§ 12. Mr. Boyesasked the Secretary of State for Transport when he last met trade union representatives of British Rail's staff.
§ Mr. David MitchellMy right hon. Friend has not yet been approached by representatives of the rail unions for a meeting, although I have met them on a number of occasions.
§ Mr. BoyesWhen the Minister next gets the opportunity to meet the British Rail trade unions, will he explain to them why the Government have found it necessary to make a further 25 per cent. cut in their grant to British Rail? Will he also explain how many more people will lose their jobs as a consequence, bearing in mind that tens of thousands of loyal, devoted and skilled railwaymen have already lost their jobs? It is all right sitting on the Government Benches making these decisions, but people are losing their jobs, and travellers, such as myself, who use British Rail week in and week out, are finding that the level of service is dropping, not because of the people 676 who work on the lines, but because of the decisions of British Rail and because Ministers are cutting the system and starving it of cash.
§ Mr. MitchellThe hon. Gentleman asked about my next meeting with the unions. The former Secretary of State met the unions in December 1983. The NUR was to have met us in July 1985, but cancelled the meeting, saying that it would be in touch to arrange another date. It has not yet done so.
The second part of the hon. Gentleman's question referred to the cut in the public service obligation. Of course, all taxpayers will be pleased with that cut, provided they can get adequate quality standards from British Rail in the delivery of its services. The chairman has accepted the revised targets that have been produced and has assured us that he is able to provide the quality of standard that he has been invited to provide. I ask the hon. Gentleman to stop running down British Rail and to recognise that the staff are doing a damned good job and that in many cases quality standards are rising.
§ Mr. HoltWill my hon. Friend accept that he should not wait for the trade unions to approach him, but that he should be asking to meet the trade unions and asking why there are such high rates of absenteeism, particularly among transport catering staff? Passengers have to go for hours on end without food or drink on British Rail trains.
§ Mr. MitchellThat is a management matter for British Rail and not one in which Ministers should get involved with staff unions. My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the problem of vacancies. As unemployment among railwaymen has been mentioned, I should say that there are still unfilled vacancies and British Rail would be glad to have people come forward to fill them.
§ Mr. AndersonBefore the Minister rushes to criticise absenteeism or other matters, will he take the trouble to look at the scandalously low pay of many people who work on British Rail? He will find that even people who often work unsocial hours have take-home pay of only £70 or £80 a week. Even if the Minister and his colleagues wish to criticise absenteeism or the inability to fill vacancies, will he realise that the 25 per cent. cut will be made at the expense, to some extent, of railwaymen and their standard of living?
§ Mr. MitchellBritish Rail has managed with a 25 per cent. reduction in its PSO for the past three years and this has not resulted in any reduction in railwaymen's wages. Moreover, the level of their wages in real terms is slightly better than it was when the Labour Government were in office.
§ Mr. SteenWhen the Minister meets the unions, will he ask them to have a word with British Rail management to ascertain why English mineral waters are refused on British Rail, with the consequence that the French have a monopoly on all British Rail rolling stock? Why do the French have such a monopoly, and why are English mineral waters refused on the same wagons?
§ Mr. MitchellMy hon. Friend makes an interesting but somewhat detailed point about the management of the catering side of British Rail, which I shall draw to the chairman's attention.
§ Mr. SpearingIs it not the contention of the unions and of others that any reduction in the real value of rail 677 subsidies must be met either by reducing the quality of services or increasing fares over the general rise in inflation? Is the Minister suggesting that the reduction can be wholly met from increased efficiency?
§ Mr. MitchellYes, Sir.
§ Mr. SnapeWhen the Minister next meets the appropriate trade unions, will he discuss with them the impact on fares and services of the Government's latest reduction in financial support for British Rail? Will he accept from me that on Friday afternoon, to take one example, my train to Birmingham was 40 minutes late for a 95-minute journey? Will he also accept that it is no consolation to regular rail travellers to gaze across fields at the permanent traffic jams on the M1?
§ Mr. MitchellI travelled on the first electric train from Huntingdon this morning and it was dead on time on arrival. Moreover, Network SouthEast has set itself a target of 90 per cent. of trains arriving within five minutes of scheduled time and is now beating that target. As for the improvements in efficiency which are required, 8 per cent. in three years is not beyond the wit of most major organisations.