A13

HC Deb 27 January 1995 vol 253 cc657-64

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Wells.]

2.32 pm

Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay)

I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to discuss in the House the fate of the A13, a major highway. I declare an interest. I have the dubious pleasure of driving up and down this very congested road every time I visit my constituency.

I apologise for the absence of my hon. Friends the Members for Basildon (Mr. Amess), for Rochford (Dr. Clark), for Southend, East (Sir T. Taylor) and for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon), all of whom would have loved to be here this afternoon because their constituencies are equally affected by this important road. They had prior engagements in their constituencies, but they are, of course, here with us in spirit. They all agreed that, with my competence and the Minister's tolerance, we would be able to sort the matter out amicably between us.

I seem to have spent half my life in Parliament talking about transport problems in south Essex. There is the infamous London, Tilbury and Southend railway, which we nominated as the misery line. In the winter, other railways are held up by leaves on the line. The LTS is the only line that used to get held up by dead sheep on the line, which frequently caused enormous inconvenience to constituents in the area, enormous numbers of whom come up to London to work. That line, of course, has been well taken care of by the Government, who generously put £50 million into the signalling, as I recall. We very much hope that the line will soon be taken on by the private sector as one of the first of the new privatised railway lines.

There is an awful stretch of the Mile End road where the A13 comes into central London, especially between the Blind Beggar and the Brown Bear; two famous, or infamous, pubs. Again, the Minister heard our cry. Whereas before it was reduced to two narrow lanes with a street market on either side and parking and double parking at all times of the rush hour, the Minister has sensibly instituted legislation, or whatever the proceedings are, to put double red lines along that road, which will enormously improve the journey out of London for people making for the M11 and the M25, as well as the Al2 and the A13. We are looking forward to those improvements.

Now to the A13 itself. I was very dismayed indeed to see that the Department of Transport, which had raised all our hopes to believing that this stretch of road was about to be put right, has now told us that it is to put on hold a part of that work—the bit between Wennington and Mar Dyke, which would link the road to the M25.

This new stretch of the A13 is being constructed in three parts. Incredibly enough, the middle part of that road is being built now, but the two bits which connect it to London at one end and to the M25 at the other are likely to be delayed, as I understand it. That is why I have taken the opportunity to bring the Minister to the House to explain that to my constituents, who are extremely annoyed and upset. That little bit of road in the middle will be like one of those old Essex barges that we used to put the criminals in, but without moorings. It will be bobbing about in the middle of the marshes where nobody can get at it or use it. I cannot think of anything more foolish.

So, like Pip, here I am with my great expectations. For many years, we have felt that it was time that Mr. Magwich, our benefactor, told us how he would improve matters for the people who live in the vicinity of the Essex marshes and want that road improved.

We are all aware and I know that the Department is aware that the present Al3 is totally incapable of coping with the demands of the traffic using it. For a large stretch, it is nothing more than a country road, with two lanes of traffic—one up, one down—yet it carries one of the most enormous amounts of traffic in the country.

Ford motor company at Dagenham uses it. Ford's is an enormous organisation, as we know. It employs about 35,000 people, and those people rely on Ford's having good access to transport in and out of its area. I know that Ford's has talked from time to time about whether there is a need to relocate its premises simply because of the problem of getting its great trailer lorries, full of new vehicles, out on to the road and around the country.

The Tilbury docks, which are close to the A13, feed an enormous number of trailer lorries, carrying great big containers full of products all over the country. They are huge lorries and there they are, trailing along behind the Ford trailers. Also in that part of the world, there are many tips for rubbish from London, so there are great big lorries with skips on their backs on the road too.

Those lorries, which incidentally distribute quite a lot of rubbish along the side of the road and make it one of the least attractive areas, are on their way to an area I have discussed in this House before: Mucking Flats, a name many motorists can be heard muttering as they are stuck behind those lorries. The journey into and out of London is made almost impossible because, almost from one end to the other, there are trails of gigantic lorries up and down that stretch of the motorway.

I have yet to mention Shell Haven, the location of the two largest oil refineries—for Mobil and Shell—in the country, which are both in my constituency. Those companies send huge oil tankers up the road. One can see the picture in one's mind's eye—a gigantic lorry with a container from Tilbury docks, followed by a Ford trailer with ten motor cars, followed by an enormous lorry carrying skips full or rubbish on its way from London, followed by a gigantic lorry carrying petrol or oil. There are processions of these lorries along the A13. I have sometimes followed a line of 50 lorries along that road. No other road in Britain is as heavily congested as that.

In addition to that, many people in Southend, Billericay and Thurrock use the road because the railway line has been so poor in the past. Many coaches carry commuters out in the mornings and back at night. If I am painting an horrendous picture of that road, I promise the House that I am not exaggerating in the slightest.

Lakeside is one of the most widely used shopping areas in the country and Lakeside is just off the A13. On Sundays, the world and his wife come to Lakeside. They come from Kent in great hordes across the bridge and they cross the river through the tunnel. They come from London and they come from Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge and Oxford. It seems that the whole country comes down to Billericay and Thurrock to use Lakeside. On Sundays, when we might expect a rest from the traffic on the A13 so that we can nip around quickly, we run into all that traffic. The traffic is almost worse on a Sunday now than it is in the week.

The A13 is a crucial link and a crucial part of the economy of our country and it handles enormous volumes of traffic. If ever a roadway needed to be built in a hurry, this is it. I hesitate to suggest to my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London that he might get a bit of money from the European Community for all this.

I take my holidays in the south of Portugal. In the past two years, the Portuguese have built a road from Faro practically to the end of the west point in Portugal, Cape St. Vincent. They built that huge stretch of road in two years with European money. We have been waiting since 1964 for our piece of road. Although it goes against everything I believe in, if the Minister is short of money, perhaps he should go to Europe cap in hand and see what he can get out of them; anything to get the road built.

The population of Essex has increased enormously in the past few years. As it is such a vibrant area with lots of jobs, thanks to the Government's economic policies which keep Essex in very good heart, we need to increase road provision generally in Essex, because an awful lot more people have moved in. In the past two decades, the population has increased by about 50 per cent. To illustrate that point, after the war there was only one Member of Parliament for the whole of the area, but there are now nine. That shows how much the population has increased. However, we still have this old two-lane-wide country road to service those people and their needs.

We do not need to persuade the Department of Transport because it carried out a study in 1990. It said: traffic flows, between 25,000 and 50,000 vehicles per day, and a very high commercial vehicle content used that road. It stated that, unless work begins soon, there is little doubt that the increase in traffic wishing to use this piece of roadway will cause grave deterioration in conditions, not only along the trunk road, but also on those routes which are perceived by drivers as a way of avoiding the A13. That involves drivers nipping around the back streets and disturbing residential areas. The people of Essex have had to cope with the problem for much too long.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister because the existing improvements incorporate plans to minimise the impact on the environment. In fact, the new piece of road goes through land which is not used for anything because it is reckoned to be industrially polluted. We are not disturbing the environment by building the road. There are practically no objectors to it. That must be a miracle in this country because, if one wants to build a new road, one can reckon on 10 years of people sitting in trees to try to stop the road being built. There are no trees in Essex, so no problem. The Minister has carte blanche from the environmental lobby. Even the greens are on our side for a change.

By moving the road into that part of the world, we are improving the air quality. All those horrid exhaust pipes, which I hope we will clean up one day, will squirt out their noxious gases down in the Essex marshes, where there are probably a few wild birds to disturb, but apart from that they will cause no disturbance. There will be no cyclists to get in the way, and so on. It is a very important road.

My hon. Friend the Minister will be aware of all those arguments. I know that he is enormously sympathetic. I have the greatest admiration for the way in which he has taken on board other complaints that we have made, particularly, as I have said, about the Mile End road and other parts of the area. The improvements that we need, which have been on the drawing board since 1964, are absolutely essential.

The Department report asserts: The benefits of the proposals‖reflect the Government's policies for the improvement of the economy as well as taking vehicles off congested roads. I could not possibly have said it better. I might have more sympathy with the Department if the plans had come up against obstinate local resistance, but, as I have said, there is none. No resistance exists; the road is essential; the plans have been laid; and we were looking forward to the second part of the road starting this year. We then received the awful news that the project was being put back.

In February, the Department announced that, despite cuts in work on the Wennington to Mar Dyke improvement, which is the piece that will link it to the M25, it would begin in 1994–95. I much regret to say that that urgent work, which has brought me here today to discuss the matter, is absolutely vital. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to give all those involved in making the decision a good talking to and a flea in their ear, because there is not a more deserving section of the country or of our roadways that needs his attention. I look forward to his having an opportunity to reassure me that, after all, my plea has made him change his mind and that that bit of roadway will be started straight away.

2.46 pm

The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steve Norris)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mrs. Gorman) for introducing the debate, because it gives me a chance to record the present position with regard to the A13 between Dagenham and Mar Dyke.

I am not terribly good on Dickens, but I am probably right in saying that Mr. Magwich possessed a substantial criminal record. I hope that my hon. Friend will not mind, therefore, if I am less than enthusiastic about the appellation. However, this is not the first time that that has happened to me. Not long ago, I launched a vessel on the Thames called the Ebenezer Scrooge. There were those who were unkind enough to interpret that as a description of the Government's economic policy. I pointed out to them, of course, that Scrooge saw the light at Christmas and turned out to be a very nice chap after all.

Who knows, if we can use Dickens as our base, there may be hope for us all in what I agree with my hon. Friend it is an important matter. Its importance is reflected in the representations that I have also had from my hon. Friends the Members for Rochford (Dr. Clark), for Basildon (Mr. Amess), for Upminster (Sir N. Bonsor) and for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire). All of them have spoken to me about that road.

I hope that my hon. Friend, therefore, will allow me to address one or two points about transport needs in south Essex generally. She rightly said that it is of great interest to all of us. I say "us" because I have the honour to represent an Essex constituency. Incidentally, my hon. Friend is right about the London, Tilbury and Southend line. It is no longer a misery line. It has been hugely improved. I look forward to the challenges and opportunities of privatisation, a matter on which my hon. Friend and I strongly agree.

In that context, one of the things that my hon. Friend the Member for Rochford said to me only yesterday was that we always seem to have been the poor cousins. He made the point—my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay also mentioned it—that, whereas from every other point of the compass the roads into London tend to be substantial dual carriageways, for an awful lot of its length the A13 is a single carriageway. I know that myself because my excellent constituency secretary Tricia Gurnett lives in Grays, and therefore I frequently have cause to sit behind Ford trucks, waste trucks and so on in the endless line which my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay described. I have every sympathy with her predicament.

Therefore, I shall make some things clear and put them on the record. In her letter to the Secretary of State immediately she learned of the settlement my hon. Friend started by saying that the Government "absolutely cannot" abandon the extension of the A13. That was in her usual graphic style. Let us be quite clear—the A13 is not being abandoned. The schemes are there, and they are important. We are talking about the phasing of the schemes, and that is a point to which I shall return.

Bluntly, there is no easy answer. I am sure that my hon. Friend will be the first to recognise—she has constantly preached the message herself—that government is often a process of making some hard choices. She and I would agree that, in terms of the Government's macro-economic policy, the most important thing is to make sure that we reduce the burden of taxation on business. In attempting to do that, the most important thing is to control Government spending. From the little experience which I have of Government, I have to say that controlling Government spending is never going to be easy.

Churchill talked about everyone believing in reductions in general, and expenditure in particular. The transport analogy to that is, in my experience, that every hon. Member believes in abandoning the roads programme except in his own constituency, where there always happens to be a scheme of absolutely superlative quality.

I shall not disguise from my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay that none of the decisions that the Secretary of State was obliged to make around the time of the annual settlement was easy. The A13 was not the only scheme that we were not able to take forward at a pace that we would have liked. I say genuinely to my hon. Friend that the A13 is a scheme to which we attach a great deal of importance.

I shall say a word on the other schemes in Essex which concern my hon. Friend and her colleagues. The A130 is one such scheme, and again many people in south Essex are extremely concerned about it. The council has put in bids in each of its last three transport policy and programme submissions for the A130—a route that crosses the A13, linking Canvey island with Chelmsford and the Al2. It is a very large scheme. Stage 1 is estimated to cost some £44 million and the whole project amounts to more than £100 million.

That makes it a daunting scheme and, bluntly, one which—in terms of financing a new project of this size from the local transport resource—is very difficult to see happening in the immediate future. It might be better to consider the A130 as a potential trunk road, in view of the strategic importance that Essex rightly bestows on it. I have asked for that proposition to be pursued. We must not get caught in a bureaucratic bind in which it is said that the A130 is not a trunk road, so it must be financed from the local settlement, but as it costs more than £100 million, it is too much for the local settlement, so it is constantly deferred out of the local settlement itself. We must break that administrative log-jam, and I am certainly keen to ensure that we do what we can, although the project still represents a great deal of money.

The Al20 is a scheme which is of considerable importance to hon. Members in that area. That is the road that copes with the pressure from Stansted and brings relief to local communities. It is being developed by Essex with the aid of a 100 per cent. grant from my Department. We hope to republish the orders after they are reviewed later this year. Once the statutory procedures are completed, construction can begin as soon as funds are available. We understand how disappointed people are about the delay, but the county council—as the developing authority—will have to decide how best to proceed.

My hon. Friend mentioned Lakeside. As she knows, the Highways Agency has let a commission to look at the improvement of capacity of the M25 junction 30 with the A13 and the M25 junction 31. This includes the second stage of the Lakeside development A13 link roads funded by the developers, who have entered into a formal agreement with the Department for this purpose. That would have the effect of increasing the capacity of the A13 to improve access from the shopping centre and from the M25. Various options will be investigated before the proposals are published at a public consultation in about 12 months.

I shall not narrate the points that my hon. Friend made about the importance of the Al3 trunk road except to say that it is, indeed, a corridor which provides one of the main opportunity areas around London for expansion and new jobs. The draft Thames gateway planning framework, which was published last September, identified a number of major development sites on the north bank of the Thames. As well as the Royal docks, they include the former Beckton gasworks, Barking reach, Rainham marshes and the Grays waterfront. Accessibility is one of the major constraints in attracting investment into these large sites. So we see the Al3 improvement as important in that context.

It is also simply one of the most important radial routes into London from the east. It will provide a fast, safe road from docklands to the M25. It is a vital transport link to the developments which have already taken place or are in hand. My hon. Friend and I are familiar with some of them, but there will be benefits to the communities of Dagenham, Rainham, Purfleet, Mar Dyke and others further to the east.

So the issue is how the scheme is being taken forward. The history of it so far is, as my hon. Friend suggests, that there are three sections. They are Thames avenue to Heathway, Heathway to Wennington and Wennington to Mar Dyke, running from west to east. The schemes for the improvement of the Heathway to Wennington to Mar Dyke section of the A13 were first published in 1988. New orders for dual three-lane carriageways were published in March-April 1990. The proposals were then complicated by the need to take into account development proposals at Rainham marshes, but the developer has since withdrawn the plans. However, the local urban development plan retains the same intention for the area.

The effect of the new road on the marshes was fully discussed at the public inquiry and the decision to proceed was made in the light of the information arising from that discussion. A public exhibition took place in June 1994, to which the local Members of Parliament and local councillors were invited. The exhibition explained to local people how the construction activities would progress.

My hon. Friend was right to say that the proposals had generally been supported throughout the statutory procedures. My hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire) was consistent in reminding me of the need for the scheme and its importance to the national and local economy. Local authorities are generally in favour of the proposals, as are the majority of local residents and residents' associations.

The scheme presents an opportunity for environmental improvements. Ecologically, the marshes are changing in character since the construction of the sea defences along the Thames estuary. Salt water no longer floods the marshes, and fresh water draining into the river is gradually flushing out the remaining saline water. In the absence of salt water, the salt marsh will continue to dry out. That will have some effect on nature conservation interests, but there will be considerable opportunity for creating habitats for birds, plants and so on. Our proposed mitigation measures will, in the long term, be beneficial to the ecology of the area.

As to the scheme, and the points that my hon. Friend has raised, we have made a good start and construction is in hand on two contracts. I want to make this point clear, because my hon. Friend might have been under a misapprehension. Without meaning to sound patronising, the schemes are almost impenetrably complex to those who do not have to live with them every day.

In fact, two schemes are up and running now. The first is being undertaken by AMEC Civil Engineering Ltd. It is an £11.8 million scheme for work including the relocation of warehouse and storage facilities at Ford's, the construction of a new water treatment plant by the River Beam and the construction of access roads and two trial embankments. Work started in February 1994 and will be completed in the spring.

The second contract was awarded in February 1994—it is a £106.9 million contract for the construction of 2.8 miles of new three-lane dual carriageway between Thames avenue, Dagenham and London road, Wennington, which will cross Rainham creek and Rainham and Wennington marshes. The work started in March 1994, is not affected by the recent settlement and is expected to be completed—just as the sign boards say—in 1997.

Two contracts remain, to which we are not committed in this year's settlement, but they remain very important to us. One is for 1.7 miles of main carriageway works between Heathway and Thames avenue, with an estimated cost of £86.9 million. The scheme will provide a full interchange at Choats Manor way and pass through the Ford motor works to connect with the interchange now being provided at Manor way. I should like to thank Ford's for its tremendous co-operation. The company has had to integrate with us in all of the preliminary works on this important project and has been exemplary.

The other remaining contract is for two miles of main carriageway works between a new interchange at London road, Wennington and the M25, at an estimated cost of £26.5 million. Both remaining contracts are priority 1 in the national road programme. They remain a high priority, and work will start on them as soon as funds are available That is a form of words to which we are accustomed in the Department, but I hope that my hon. Friend and all those hon. Members who read this debate will gain some reassurance from them.

The scheme is up and running. More than £100 million is already committed to it, work is under way and none of it is affected by the difficult settlement that we have had to make this year—a difficult settlement in which many of the projects that people prized had to be put on hold, at least temporarily.

I hope that I have demonstrated to my hon. Friend that, despite that slight interruption in what might have been an ideal timetable for the scheme, the Department appreciates its importance for all the people of south-west Essex, including those whom my hon. Friend represents.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at one minute past Three o'clock.