§ 1. Mr. Greenwayasked the Secretary of State for Transport if will make a statement on the future of travel passes in London for pensioners, blind and disabled people.
§ The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Nicholas Ridley)I understand that for 1985–86 the GLC has announced its intention to continue to fund concessionary travel for pensioners in London. Thereafter, the responsibility for pensioners' concessionary travel will rest with the boroughs, which will continue to fund concessions for the blind and disabled.
§ Mr. GreenwayWill my right hon. Friend accept the congratulations of the blind, disabled and pensioners of London on guaranteeing their passes for the first time, which no Labour or Lib-Lab Government ever did or thought of doing?
Will my right hon. Friend also consider asking London Regional Transport to allow homeless people to go on to underground stations during very cold weather, pending resolution of their tragic homelessness?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That is somewhat wide of the original question.
§ Mr. RidleyOn the first point, I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It would be helpful if the Association of London Authorities joined the current discussions to see how best to get a voluntary scheme among the boroughs for 1986–87.
On the second point, I shall draw my hon. Friend's comments to the attention of London Regional Transport, if that is in order.
§ Mr. Tony BanksCan the Secretary of State give an assurance to pensioners that their passes will in no way be put in jeopardy by the mess that he has made over LRT's budget for next year and the excess £50 million that he demanded from the GLC in a manner described by Mr. Justice McNeill as
illegally, irrationally and procedurally improperly"?Can the right hon. Gentleman also tell us whether fares will have to go up 15 per cent, to cover his incompetence in organising a budget?
§ Mr. RidleyOn the first point, the hon. Gentleman and the House know that a statutory back-up scheme for concessionary travel for pensioners in London is enshrined in the London Regional Transport Act. A threat to pensioners would arise only if the abolition Bill did not make speedy progress to the statute book.
On the second point, the hon. Gentleman will know that we have appealed against the judgment, and therefore it is sub judice.
§ Mr. SnapeDoes the Secretary of State accept that he has no cause for self-congratulation? He accepted the amendment to include provision for concessionary fares in the LRT Bill most reluctantly. Following the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), does the right hon. Gentleman consider that, as a result of the impact of the court's judgment on pensioners' and other concessionary fares in London, he owes the House an explanation, the GLC an apology and the ratepayers of Greater London £50 million?
§ Mr. RidleyThe hon. Gentleman knows that it was to stop the scurrilous groundless rumours that concessionary fares were under threat—which were being peddled by the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends— that we 3 underwrote those fares in the Bill. I do not see why the hon. Gentleman is complaining about that now. That is what he wanted. I repeat that the other matter to which he referred is sub judice.