§ 6. Mr. Jon Owen JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport what instructions he has given to the franchising director to ensure the disruption on South West Trains is not repeated (a) on that company's lines and (b) on other lines. [17758]
§ Mr. WattsThe franchising director's objectives, instructions and guidance require him to secure an overall improvement in the quality of services available to railway passengers. Franchise agreements contain provisions which give operators both direct and indirect incentives to achieve that.
§ Mr. JonesDoes the Minister agree that fining South West Trains £600 per train is completely inadequate given 9 that the taxpayer is subsidising it to the tune of £60 million a year? May I inform the Minister that only on Saturday a constituent of mine found himself stranded at Ascot on a journey to Aldershot when a train was cancelled with no more than two hours' notice? Is not it true that although the leading company behind South West Trains is called Stagecoach, it has acted like a bunch of cowboys while it has run the rail service? Is it not time that the Minister did something to take effective action to stop that company from leaving our constituents stranded at stations such as Ascot?
§ Mr. WattsI am sorry that the hon. Gentleman's constituent was inconvenienced. As someone who lives in Ascot, I would say that there are worse places to be stranded. However, that performance is not acceptable and I am sure that his constituent will obtain recompense from the company for its failure.
The Opposition's protests on behalf of passengers might have a ring of truth were they not comparable with the sponsored silence that we hear whenever passengers are inconvenienced by the activities of their friends in the trade unions.
§ Mr. Andrew SmithIs it not remarkable how the Minister stands there as though all this had nothing to do with him? He cannot tell us the total penalty, nor even whether the franchise agreement has been broken, yet after all the chaos with South West Trains, Connex South Central is reported to be breaking its agreement and West Anglian-Great Northern is now planning to cut peak-hour services to Stevenage by a third. What responsibility will the Minister accept for that utterly disgraceful state of affairs on the privatised railways, or do the Government think that, having privatised the railway, they can now wash their hands of all responsibility? The House demands action from the Government to sort out the mess that they have created.
§ Mr. WattsI am just as willing to take credit for all the good things that are happening as a result of privatisation, including the improved service to the hon. Gentleman's constituency of Oxford on the Oxford to Paddington line, as I am to criticise if performance slips below the standard that we have the right to expect. The hon. Gentleman based his question about West Anglian-Great Northern on false information. A one-third reduction in services to Stevenage is not proposed. Between 7 am and 10 am, there are 26 trains from Stevenage to London and the proposed number is 22; in the evening, there are 25 departures from London and the proposed number is 23. What the hon. Gentleman has missed is that peak-hour commuter services into London are regulated both in terms of a minimum number of train movements and, more importantly, by load factor regulations. The obligation on the train operator, which was never an obligation on British Rail, is to ensure that overcrowding does not exceed specified limits. If a certain number of train movements is not adequate to meet passenger demands, there is a requirement to provide more trains. The dual protection of a minimum number of trains per hour and load factor regulations ensures that passengers will have a far better standard of service than they ever had from British Rail.