§ 5. Mrs. Rosemary McKenna (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)If he will make a statement on the level of investment in the UK's railway infrastructure. [73416]
§ The Minister of Transport (Dr. John Reid)I made it clear at the national rail summit on 25 February that the Government would be looking closely at Railtrack's 160 annual network management statement—due to be published at the end of this month—to establish whether the company's proposed investment was sufficient.
§ Mrs. McKennaDoes my right hon. Friend agree that Railtrack's profits are too high, and that proper investment in the rail network would put more freight on to the railways and give passengers a better service? Given that the bulk of Railtrack's money comes from public subsidy, does it not have a responsibility to the users of railways, as well as to its shareholders?
§ Dr. ReidI am sure that my hon. Friend is right and that the whole House feels strongly that Railtrack has to meet the needs and expectations of the public and railway companies on investment in me infrastructure. The regulator has concluded that Railtrack's returns have been excessive. The Government will be looking to the regulator to establish a structure of charges that imposes incentives on Railtrack to invest properly in the network.
§ Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde)I am sure that the Minister will rejoice with me about the recent signing of the contract between Virgin Rail and Fiat Ferroviaria for £750 million-worth of tilting trains for the west coast main line—investment that would not have taken place without privatisation. Will he use his best endeavours to ensure that Railtrack maintains its part of the deal by investing in the new track infrastructure and signalling system, so that we may all enjoy the benefits of the new tilting trains?
§ Dr. ReidI am always suspicious when I am exhorted by a Conservative Member to rejoice, rejoice, but on this occasion we can look forward to investment in the west coast main line. It is badly needed. Of course, we should accept that, under privatisation, investment has gone up, fares have come down on average, largely because the Government regulate them, and passenger numbers have gone up dramatically. However, the right hon. Gentleman, along with the rest of the House, will be aware that there has been a serious downside—punctuality and reliability levels are not acceptable. We have said that we want year-on-year improvements on that. Therefore, we welcome any investment, increase and improvement in services to passengers.
§ Mr. John Cummings (Easington)Is my right hon. Friend aware of the huge increase in passenger journeys on the east coast line, something which is creating severe overcrowding? Does he agree that uncertainty over the present franchise is inhibiting the necessary investment to cure that problem? When will he be in a position to advise the House as to the future of the present franchise?
§ Dr. ReidThere is no doubt that the increase in passenger numbers has put undue strain on the capacity of both the railway system and rolling stock. I am glad to be able to tell my hon. Friend that some 2,300 new pieces of rolling stock are scheduled by 2002.
On the question of franchises, we have made it plain that we are prepared to be a flexible and constructive partner with the railway companies if they deliver on investment and performance. However, we have made it equally plain that, when it comes to franchise 161 renegotiations, any company that is not delivering the service that passengers are entitled to expect will not have a long-term future in the industry.
§ Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex)May I make it clear that we will support the right hon. Gentleman in his efforts to improve punctuality and reliability?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for acknowledging that privatisation has brought about a quantum increase in the number of passengers carried on the railway and that Labour inherited a £20 billion investment programme as a result of Conservative policies. Has he given any thought to where he would have got the money if we had not privatised the railway? Would it be like the tube, where there is no investment at all and only life-support finance because the Government cancelled plans for the tube?
§ Dr. ReidSince I became Minister of Transport, I have been prepared to accept that investment in the railways and passenger numbers have gone up, and fares have come down; the hon. Gentleman will find that in the record very often. I hope that he accepts that the downside of privatisation was a complete fragmentation of the industry, with 25 companies operating on different timetables, fragmented information systems, overcapacity and overcrowding on many routes, and unacceptable lack of punctuality.
Through regulation and the strategic rail authority, we are trying to improve punctuality and we look for year-on-year improvements. If the hon. Gentleman is saying that Conservative Members are behind us on that, I welcome it. I am sure that we all do. We look forward to him joining us in ensuring that railway companies discharge their responsibility to the public and improve the service, which, in too many areas, has been dismal.