HL Deb 25 May 1982 vol 430 cc1074-5

2.57 p.m.

Lord Davies of Leek

My 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 whether they agree with the statement in the Annual Report for 1981 of the Central Transport Committee (page 5, para. 6) that improved punctuality on the railways depends upon better track maintenance which has deteriorated because of the financial constraints imposed on British Rail by the Government.

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, the Government share the concern of the Central Transport Consultative Committee about the level of expenditure on track maintenance. To avoid further reductions in expenditure on necessary renewal and maintenance of the infrastructure, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport has announced his intention to earmark part of this year's public service obligation grant for this purpose.

Lord Davies of Leek

My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for that splendid and hopeful Answer. In order that I may streamline my supplementary question, will he again look at paragraphs 5, 7 and 40 of the excellent consultative report, so that track maintenance at least can be handled as practically as possible? Is the noble Earl aware that, if we want to move people, it is absolutely necessary to have a first-class railway system? Finally, could we not use some of the contingency fund immediately for track improvement?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, I follow the noble Lord in his three supplementaries, though I am not quite sure what he means by the contingency fund, and perhaps we could have a look at that afterwards. We agree entirely with the idea that British Rail present a wonderful option for transport in our country. Like the noble Lord, I have read the figures, and I was delighted to see that over the last two years punctuality has remained more or less constant.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, does the Minister agree with the comments by the CTCC, and confirmed in British Rail's own annual report, that part of the problem is due to the financial targets and the fact that British Rail has therefore had to spend £90 million less on investment as a consequence of trying to reach the financial targets? Has the noble Earl seen the report that appeared in the press only this week, that British Rail has had to throw out its timetables for the excellent London-Birmingham route because of the backlog of work required on the track, and that consequently there are 25 speed restrictions between London and Rugby?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, I have not seen the figures which the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, has just quoted to me, but, of course, I shall look into them. Perhaps I may just say that in point of fact a renewal of track does not count against the investment income; so this is a separate item which I believe ought to be spent on renewal of track, which was the point of my earlier answer to the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Leek.