§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Knapman.]
10.16 pm§ Mr. Patrick Thompson (Norwich, North)I am pleased to have secured a debate on road links with Norwich, and am grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for Railways and Roads for once again responding to concerns in East Anglia about the region's transport infrastructure. I know that my hon. Friend is used to responding to Adjournment debates, and it is for that reason that I am pleased that he is here. I also welcome my right hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Mr. MacGregor). It is his birthday today, so it is a considerable sacrifice on his part to attend tonight's debate. I appreciate his support and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Great Yarmouth (Mr. Carttiss), other hon. Members and the Whip—I appreciate support from wherever it may come.
Along with the Norwich and Waveney chamber of commerce and the local newspapers—the Eastern Daily Press and the Evening News—I have long campaigned for improvements to the All and the A47 in particular. Some years ago—I think it was 1985 or thereabouts—I recall driving a heavy goods vehicle all the way from Norwich to London with members of the local press in the cab and television cameras on at least some of the bridges along the way. It was part of a campaign to improve the roads to Norwich, a campaign that I have since continued with the support of my colleagues who represent Norfolk and the surrounding area.
That journey was interesting. I think that I caused a traffic jam because I was not driving quite as fast as I should have been to keep up with the normal heavy goods vehicle traffic. In view of this impending debate, last Monday I decided to take a particular interest in my journey from Norwich to London. I left Norwich at 12.20 pm and reached the Attleborough bypass, but, at about 1 pm, there was an accident further down the single carriageway. I then had to take a very roundabout, cross-country route to Thetford and eventually reached London at 4.15 pm. From Newmarket onwards there was a clear run, but, once again, there were serious problems in Norfolk caused by the single carriageway. Even that journey last Monday illustrates my point, which is that there are still serious bottlenecks on the route from Norwich to London.
Not everyone realises that every single important entry route into Norwich, whether it is the A17 from Newark and Sleaford, the A47 from Peterborough and Wisbech or the All from London, forms a single carriageway as it crosses the Norfolk boundary. People in Norfolk are therefore right to say that we have not yet done enough to improve our roads.
There has been genuine concern in Norwich about the prospects for economic growth and employment following the sale of Colmans and job losses at Nestle. Leading business men in the city felt it essential to address the challenge of providing new markets and work for local people rather than waiting for some fairy godmother to appear.
That positive response led to the creation in January of the new Norwich area development agency under the chairmanship of Malcolm Wall. I pay tribute to the 1113 agency's stimulus, which has widened the debate on the prospects of Norwich, Norfolk in general and our transport links in particular.
There is no need for undue gloom. Norwich's role as the capital of Norfolk and the regional centre of East Anglia is well known. The strength of the city's economy lies in its wide range of industrial and commercial companies that operate in manufacturing and the service sector. The decline in employment in our local clothing and footwear trades, electrical engineering and metal goods has been more than counter-balanced by the growth in printing and publishing, the media, mechanical engineering and the exciting area of bio-technology research, which is centred on the university of East Anglia.
Today's unemployment figures show a continuing fall in unemployment in Norwich. Norwich suffered less in the recession of the late 1980s and early 1990s than other parts of the country. Forecasts by Norwich city council in September 1994 and the Norfolk and Waveney training and enterprise council last year suggest that Norwich and its surrounding area can expect a further growth in construction and the service sector in the next 10 years.
If those predictions are to be realised, good road communication is essential. Norwich is the biggest conurbation not to have direct access to the national dual carriageway network. The city's link with the region's most important port, the A47 to Great Yarmouth, is a single carriageway from Acle to Great Yarmouth, with a poor accident and congestion record.
Traffic movements on the A47 are expected to rise from the 15,000 a day in 1993, which was already above its designed capacity on undualled sections, to between 21,000 and 24,000 a day by 2001. Similarly, it is predicted that traffic movements on the A 11 will grow from about 20,000 a day to between 27,000 and 31,000 a day by the same date. They are potential increases in traffic of between 35 per cent. and 60 per cent.
Without significant improvement of both roads, increased traffic congestion will lead to longer delays in delivery times and poorer service from firms based in Norwich compared to those available from competitors operating in areas with better road networks. Companies, individuals and households will be penalised in time lost, lower competitiveness, lost job prospects and environmental damage.
Fuel consumption is inevitably higher on congested roads where there is slow stop-start travel. Recent research by the Centre for Economics and Business Research Ltd. demonstrates the environmental damage that will arise in urban areas from reduced spending on the road programme. The Government are rightly taking seriously the environmental arguments on traffic control and road structure, and that is fine. Nevertheless, my argument is environmental. Traffic jams on the A11 and the A47, caused by a single carriageway, long queues of traffic and accidents, lead to people travelling slowly and increased pollution. I certainly reject any environmental argument against the case that I am presenting.
Businesses in Norwich are acutely aware of the challenges of the major road network. Almost 35 per cent. of firms surveyed in Norwich in 1994 consider access to motorways, major transport links and ease of distribution the top factors in influencing their possible locations. That was the concern most frequently expressed by firms 1114 taking part in the survey. A number of companies commented on the benefits of being somewhere where distribution would be easier, somewhere with a better road network. The eastern region of the CBI, covering more than 2,300 member companies, has come to the same conclusion.
There is no doubt that, during my 12 years as a Member of Parliament for Norwich, North, the issue that the business community has raised most regularly with me has been the one that I am raising tonight. That issue has been at the top of the business man's agenda since I have been a Member of Parliament.
Actively managed firms regretted the extra day or so that it took to reach their customers and some expressed the view that if they were starting again from scratch they would have preferred a location in the midlands.
My right hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk was Secretary of State for Transport and one of his predecessors described East Anglia as the Cinderella of the national road network. In spite of recent improvements, to which I shall refer in a moment, that is still true. It is not surprising that, in recent months, business leaders in Norwich have even been in touch with the Chairman of the Select Committee on Transport on that issue.
It was partly to address that issue that the Norwich area development agency was created in 1995. It has argued consistently for the upgrading of the A11 and the A47 to improve the region's economic ties with Holland, Denmark and the Baltic states and for a wider range of services from Norwich airport. Those pleas have had the support of the European Commission which recommended that the A47 should be included in the trans-European road network of routes of more than national importance to form one of the vital strategic routes throughout Europe. Norwich airport's links with offshore industries would certainly benefit from the dualling of that route. I, too, am happy to support that argument.
In case that should appear to be a rather gloomy introduction to this short speech, I should like to say that I do not wish to claim that the Government have done nothing to invest in the road network around Norwich or in Norfolk. I have had some difficulty in the past week in obtaining figures from the Department of Transport. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will not mind my referring to that, but it is difficult to collect together all the figures and I shall therefore be deliberately vague. In the past 10 years, about £100 million has been spent on the A11, about half of that in Norfolk, and somewhat more than £100 million on the A47, nearly all of that in Norfolk. That is pretty well all since the May 1989 White Paper "Roads to Prosperity".
The opening of Norwich's southern bypass and the completion of the newly constructed section of the A 11 between Stump Cross and Fourwentways have made a fantastic difference. As I mentioned earlier with regard to my journey from Norwich to London, once I reached the Newmarket area it was full—I had better be careful what I say because there was a lot of bad driving, and that is a subject for another Adjournment debate; but it was certainly a clear run all the way, and that is good.
The new Wymondham bypass, which will be opened shortly—I gather that it has been delayed a little—will be a great benefit to road commuters and to those commuting 1115 to and from London. Links to Cambridge on the A11 and beyond, with the A 1 -M1 link to the west midlands, are rightly to the Government's credit. I hope that my hon. Friend recognises that I understand what has been done and I pay tribute and give thanks for that.
I also pay tribute to the tremendous work done in all this by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk in his capacity not only as a Norfolk Member of Parliament but as Secretary of State for Transport. I also welcome to the debate my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham), who also has an interest in the A47 in particular and road links in general.
Even so, the announcement of the changes to the road programme in East Anglia following the Budget has caused concern to the Norwich area development agency and to a wide cross-section of business opinion in my constituency. Only one scheme on the A11 between Roudham Heath and Attleborough remains in the active programme, with all the other remaining improvements postponed to an uncertain future. On the A47, one scheme remains in the main programme, but it may well be put on hold, while seven further schemes are in the longer-term programme, and four more appear to have been abandoned entirely.
The position is that there are no new planned starts on any trunk road in Norfolk in the forthcoming financial year 1996–97. No private sector design, build, finance and operate schemes are envisaged for the county. Norwich and Norfolk lack the financial support to alleviate traffic bottlenecks and to remove danger spots. There is no prospect of a basic network of strategic dual carriageways being completed to link the county with the national or international route network until well into the next century.
§ Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk)The Minister will soon open a new road—the A47 west of King's Lynn—in my constituency. However, a number of my constituents are concerned about the delays over the Hardwick flyover on the A47—a scheme that all the environmentalists support. My constituents often say, "In other parts of the country people do not want roads, such as the Newbury bypass. Why not build a road where there is overwhelming support?" It would not be an expensive scheme and it has gone through its planning stages. I am sure that the Minister will support my campaign to have that road built soon.
§ Mr. ThompsonI support the case put by my hon. Friend. The A47 has an appalling accident rate and causes great delays. In fact, a lot of the traffic that should use the A47 diverts on to the A14 and comes through to Great Yarmouth. When the business community in my constituency tell me that this situation is not good enough, I have to agree with them. Road links to Norwich have had a low priority in the past, and that is why we have this problem. This is not the time to abandon the push for improvements. The campaign must be stepped up so that the Government accept that they must look again at their priorities.
I am campaigning on behalf of businesses in Norwich. I hope to receive an early reply from my hon. Friend the Minister for Railways and Roads to my questions. When 1116 will works on the schemes remaining in the main program start? What does "likely to be put on hold" mean in terms of programme timing? Does my hon. Friend recognise the serious economic, environmental and safety consequences of the lack of capacity on these trunk roads? I look forward to my hon. Friend's reply, and I thank him for being present tonight.
§ Mr. John MacGregor (South Norfolk)During my time in this House—including when I was the Secretary of State for Transport—I have sought to improve the road links from Norfolk and to gain the bypasses that are needed. I demonstrate the priority that I attach to this issue by spending my birthday participating in the Adjournment debate. There have been substantial improvements to the roads in my constituency, with the introduction of bypasses—which make a great difference to rural towns and villages—and the improvements to the A11.
Now that we have improved those roads, we need to finish the job. If we do not, the perception that Norfolk is far way will continue to exist. That is why it is important to complete the links and the bypasses on the A11 and the A47. There is an impression in Norfolk county council that, Government policy at the moment is against bypasses. An important county council bypass on the A413 still has not been completed. There have been bypasses on the rest of the road, but the village of Broome is facing real difficulties.
Last October, the Secretary of State for Transport told me, "I recognise that rural bypasses will continue to be important." It is important that that message gets through to Norfolk county council in drawing up its priorities. I should be grateful if my hon. Friend would confirm that that is the Government's approach to bypasses.
§ The Minister for Railways and Roads (Mr. John Watts)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Thompson) on securing the debate. I also congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Mr. MacGregor) on spending his birthday with us.
My hon. Friend expressed concern about the effect that managing the trunk road programme announcement has had on the various schemes to improve the A11 and the A47 leading to Norwich. It may help if I explain briefly the background to the announcement that was made at the time of the Budget by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport. A combination of sharply rising road construction costs and a continuing need to keep firm control of public expenditure, necessitated a review of the trunk road programme.
The new programme has been targeted at key routes, and primarily at making the best possible use of the existing network. The new national programme includes a significant number of bypasses, but many very desirable and strongly supported schemes have had to be deferred or withdrawn altogether.
My right hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk asked about our commitment to bypasses. I can assure him that we remain committed to funding local bypasses as far as resources permit, as that is often the best method of dealing with traffic congestion and improving the environment in rural areas. As a demonstration of that, 1117 I can tell my right hon. Friend that bypasses account for nearly one third of the road schemes currently being funded by transport supplementary grant—a total of 48 out of 147 schemes. I must point out also that in the tight 1996–97 public expenditure settlement, we have still managed to approve five new rural bypasses for TSG. It is for the local highways authority to decide on the priority that it wishes to give to promoting bypasses when putting its bids to us. About a quarter of the trunk road programme is devoted to bypass schemes.
Our main priorities for East Anglia are the Al4 and the M11-A11. In recent years, the No. 1 priority for East Anglia has been the A14. That dual carriageway trunk road all the way from the M1-M6 junction to Felixstowe is one of the key strategic routes for the region.
We have five further schemes in the programme for capacity and safety improvements on the route. Those are the Thrapston to Brampton grade separated junction, the A14/M11-A10 widening, the A14(M) Bar Hill-M1/A1 link, the A 1 4 Quarries Cross GSJ and the Rookery crossroads GSJ.
The A14 is also one of the 14 Christophersen priority projects for the European Community and it is eligible for some funding from the trans-European networks budget.
As well as constructing that major new route, to open up East Anglia to the west midlands and elsewhere, we have been investing significantly nearer to the homes of my right hon and hon. Friends. In the past five years, we have spent over £180 million on improvements to trunk roads in Norfolk alone.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North will be pleased to learn that our next priority in the region is the M11-A11 route from London to Norwich. The priority placed upon that route is widely accepted in the region, as it is the key route to Norwich, and thence on to the coast.
We are making great strides with the dualling of the A 11 from south of Cambridge, with eight of the 12 schemes already opened. Just before Christmas, I opened the latest section, the Stumps Cross-Fourwentways scheme, which I am sure my right hon. and hon. Friends have used. Another, the Besthorpe-Wymondham improvement scheme, is also nearing completion and will be opened very shortly.
That will leave us with only three schemes to complete the dualling of the A11 from the M11 to Norwich. All those schemes have been retained in the main programme. The most advanced of those, the Roudham Heath-Attleborough improvement scheme, is ready to start when funds become available. The others—the A11 Attleborough bypass dualling and the Fiveways to Thetford improvement—will follow, and it remains our firm intention to complete the dualling of that key route.
My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North asked me to explain what was meant by the term "on hold". When looking at the main road programme, we must try to ensure that we have the right number of schemes reaching the start of work stage to match the funding that we think will be available to start construction. If we take schemes through their preparation stages too quickly, we build up a backlog and the expenditure could be aborted, particularly if we have made orders for compulsory purchase and they time-expire. That means that we have too many other schemes at the same stage.
1118 We shall move forward at the appropriate pace so as to be ready when funding is likely to be available for construction.
Our third priority in the region is the A47. I am sorry that we have not been able to make as much progress as we had hoped, and I recognise that the long-cherished hopes of many local businesses and authorities for a complete dual carriageway route will not be immediately forthcoming.
However, it should be remembered that in recent years, we have spent some £150 million on schemes on the A47 in Cambridgeshire and Norfolk, between the A1 at Peterborough and Great Yarmouth. They include the Norwich southern bypass, which has not only greatly benefited the city, but considerably improved travel to the coastal towns of Great Yarmouth and, to a lesser degree, Lowestoft. There are other schemes in Cambridgeshire and Norfolk. They include the A47 East Dereham-North Tuddenham improvement, the Narborough improvement and the Walpole Highway-Tilney End bypass.
The latest scheme, the Walpole Highway-Tilney End bypass, is nearing completion and should be opened in a few weeks' time. There are also two further schemes in the main programme: the Hardwick roundabout flyover at King's Lynn, on which my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham) has made such strong and repeated representations, and the Thorney bypass, in whose support my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Moss) has made strenuous efforts.
I must disabuse my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Norfolk of the misconception that the Newbury bypass is not wanted. It is wanted by the overwhelming majority of the people of Newbury. In reality, there are few schemes in the programme that face significant opposition, except from those whom I call NIYBYs—the "not in your back yard" people who live nowhere near the area that suffers from the traffic, but who none the less wish to deny the bypass to those who would benefit from it.
All the other schemes on the A47 will be brought forward as the programme rolls on. However, I cannot give any undertakings at this stage about when schemes in the long-term programme can move into the main programme. However, where we have withdrawn major schemes or are unable to make rapid progress with them in the foreseeable future, as a matter of course we shall consider whether more limited improvements to the existing roads can be implemented to improve safety and to ease congestion.
In continuing to maintain the existing routes, we are currently constructing the A47-A1122 roundabout junction at Swaffham Heath, which should be completed this financial year. We also have proposals to provide a right-turn facility at Knarr Fen at an estimated cost of £220,000 and an addition of 1 m hardstrips between Thorney and Guyhirn, at an estimated cost of between £2 million and 3 million. That is all further evidence of our commitment to a realistic programme of improvements to the strategic routes serving Norwich on trunk roads.
We must not look solely to the trunk road network as being the only routes serving East Anglia and Norwich. My Department has provided considerable financial support for Norfolk county council schemes in recent years. In the past two years alone, support has been given 1119 for the A143 Scole-Stuston bypass and the A143 Brockdish-Needham bypass, both of which are now open to traffic, and construction works are in progress on the A149 Ormesby bypass.
I am also pleased that, in the latest local transport settlement, we were able to continue to support the county council's package bid for Norwich for a second year—including the Cringleford park-and-ride scheme—with a further £2.3 million-worth of credit approvals.
I said earlier that it was vital that priorities were set within a realistic financial framework. We have done that in a responsible manner, concentrating our efforts on the key national routes. To retain schemes in the main 1120 programme or the long-term programme that we know would have little realistic opportunity of being delivered would be to mislead people.
I know that my hon. Friend would not want me to excite expectations that could not be realised among his constituents. However, I can assure him that the needs of Norfolk and Norwich were very much in my mind in determining priorities in the trunk road programme. We shall continue to invest sensibly and carefully to meet the transport needs of the county and the East Anglia region of which it is an important part. Cinderella will go to the ball.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at seventeen minutes to Eleven o'clock.