§ 2.45 p.m.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government to state, against each railway line, the anticipated savings arising from closure, comprised in the total of approximately £800,000 referred to by the Minister of Transport at his Press Conference on March 3; and whether the earnings figure for each line, used in calculating the expected savings, included the present revenue from passenger parcels, contributory income and miscellaneous earnings.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM)My Lords, I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement of estimated savings from each of the passenger closures referred to. The figures are the best up-to-date estimates that the Railways Board can make of the net savings directly attributable to each of those passenger closures, after allowing for the loss of the contributory revenue. The Board also expect to make other consequential savings. These include those on basic track and signalling maintenance where lines are subsequently closed completely. They also include savings on general administration and from increased rationalisation, which cannot easily be quantified.
The closure of a passenger service does not necessarily entail withdrawal of the parcels service, and the figures therefore take no account of parcels receipts. If by miscellaneous revenue the noble Lord has in mind such things as receipts from advertising facilities and rents from kiosks on stations, then the figures do not take account of such receipts, nor of the cost of providing the facilities.
| Following is the statement referred to: | |
| Estimated net annual saving | |
| £ | |
| Salisbury—Fordingbridge—Bournemouth | 70,000 |
| Brockenhurst—Ringwood—Bournemouth | 108,000 |
| Taunton—Yeovil Pen Mill | 60,000 |
| Northampton Castle—Wellingborough Midland Road | 58,000 |
| Northampton Castle—Peterborough East | 123,000 |
| Thetford—Swatfham | 7,000 |
| Brightlingsea—Wivenhoe | 8,000 |
| Dereham—Wells-next-the-Sea | 2,000 |
| Carlisle—Silloth | 30,000 |
| Sunderland—Durham—Bishop Auckland | 35,000 |
| Sunderland—West Hartlepool | 6,000 |
| Swansea—Pontardulais | 100,000 |
| Berwick—St. Boswells | 56,000 |
| Langholm—Riddings Junction | 26,000 |
| Elgin—Lossiemouth | 5,000 |
| Ayr—Dalmellington | 11,000 |
| Kilmarnock—Darvel | 19,000 |
| Kilmarnock—Ardrossan | 29,000 |
| Fraserburgh—St. Combs | 5,000 |
| Edinburgh—Dunbar (local services) | 30,000 |
| Edinburgh—Berwick (local services) | 47,000 |
| Craigendoran—Arrochar | 3,000 |
| Total | 838,000 |
§ These figures do not take account of any payments to bus operators in respect of provision of additional bus services. It is estimated that such payments will be of the order of £40,000 per annum.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I would express my most grateful thanks to the noble Lord for the extremely helpful reply. If, as I understand, he is going to publish these figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT, I can assure him that both his Answer and the figures will be studied with the greatest interest and will convey more information than we have ever had since the publication of the Beeching Report.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord who has replied whether, in dealing with these branches which have been closed down, the tracks which have been laid are invariably taken up, or are they left? Could he perhaps some time (I do not expect him to do so at this moment) let me know how many of the branch lines have had the tracks taken up?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I think the noble Earl has not quite taken the gist of my Answer, because the Question refers to the number of passenger closures, and I tried to make it very clear that these were passenger closures; so that, strictly, the noble Earl's Question does not arise from the original Question. There may be cases where the track will be taken up later if the line is completely closed; or it may be continued for goods only. Therefore the noble Earl will see that his question does not directly arise.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHNevertheless, let me know.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, arising out of my noble Leader's question is it not the case that the right honourable gentleman the Minister of Transport does frequently, when agreeing to a closure of a passenger service, give instructions that the track shall not be removed without his agreement; and further, that in other cases where he gives no such instruction, the Railways Board, assuming there is no freight service still running, are then free to lift the track if they wish?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, as I have several times stated, my right honourable friend treats each case on its merits and attaches to each case, as the Act permits him to do, such conditions as seem to be required in the circumstances.