§ 1. Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk)When he next expects to meet representatives of the Health and Safety Executive to discuss progress on the report on the Potters Bar rail crash. [81309]
§ The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Alistair Darling)Regular meetings are held with the Health and Safety Commission and members of the Health and Safety Executive to discuss railway safety matters, which include progress on the investigation of the Potters Bar derailment. The next meeting has been arranged for next week.
§ Mr. BellinghamAs the Secretary of State will know, the WAGN train on 10 May was en route to my constituency. Many of my constituents were on the train, although thankfully only one was seriously injured.
We saw the HSE's preliminary report in July. Since then, unnamed officials have speculated that some of the stretcher bars did not have self-locking nuts. Other officials have speculated that Jarvis may well be charged with corporate manslaughter. There is considerable confusion. The crash happened six months ago; why have we not seen the final report? Surely it is for the Secretary of State to announce that a full public inquiry will take place.
§ Mr. DarlingI have made it clear that once I have the HSE's final report I will decide whether that is appropriate. The HSE is expected to produce its third interim report in the spring, and I am informed that it is likely to deal with most of the outstanding matters.
The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, as is right, I cannot control or influence the criminal investigation. Unfortunately, a large amount of information must be gathered and processed before the prosecuting authorities can make their decision. I share the hon. Gentleman's frustration at the length of time it is taking to complete not just the Potters Bar investigation but the Hatfield and Paddington inquiries. He can rest assured 486 that I will do all I can to bring the process to a conclusion, certainly in relation to matters for which I am responsible.
§ Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North)I am told that the Potters Bar points were due to be relaid over the weekend of 9 and 10 November, but that following an intervention by the Health and Safety Executive the job was cancelled, although it had been paid for. Is it not the case that Jarvis cannot now be trusted to work on our railways, and is it not time to return all such work to public ownership and accountability to the House?
§ Mr. DarlingMy hon. Friend is not entirely right about the Potters Bar points. It is true that their replacement was planned for the weekend of 9 and 10 November, but Network Rail itself decided, sensibly in my view, not to proceed because of the HSE's outstanding concerns, and for other reasons. The work will be done.
As for maintenance generally, my hon. Friend will know that in September the then Railtrack announced that a large amount of its work would be brought back and, if not in house, would certainly be done by people employed directly by contractors. The key issue, as I have always said, is that one organisation—which is now Network Rail—must be responsible for when work is done and what is done, and, above all, for ensuring that it is carried out successfully. That process is now under way, and should be complete by 2004.
§ Mr. Don Foster (Bath)How can the public be assured that the lessons of the Potters Bar crash will be learned, when 68 important safety recommendations made after previous rail crashes have either not been implemented on time or apparently sunk without trace? When will the Secretary of State tell the House which of the recommendations he intends to abandon or revise, and what he is doing to speed up the implementation of the rest?
§ Mr. DarlingThe vast bulk of the recommendations made by both Lord Cullen and Professor Uff following the Paddington and Southall accidents have been, or are on the way to being, implemented.
The hon. Gentleman is right. Some issues, such as whether the European train protection warning systems should be fitted, are under discussion. When evidence was given to Lord Cullen, he was led to believe that there was an advanced European system that could be incorporated on our railways, but unfortunately it turns out that the system he had in mind does not work on any railway anywhere in Europe. It makes sense to evaluate systems to establish whether they would work, and whether they could be adapted for our railway system.
The hon. Gentleman—indeed, the whole House—is understandably concerned about the fact that it is taking longer than expected to implement the recommendations. I am anxious to ensure that as many as possible are implemented wherever that is practicable, but if events have overtaken some recommendations it is sensible for us to consider whether further adaptations are necessary. The chief objective of the entire industry is to make certain that we have a safe railway system.
§ Mrs. Anne Campbell (Cambridge)Is my right hon. Friend aware that on the Cambridge-London line, which includes the Potters Bar points where the tragic accident took place, the service has declined sharply over the past two weeks? When members of the public ask, for instance, why there is an emergency timetable at weekends, they are told that it is because of emergency work on the Potters Bar points. Will my right hon. Friend investigate, and establish why such bad service is being given to commuters in my constituency?
§ Mr. DarlingMy hon. Friend will have heard what I said earlier to my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Mr. Hopkins) about the points, but she is right: work is proceeding not just in that stretch of line but on all stretches, particularly at weekends, to bring the line up to scratch. The problem that we face is that we have had decades after decades of lack of investment in railway lines. The investment is now available. We are having to do a lot of work fairly quickly. Inevitably, that leads to some disruption. It is not the only reason for delays on that stretch of line. There have been problems recently, as those who travel on the east coast main line to Cambridge will know, but it is inevitable that as major renewal work is carried out there will be some disruption. However, I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House will agree that what is important is that the work is done and, critically, that it is done properly.
§ Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale)Given that rail safety, as the Secretary of State has said, is hugely dependent on the role of Network Rail, can he tell the House whether he stands by the statement in his party conference speech that
The fundamental difference with Network Rail is that it will be publicly owned"?
§ Mr. DarlingIt is a public interest company, as we have always made clear. The company is owned by its members.
§ Mr. CollinsThe Secretary of State will know that the Office for National Statistics, saying it is acting on advice from his Department, has classified Network Rail as "a private sector institution". He will further know that the city analyst Standard and Poor said yesterday that confusion over the Government's relationship with Network Rail could cost the taxpayer £2.5 billion a year, money that could otherwise be invested in improving rail safety and passenger delivery.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That does not have a lot to do with Potters Bar.