HC Deb 25 November 1996 vol 286 cc12-3
10. Mr. Nicholls

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is his estimate of the loss of income to London Transport caused by the recent strikes. [4011]

Mr. Bowis

London Transport estimates that its loss resulting from the recent strikes is about £15 million.

Mr. Nicholls

Bad though that figure is, does my hon. Friend agree that behind it lies much inconvenience and the real misery of those who tried to use London Transport? Does he further agree that those commuters were entitled to expect the Labour party's outright condemnation of the strikes, but heard instead only the sponsored silence of the shadow Cabinet?

Mr. Bowis

My hon. Friend is right. Throughout the summer, while Londoners suffered from that wholly unnecessary strike action, we were more likely to hear the scrunch of Opposition Members wandering the beaches of Benidorm in their designer clothes than a single squeak on behalf of anguished Londoners. I hope that the Opposition will take the opportunity to condemn, even retrospectively, that strike and the disruption that it caused.

Mr. Tony Banks

No one could accuse the Minister of wearing designer suits. However inconvenient strikes on London Transport may be, at least they are predictable—commuters know that the trains will not run that day. If the Minister travelled on London Transport, he would realise how appalling the service is in terms of daily inconvenience to Londoners. On that subject, when will he explain what happened last week when the entire underground system closed down—the second time that Lots road power station has completely packed up in recent months? What went wrong? Will there be an inquiry and when will the Minister apologise to Londoners?

Mr. Bowis

The hon. Gentleman would certainly hear the sand scrunch if I walked on it. He is one of the few Labour Members to comment on the strikes that crippled Londoners' ability to travel to work during the summer. We have heard nothing about it from the current Opposition Front Benchers or their predecessors, but it is time that we did because Londoners are waiting to hear whether the sponsored silence will be the pattern for Labour and strikes.

London Transport has made clear to the people of London its regrets and apologies for that late-night disruption, which, it has stressed, had nothing to do with investment but was caused by a problem with a valve turning off the power for 10 minutes. During that time, it could not get Greenwich station up and running, so the system was transferred to the main stream and it began to work again, causing minimum disruption and inconvenience. Trains were running by the end of the night and everything was in order for the next morning.

Mr. Harry Greenway

My constituents suffered a great deal as a result of last week's underground shutdown. Does my hon. Friend share their concern and anger that Labour Members speak up about that incident, which lasted for only a few hours on one day, but do not speak against strikes that last for many days and cause much more distress, anger and disruption? Where are their values?

Mr. Bowis

My hon. Friend is right. London Underground is investigating the incident and what may be done to prevent any repetition. However, we may compare that small incident, which lasted only a few hours, with the 1.6 million tube passengers whose lives and journeys to work were disrupted by the underground strike, week after week, while the Labour party said nothing.