HC Deb 15 January 1990 vol 165 cc6-7
5. Mr. Butler

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he last met the chairman of British Rail; and what was discussed.

Mr. Parkinson

I last met the chairman of British Rail on 13 December, when a wide variety of rail topics were discussed.

Mr. Butler

Will my right hon. Friend tell me what British Rail's investment plans are for the next few years? Does he believe that its provision is adequate nationally and in the north-west?

Mr. Parkinson

Over the next three years, British Rail plans to invest £3.7 billion in the network, which, as Sir Robert Reid mentioned in his very interesting speech, represents a doubling of investment from when he began his job. It is a record level of investment, and, in his own words, is, practically as much as we can manage.

Mrs. Margaret Ewing

Does not the Secretary of State accept that rail commuters, wherever they live, are entitled to parity of services? Is he aware of British Rail's ludicrous proposal in my area to remove the Super Sprinters from the Inverness to Aberdeen route, to resolve some little local difficulties elsewhere in the network? Does he therefore accept the need for investment to cover the whole country, to ensure that some regions do not benefit at the expense of others? Will he look into that ridiculous proposal?

Mr. Parkinson

I shall happily look into that matter on behalf of the hon. Lady and write to her. One difficulty has been that much of the new rolling stock has failed to perform. British Rail has found itself in substantial difficulties, with new trains that do not meet the required specification.

Mr. Adley

Was there not something of a discrepancy between the recent speech by the chairman of British Rail and press reports of it? Given one of the points that the present chairman made about the need for assistance to complete an environmentally acceptable link from London to the Channel tunnel, can my right hon. Friend tell me whether the Government are unwilling to provide assistance or whether they believe that section 40 of the Channel Tunnel Act 1987 precludes them from doing so?

Mr. Parkinson

My hon. Friend has noticed what even The Observer noticed yesterday: the report of the speech and the speech bore little resemblance to each other. Sir Robert said that, at the end of his period as chairman, British Rail was in an unprecedented position of strength. His speech was widely misreported.

The Government's position on a fast link is clear. They committed themselves to ensuring that the existing infrastructure—road to rail—would be improved to service the tunnel when it opened in 1993. The fast link is a private venture between British Rail and a private sector partner. The Government are precluded by section 40 from subsidising that line.

Mr. Snape

Does the Secretary of State accept that, according to the interpretation of at least such well-known Left-wing newspapers as the Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph, Sir Robert Reid's recent speech was a denunciation of the Government's investment policy? What proportion are the Government providing of the billions of pounds that are soon to be invested in British Rail? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that, if he used the same cost-benefit analysis that he uses to justify the Government's road programme in order to electrify and modernise our railway network, Britain could have a railway system that is desirable as well as profitable?

Mr. Parkinson

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman reads the whole speech. He will find that Sir Robert pointed to the tremendous improvement in British Rail—69 million more passengers and record investment—and said that his successor would inherit a rail system that was infinitely better prepared for the 1990s than it was for the 1980s, when he took over. The Government will put in substantial parts of the programme.

Mr. Snape

How much?

Mr. Parkinson

The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) has today tabled a question on that matter to the Treasury, and I shall not anticipate the answer. By the way, I should like to know where the hon. Gentleman is—this is the second Question Time in succession that he has missed. Perhaps he does not approve of televising the proceedings in the House and is making his protest. When the hon. Member for West Bromwich, East (Mr. Snape) sees that answer, he will find that the investment is substantially funded from the public purse.