London Buses (Hansard, 19 April 1993)

§ 1. Mr. Corbyn
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received concerning the future of London Buses.

§ The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steve Norris)
We have received a number of representations on our plans for the privatisation and deregulation of buses in London.

§ Mr. Corbyn
Is the Minister aware that the vast majority of people in London are violently opposed to the deregulation and privatisation of their bus services? Is the hon. Gentleman aware also that outside London in English metropolitan areas there has been a reduction of 24.8 per cent. in passenger journeys since deregulation took place? London bus drivers and conductors are being forced into accepting lower wages and longer working hours while operating disgracefully old buses. The average age of a London bus is over 13 years.
Does not the Minister think that it is time to listen to what the people of London say, to end nonsensical privatisation and deregulation and adhere to what is, basically, a very good bus service in London which can 2 provide a decent and safe service for the people, rather than stepping into the unknown and the nonsensical concept of deregulation?

§ Mr. Norris
It is always nice to start the week with the sort of rant that reminds me why Conservative Members occupy the Government Benches while Labour Members are on the Opposition Benches. There are three essential conclusions to be drawn from the deregulation experience: first, operating costs have been reduced by a third; secondly, route mileage has increased by 20 per cent; and, thirdly, public subsidy has been reduced by half.

§ Mr. John Marshall
Does my hon. Friend agree that the privatisation and deregulation of London Buses will lead to innovation and the introduction of new services for the benefit of London's travelling public? Will he comment on the dishonest campaign that deregulation will mean the end of the bus pass?

§ Mr. Norris
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me the opportunity to say just that. The concessionary fares that are offered to pensioners in London are financed by the boroughs. The provision for them to provide similar facilities is, and always has been, a cornerstone of our deregulation legislation. My hon. Friend put his finger on the matter. Developments in bus technology— midibuses and minibuses, for example—have all arisen as a consequence of deregulation and not the planning-led and sterile system that the Labour party appears to favour.

§ Mr. Tony Banks
Surely the Minister knows that outside London fewer people are using deregulated bus services rather than more. The Minister is out to lunch if he believes that the majority of Londoners are looking forward to deregulation in the capital. Can he defend a situation in which bus workers are being told that if they want to retain their jobs they will have to accept wage cuts of £20 or £30 a week, or more? Does he think that that is fair? It is not something which we would vote in favour of for ourselves and it is not something which we should inflict on London bus workers.

§ Mr. Norris
May I make it plain to the hon. Gentleman —I think that he knows—that people in London simply 3 wish to see a better bus service. They are concerned that we should respond to their concerns as passengers. My right hon. and hon. Friends and I believe that deregulation will enable us to do that more effectively.
The hon. Gentleman referred to the renegotiated terms that London Buses Ltd. has discussed with some of its employees. That has put bus workers in the undertakings concerned on all fours with all of those who are employed in bus companies in the private sector. When the renegotiation has taken place, it has been accompanied by large payments which, generally, have been well in excess of £1,000, to buy out the previous uncompetitive working practices.

§ Mr. Forman
As some of my constituents, including those who work for London Buses, have expressed quite strong reservations about the liberalisation policy which I think my hon. Friend knows about, will he kindly set out for their benefit and for that of the House how it is that the experience of rural bus services, or services in rural towns, is relevant to the peculiar circumstances of Greater London?

§ Mr. Norris
I know, Madam Speaker, that you would not wish me to answer my hon. Friend exhaustively, so perhaps I can write to him in more detail. However, my hon. Friend will appreciate that the reduction in the use of buses has generally been associated above all with the growth in the use of the private car. People want to use their private cars and, when they can, they will generally do so. That is generally more possible outside London than inside. I repeat to my hon. Friend and for the benefit of the House that the key benefits of deregulation are substantial reductions in operating costs and increases in the number of bus miles operated.