§ 3. Mr. Simsasked the Secretary of State for Transport what meetings he has had with the chairman of British Rail since 14 May; and what subjects were discussed.
§ 14. Mr. Boyesasked the Secretary of State for Transport when he last met the chairman of British Rail; and what was discussed.
§ Mr. RidleyI have had five meetings with the chairman of British Rail since 14 May, most recently on 4 July. Each time, we discussed a large number of matters of mutual interest.
§ Mr. SimsDid any of those matters of mutual interest include the new timetables introduced on 14 May, especially as they affect my constituents and other commuters in south-east London? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the letters to the chairman of British Rail complaining about poorer services under the new timetables are only a fraction of the complaints voiced by the users of the service, who are further frustrated by continual delays and cancellations? Will my right hon. Friend invite the chairman of British Rail to review those services and to restore as quickly as possible an adequate and punctual service?
§ Mr. RidleyMy hon. Friend has done a splendid job in bringing those deficiencies to the attention of the chairman of British Rail, including during an Adjournment 683 debate to which my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State responded. I am glad that I can tell my hon. Friend that British Rail recognises that some of the morning peak services on his line have been overcrowded. Recently, it lengthened two of the trains that call at Grove Park. It is now considering whether to stop two more trains there to help relieve congestion.
§ Mr. BoyesDoes the Secretary of State recognise that —this follows the supplementary question of the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Sims) — that not only London but many other areas have been affected, some experiencing cuts of up to 25 per cent. and others cuts of more than 60 per cent., in spite of his allegation that the cuts would be no more than 2 per cent.? There has been a deteriorating service and overcrowded trains because BR has not been able to provide the services that would have been possible if the Government had not imposed those cuts. Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he will carry out an immediate assessment of the effects of the cuts to ensure that the same thing does not occur when new timetables are next introduced?
§ Mr. RidleyThe hon. Gentleman should know that his figure of 2 per cent. overall is about correct. That is for the whole of the railway network, and within such an average one can find better and worse figures, as he no doubt will seek to do. I do not believe that that is due to the Government's financial control of British Rail. I believe that it is due to the change in travelling patterns. British Rail is right to seek to meet passengers' demands —increasing services where they require it and reducing them when they do not.
§ Mr. YeoHas my right hon. Friend discussed with the chairman of British Rail whether it can compete fairly with deregulated coach services, given the low licence fees charged to those coach operators, and the considerable environmental disadvantages that are associated with road transport.
§ Mr. RidleyFor longer distances within the country, the coach is cheapest, British Rail next and the aeroplane is the most expensive. I am interested to ensure that we try to even the competition between those three modes of transport to make it as fair as possible. That is why we have asked British Rail to make a modest return on its inter-city service and why in due course I shall be publishing proposals for the bus industry which may have some effect on the problem that my hon. Friend so rightly mentioned.
§ Mr. AndersonThe Minister will be aware that earlier this year there was an unprecedented directive from Rail House to regional managers that they should not discuss investment priorities with parliamentarians. Was that done with the approval of the Minister, and does he have views on it as a proper way for the heads of nationalised industries to work?
§ Mr. RidleyIf I were to have views and comment upon directives from the boards of nationalised industries to their managers, I should have time to do nothing else but read them. I believe that it is fundamentally wrong that I or any other Secretary of State should comment upon how the railways manage their internal affairs.
§ Mr. StanbrookWhen my right hon. Friend next meets the chairman of British Rail and discusses communter services, will he impress upon him the need 684 to take into account the experience and expertise of rail commuter organisations such as the Orpington District Rail Passengers Association, because they have a contribution and expertise to offer which is not always present in British Rail? They can help to match efficiency with the convenience of the travelling public.
§ Mr. RidleyI accept entirely my hon. Friend's comment. I believe that British Rail keeps in touch with its consumer bodies. I believe that it has now worked out beneficial proposals for keeping in touch with hon. Members about changes in timetables. I further believe that in the London area the arrangements for liaison between the chairman of British Rail and the chairman of London Regional Transport, which I am about to set up, will make for even more co-ordination.
§ Mr. WigleyAt the meetings, did the chairman raise with the Secretary of State any uncertainty about the future of the Cambrian coast railway line and the central Wales railway line, about which there are rumours? If the chairman has not made any suggestion about the withdrawal or closure of those lines, will the Secretary of State say that clearly so that the users of those lines will be in no uncertainty as to their future?
§ Mr. RidleyAt none of my meetings with the chairman of British Rail have those lines been mentioned, nor has there been any suggestion about their closure.
§ Mr. Beaumont-DarkHas my right hon. Friend yet received a letter of thanks from the chairman of British Rail for his refusal to increase the speed limit on motorways from 70 mph to 80 mph, which can only be to help British Rail, because there is no other logical reason for it?
§ Mr. RidleyI congratulate my hon. Friend on his ingenuity, but the letter, which I await eagerly, has not yet arrived.
§ Mr. JannerAs part of the Government's non-management or mismanagement of British Rail, have they become aware of the dissatisfaction felt by people who travel from St. Pancras to Leicester about the almost complete lack of investment on that part of the line? When he next sees the chairman of British Rail, will he please protest about that matter on behalf of my constituents and those who travel to my constituency?
§ Mr. RidleyIt is funny, but I detect a growing body of support for and encouragement of British Rail from my hon. Friends. It seems that it is only the Opposition who are knocking it now.
§ Mr. SumbergHas my right hon. Friend discussed with the chairman of British Rail the deplorable standards of catering and buffet facilities on many inter-city trains? If he has not, will he say that privatisation is an option that is open to it?
§ Mr. RidleyPerhaps I spoke too soon. My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the Parliamentary Under-Secretary has been pursuing the question of introducing private catering and capital into all of British Rail's catering activities at stations and on trains. I hope that we shall soon see an opportunity for competition and for others to supply a better service where they can.
§ Mr. CartwrightHas the Secretary of State discussed with the chairman of British Rail its reported plans to reopen the Snow Hill tunnel connection to provide a through train route to cross London? In view of the obvious benefits of the scheme to travellers from north and south London, will he tell the House when it is likely to come into operation?
§ Mr. RidleyNo, Sir. The chairman has not raised that matter with me.