§ 8. Mr. MullinTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he last discussed with the chairman of British Rail plans for a direct rail link between the channel tunnel and the north of England; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. RifkindI last met Sir Bob Reid on 12 December, when we discussed, among other things, rail links between the tunnel and the north.
§ Mr. MullinDoes the Secretary of State agree that only a dedicated European-gauge track between the tunnel and north-east England and Scotland will reduce the divide between north and south and that failure to provide one will exacerbate that divide? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman take whatever steps are necessary to provide such a track?
§ Mr. RifkindI do not believe that there is any need for a dedicated track at present. If one were provided, it would divert substantial resources from other, more pressing railway requirements. It is important to ensure that demand for services from the channel tunnel can be fully met, but British Rail believes that that will be possible using the existing track, at least for the first few years.
§ Mr. AdleyWill my right hon. and learned Friend contemplate the incongruity and inequality as between road and rail in the answers given regarding the north of England at Question Time today? Does my right hon. and learned Friend recall the Minister for Roads and Traffic saying a few minutes ago that the Al to the north of England is to be converted to a motorway, and that £130 million is to be provided for local roads in the north of England? Will the Secretary of State seriously review the criteria applied by the Department for investment in roads compared with those for investment in railways?
§ Mr. RifkindI read with interest the speech that my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Adley) made in the House last March, when he referred to that particular aspect. I am always prepared to consider any argument that there is unfairness or inconsistency in the way in which investment projects are appraised. We make a genuine attempt to assess them on a fair and equitable basis, but we will consider carefully any suggestions to improve our procedures.
§ Mr. SnapeDoes the Secretary of State accept that not only will the north of England fail to receive through passenger trains when the channel tunnel opens, but that, with the proposed withdrawal of much of the Speedlink network, the north will also have fewer through freight trains? Is not that a further setback both for the railway industry and for the environment? Is the Secretary of State happy at the prospect of an additional 100,000 or more lorry movements on Britain's roads?
§ Mr. RifkindBritish Rail has said that there will be some delay with regard to through passenger services, not for reasons of resources but because the manufacturers have not yet been able to deliver a firm date and price for the modified rolling stock. Services will be available from day one, although they will involve some changes for passengers, probably at Waterloo. In relation to freight, I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's point about the implications of the Speedlink decision for the channel 606 tunnel. That decision arose out of the massive losses which British Rail was making on its existing Speedlink services. The hon. Gentleman will be as pleased as I am that about half the freight carried by Speedlink is to be retained by the rail network through new contracts with relevant customers.
§ Mr. Simon CoombsDoes my right hon. and learned Friend accept the need to ensure that the benefits of the channel tunnel are shared by all regions of the United Kingdom? In that context, has he seen the report recently published by the Transport Users Consultative Committee for western England which draws attention to the need for a direct link to the south-west through Swindon?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Unfortunately, the question is about the north-east.
§ Mr. RifkindI accept what my hon. Friend said—there is bound to be legitimate interest in various parts of the kingdom in having the benefits of the channel services. Essentially, it is for British Rail to decide whether there will be a demand such as to justify providing that service. I hope that it will consider carefully the points made by my hon. Friend.