HC Deb 12 November 1984 vol 67 cc400-1
5. Mr. Dormand

asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the results of the three investigations made into repairs of the A19 road.

Mrs. Chalker

In 1980 G. Maunsell and Partners was commissioned to investigate problems on the Tees viaduct. In 1981 and 1983 Cleveland county council was asked to examine stage I and stage II of the carriageway pavement.

Certain faults were found in the viaduct and the stage II carriageway. Careful analysis of the reports has caused the Department, as a dissatisfied customer, to begin negotiations with the consultants and contractors to seek redress. Until discussions are complete, I regret that I cannot give the hon. Gentleman final information.

Mr. Dormand

Is the Minister aware that it is three years since I asked for an investigation to take place into repairs on the A19 and that the Government refused my request? As there have now been three investigations into the allegations that I made, does that not suggest that the £7 million that has been spent on repairs to the road during a life of only nine years should be a matter of considerable concern? Despite what the Minister said, as the Government received the report on the last investigation as long ago as May 1984, when may we expect a comprehensive statement? Will she give an assurance that the contents of the three reports will be made public?

Mrs. Chalker

I think that the hon. Gentleman has asked five questions. He will be as aware as I am that it has taken a long time for the county council and the consultants to get to the bottom of the problem. There were three different inquiries, not into the same problem, but into three separate aspects to it. The stage I viaduct is perfectly safe to use, but it must be repaired. Further repairs must also be made to the stage II carriageway. The only works that have been carried out so far involved £100,000 being spent on patching the defects.

The hon. Gentleman is not quite correct to talk about £7 million being spent over the past nine years. That amount of money has been spent over the 18⅔miles of the A19 between the river Tyne and the Yorkshire border. It includes all repairs, and for that distance of road it is not exceptional. As soon as I am satisfied with a further deflectograph study on the stage II carriageway — I cannot say that I am satisfied with the results at present—I shall consider making a statement direct to the hon. Gentleman. Until negotiations with the parties are complete I shall not publish the report, as I do not want to prejudice the outcome.

Mr. Holt

Does my hon. Friend agree that although repairs to the A19 are valuable, at whatever cost, hon. Members who live in the area will find that their constituents will continue to complain unless the junction at Dishforth is improved? When I have asked what plans the Department has for uprating the A1 to motorway standards—

Mr. Speaker

Order. Is this on the A19?

Mr. Holt

Oh yes—

Mr. Speaker

Oh.

Mr. Holt

I am very sorry, Mr. Speaker, that your knowledge does not extend to the fact that the A1 and Al9 join each other at the Dishforth roundabout. At present drivers may have to wait up to two hours to get past that roundabout. What plans does the Department have to extend the motorway provision so that the A1 is uprated at Dishforth where it leads on to the A19, and so that the latter can be uprated, thus giving the north-east of England a fillip?

Mrs. Chalker

I assure my hon. Friend that I am well aware of the problem at the Dishforth roundabout. As soon as our investigations are complete I shall write to him in greater detail.