§ 27. Mr. ConnartyWhat steps he proposes to encourage freight on to the railways. [35471]
§ The Minister of Transport (Dr. Gavin Strang)Our proposals to create a new rail authority will help to ensure that freight interests are properly considered in the strategic planning of Britain's railway network. We will continue to improve the operation of the freight grants scheme, building on the success of last year. Our White Paper on integrated transport will include other proposals for encouraging rail freight.
§ Mr. ConnartyI thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. I am sure that he agrees with me that it is necessary 1026 to put more freight on to rail so that we can reduce the pollution and congestion on our roads. I am sure also that he welcomes the decision by English, Welsh and Scottish Railways to put a new rail head into Grangemouth, the largest port in Scotland, which will help with the task of reducing pollution and congestion on our roads. Will my right hon. Friend give us some specific information about the grants that he is making available and what he has done to untangle the red tape that the previous Government put in the way of those who wished to use the grants for rail freight?
§ Dr. StrangWe certainly welcome the investment by EWS and other rail freight companies and we want to see the maximum progress made. We have simplified the grants arrangement and eliminated all the red tape. Whereas the money available for rail freight grants in the previous financial year was £15 million, we have increased it to £30 million in the current year, virtually all of which will be spent. Next year we are allocating £40 million for rail freight grants. On freight, the Government are putting their money where their mouth is.
§ Sir Norman FowlerIs it not a fact that EWS Railways has, without subsidy, increased the amount of freight that it carries by introducing new services, and is to invest from its own resources some £650 million on 280 new locomotives and up to 5,000 new wagons? Is that not a significant success in transferring freight from road to rail? Is it not also a significant success for the policy of rail privatisation?
§ Dr. StrangThe right hon. Gentleman should check his facts. The idea that EWS Railways receives no subsidy for rail freight totally ignores the concession in relation to the channel tunnel; it totally ignores the money that EWS got from the taxpayer to take over the state assets; and it totally fails to take into account the fact that the Government are putting £1.8 billion into the railway network this year.
§ Mr. SnapeDoes my right hon. Friend accept that the main competitor—[Interruption.]I will continue when the bickering stops. Does my right hon. Friend accept that the main competitor to long-distance rail freight is the heavy goods vehicle? If we are talking about subsidy, is it not a fact that, all over the country, bridges are being strengthened to take 44-tonne vehicles in accordance with the wishes of the European Community—
§ Dr. Strangrose—
§ Mr. SnapeI have not finished yet; my right hon. Friend must forgive me. Would it not be sensible to maintain the Government's restrictions on the use of 44-tonne vehicles to ensure that as much long-distance freight as possible goes by rail?
§ Dr. StrangMy hon. Friend raises an important point. Under European law, we will be required to accept 40-tonne, five-axle lorries on our roads from 1 January 1999. We have to take a decision—it certainly makes sense to do so—on whether we will allow 44-tonne lorries with six axles, which means less impact on the roads in future. We will have to take a decision on that in the next few months.