§ 14. Mr. Simon HughesTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the level of investment in safety on London Underground in (a) 1995 and (b) 1996 to date; and what is the planned level for 1997. [8772]
§ Mr. BowisDecisions on investment priorities are a matter for London Underground Ltd. It is impossible to estimate how much money is spent each year on safety because very many projects include some element of safety-related work.
§ Mr. HughesThat was a pretty hopeless answer, if I may say so. Did not London Underground warn the Government that its funding for the coming year would put at risk many of the necessary routine safety works that it needs to carry out? Is it not the case that only the most urgent repairs of escalators are being carried out, such that other escalators are often closed and not used? What is the point in ensuring that the brickwork in the East London line tunnels is restored if, at the end of the day, the opening of the line will have to be deferred for a further two years because London Underground cannot carry out basic work on the line and the track?
§ Mr. BowisIf I may return the compliment, that was not a very satisfactory supplementary question, because the truth is that any investment in London Underground's track and trains is likely to improve safety. That is what I was saying in my initial answer, and given the real-terms increase in investment, that has to be good news.
In terms of safety, the hon. Gentleman will know that, under the Railways (Safety Case) Regulations 1994, London Underground was required to submit a safety case. It did so and its case was approved by the railway inspectorate. From this year, London Underground will produce annual safety plans. The hon. Gentleman can be reassured that—certainly from the Government's point of view and that of the management of London Underground—safety is the top priority, and the good news is that the number of fatal accidents on London's underground fell from 46 in 1990 to 26 last year.