users as he does in relation to British Rail?

Mr. Fowler

I agree that there is a comparison. The House will wish to examine, when we discuss Armitage, the question of safety, including the safety of lorries.