§ 5. Mr. GapesTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the future of crossrail. [24720]
§ The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steve Norris)As my right hon. Friend has told the House, crossrail has its place in the sequence of major London projects. The Government are committed to it going ahead as a joint venture with a substantial private sector contribution.
§ Mr. GapesMany people and many organisations in London, including London Pride Partnership, the Corporation of London and the Association of London Government, were bitterly disappointed by the Government's announcement a few weeks ago. As Londoners, we feel that crossrail has been delayed unnecessarily and we hope that the Minister will give an assurance that the Government remain firmly committed to crossrail's implementation at an early date, as it is necessary for our city's economic vitality and for journeys across the city, because it links our main railway stations. May we have that assurance?
§ Mr. NorrisIf Londoners are disappointed, it is probably largely because they have relied on the disinformation about the status of crossrail which has been spread by the Opposition. The reality is that, in London, we are proceeding with the Jubilee line extension which is due to open on 28 March 1998—book your tickets now—and we have already announced that the £650 million Thameslink 2000 scheme will follow thereafter, to be followed by the channel tunnel rail link, which is a scheme of around £2.7 billion. We have made it clear that, from a financial and logistics standpoint, it is right that crossrail should follow those projects. That is prudent and sensible government, something that Londoners understand when they are exposed to it but something that I do not expect Opposition Members to begin to understand.
§ Mr. BrookeWhile I accept the logic of the Government's position, does my hon. Friend agree that the Government have prolonged the already considerable blight along the line of rail? Have the Government ventured any consideration of the French method of compensation in such matters which seems, for a disproportionately low investment, greatly to accelerate the conduct of affairs?
§ Mr. NorrisMy right hon. Friend is right in the sense that one regrets any blight on properties necessarily involved in a scheme of such magnitude continuing for one day longer than necessary, especially when the status of the proposals is as it is. I hope that he will accept that I must resist his blandishment to discuss the relative merits of French compensation systems. Certainly, we are keen to ensure that people whose properties are affected by crossrail understand that the Government remain committed to the scheme and will see it happen, but we shall see it happen according to an orderly and sensible timetable that takes account of affordability and of the impact on the streets of London itself.
§ Ms ShortIs the Minister aware that crossrail provides the equivalent of 28 lanes of road across London, that it is an enormously valuable project, and that recent reports show that perhaps half its funding could be provided by the private sector? Will he now admit what he has not told the House—that the scheme has been delayed deliberately because, if it went ahead and licences were sought, it might endanger the flotation of Railtrack? Does he agree that the enormous damage being done to London, yet again, is part of the destructive consequences of rail privatisation?
§ Mr. NorrisI suspect that the difference between us is that I do not work with that kind of conspiracy theory constantly in my mind. To any objective observer, it is the most absurd notion one can imagine in relation to the flotation of Railtrack. Crossrail is, of course, a large and important scheme, and we remain committed to it. When planning such investments in public transport infrastructure, the key criterion has to be affordability. As I said, I do not expect the Opposition to understand that, but it is how tough and real decisions are made. It is, and has always been, the case that Railtrack will look at crossrail as a private sector entity to take account of the risks and rewards attendant on it, and will respond accordingly. That is entirely right. In addition, it ensures that the financing of crossrail is properly transparent and offers the best possible deal to taxpayers.
§ Mr. NorrisI shall ignore what the hon. Lady said from a sedentary position, as that might not be parliamentary, but what I said is patently the case.
§ Madam SpeakerIt could not have been unparliamentary, or I would have stopped the hon. Lady.