HC Deb 21 April 1986 vol 96 cc5-7
4. Mr. Greenway

asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he has any plans to modify the performance objectives he sets for London Buses; and if he will make a statement.

The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Nicholas Ridley)

I gave London Regional Transport demanding objectives designed to secure better and more efficient public transport services. I am very happy to tell the House that revenue subsidies for LRT this year will be down to £79 million, which is about one third of the level planned by the GLC when it was responsible. This has been achieved without any significant reduction in the quality or any increase in real prices of the services provided.

Mr. Greenway

Will my right hon. Friend congratulate LRT on the improved services that it has provided since it was established following its removal from the auspices of the GLC? However, is my right hon. Friend aware of the delays and consequent frustrations of passengers using buses in heavy traffic? Will he give an assurance that driver-only buses will be used only after exhaustive tests have shown that they will be of benefit to the passengers and will not create further delays?

Mr. Ridley

I shall certainly pass on my hon. Friend's congratulations to the chairman and board of LRT on what has been, by any yardstick, a staggeringly successful performance. LRT already incorporates the effects of congestion into its appraisal of conversion to one-person operation. I also believe that the congestion effects have been much exaggerated, for reasons to do with factors other than congestion, by those opposed to one-person operation.

Mr. Dubs

Is the Secretary of State willing to join any bus queue in Battersea and tell people waiting at that queue that he believes the services are now staggeringly successful? Is it not true that one-person-operated buses are causing delays and frustration and are not a way to keep satisfactory services operating?

Mr. Ridley

There has been practically no alteration in bus services since LRT took over from London Transport. The only alteration has been a 2 per cent. change in services at the margin. If services were wrong before they may well be wrong now, but LRT is improving services to meet customer demand.

Mr. Adley

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the parking and garaging requirements, which are quite properly applied to London Buses in central London, and which it observes, should be applied to all coach operators?

Mr. Ridley

My hon. Friend probably knows that we have been studying the provision of coach stations and possible coach parking sites in central London. Because of the massive increase in the number of long distance and tourist coaches in London, we will take a little longer to get on top of this problem.

Mr. Simon Hughes

Does the Secretary of State plan to alter the objectives as they affect the regularity of bus services and the price for short journeys in areas such as mine, in south-east London, where no alternative form of public transport is available and where, since LRT took over, services have been reduced, as admitted by SELKENT and management, and where local people are demanding more frequent bus services and, on some routes, a reduction in the relative costs?

Mr. Ridley

Perhaps the deregulation of bus services in London would assist in solving the problem referred to by the hon. Gentleman, by allowing other operators to supply any demand not met. Overall, I do not believe bus services have been cut. A slight change has been made to accommodate areas in which there is more demand at the expense of areas in which the demand is less. A future objective will be to reduce the revenue subsidy cost, which this year is estimated at £79 million. It is even possible that we shall reduce that to zero. Moreover, there will be a saving of £245 million to the hon. Gentleman's constituents, as ratepayers and taxpayers, on what the GLC intended to spend.

Sir John Biggs-Davison

I regularly travel by bus and wonder whether my right hon. Friend does so, too. Will he discourage LRT, at least in central London, from replacing the traditional open platform bus with oneperson-operated buses, which deter passengers.?

Mr. Ridley

They also deter violence. Where one-person buses are being operated there is a far better record of safety for bus crews. I believe that it is better to leave the management of London buses to LRT. It is not my role actually to run the operation.

Mr. Stott

Are not words such as "better" "more efficient" and "staggeringly successful" a prostitution of the English language when applied to London Transport? When I am in London I regularly use the buses, and I was late for Committee last week, as were some of my hon. Friends, because I had to wait 40 minutes in a bus queue for the No. 159 bus. Over the past few months the service in London has deteriorated. How can the right hon. Gentleman claim success?

Mr. Ridley

I know that it is galling for the hon. Gentleman that there has been this massive change proving the GLC to be wrong in its forecast of the subsidy that would be necessary. I realise that the increase in investment is unwelcome to him. If he wants me to respond to the complaints in his supplementary question, I shall bring forward the date on which London will be deregulated, so that other operators can come in from the private sector to ensure that the hon. Gentleman arrives on time for his Committees in future.

Mr. Squire

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is excellent news for ratepayers, taxpayers and everyone who uses buses that about £4 million has been saved under the guidelines by going out to tender while retaining a similar passenger mileage overall on the routes tendered?

Mr. Ridley

My hon. Friend points to an important issue. He will know that 52 routes have so far been put out to tender at a saving of about £2.5 million a year, not £4 million. That is the saving so far, and it is a staggering sum to have been saved on those routes. A further 6 per cent. of total mileage is to be put out to tender in 1986–87.