§ 3 p.m.
§ Read a third time.
§ The Chairman of Committees (Lord Aberdare)My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.
Moved, That the Bill do now pass—(The Chairman of Committees.)
§ Baroness Burton of CoventryMy Lords, I have no wish to oppose the passing of this Bill but I should like to make a number of brief comments before the House sends it on its way. In November 1985 British Rail submitted to the Government, a proposal to construct a rail link to Stansted Airport. On 24th February 1986 the British Railways (Stansted) Bill came before another place. Despite government support the Bill was talked out and failed to secure a Second Reading. As noble Lords will recall from questions asked repeatedly in this House, dates for resuming the adjournment debate kept appearing and disappearing on the Order Paper of another place.
At last the adjourned debate of 24th February reached the Floor of another place on 3rd June. Even then, on 3rd June, considerable dissatisfaction was expressed by Members from all sides that after such a long delay, and when so many Members still wished to speak, a closure Motion was moved after one hour's discussion. On 24th July I was informed by written parliamentary answer that the Government had approved a rail link to Stansted Airport.
Finally, in the sequence of events, on 29th October and 3rd November the other place asked this House to 10 concur in a carry-over Motion that the British Railways (Stansted) Bill should be proceeded with in the next Session of Parliament. On 5th February this year the Bill received its Third Reading in another place and was passed.
In conclusion, I should like to explain why I have spoken today. I gave considerable thought to whether or not I should oppose the Bill when it came before the House on Second Reading on 25th February this year. In the event I decided against doing so because further delay would have helped nobody. On that day your Lordships sent the Bill to an Unopposed Bill Committee, from which it has now returned.
This has been an unhappy Bill. It is not well drafted and has been subject to much criticism from all sides in another place. It was not only Members from the North who were critical. There were constant reminders to the effect that in 1985 half a million passengers flew from Stansted but 5 million flew from Manchester. Members of Parliament asked why it should be commercially viable to serve 500,000 passengers but not 5 million passengers. The feeling persisted that the Government were all eagerness about Stansted and all hesitation about the proposed link to Manchester airport.
As the House will be aware, I have many reservations concerning the size of the present development envisaged for Stansted and the procedures that I have tried to describe today have added to those reservations. Whatever excuses relating to Private Members' Bills are put forward by the Government, there is no doubt that they have suffered considerable embarrassment over this long drawn-out saga of the British Railways (Stansted) Bill. However, equally it is obvious that if Stansted is to succeed it is essential that a rail link be provided. I hope that it will be a satisfactory one.
§ Lord UnderhillMy Lords, like the noble Baroness, I have no wish to delay the House over this Bill but I hope that your Lordships will give it their full support. Noble Lords will recall that I too was a little critical about the type of development at Stansted, but since the development envisages dealing with 8 million passengers per annum, a rail link is absolutely essential.
First of all, it is essential for the convenience of air passengers and, secondly, it is necessary from the environmental point of view because it will reduce the possibility of over-development of roads in this charming area of Essex, about which I have spoken before.
There are two questions that I should like to put. Will there be careful attention given to the possible overloading of the Cambridge-London line? British Rail will have a spur extension from that main line and I should like to be assured that it will be watched very carefully to ensure that there is an adequate passenger service. Secondly, the Bill provides for the temporary stopping up of certain footpaths and bridleways. I can understand that; but will careful attention he paid to ensuring that it is reduced to the very minimum and that when the time comes for their replacement, should that prove impossible, alternative footpaths and bridleways will be provided?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, perhaps it would be appropriate for me to indicate the Government's support for this Bill. The noble Baroness, Lady Burton, has made a couple of points about its rather tortuous passage through another place. Of course that is not a matter that I can deal with this afternoon.
She also raised the point about the rail link to Manchester airport and asked why that has not been approved in the same way as has this Bill. We treat each case on its merits and should be happy to approve the Manchester line if the case can be made for it. But we are still considering the recent grant application and officials from the Department of Transport are discussing this matter with the Passenger Transport Authority and the airport. Details have still to be resolved but we shall approve the application if the case is robust.
In our view the Stansted link stands on its own merits. It would be highly profitable even for an airport with a capacity of 7 million to 8 million passengers a year. It will relieve congestion on the motorways and local roads to Stansted and the extra rail traffic can be accommodated within the planned capacity of the railway line to Liverpool Street, about which the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, made a point. British Railways believe that they can cater for the increased traffic within existing plans for rebuilding Liverpool Street Station without cutting the quality or overloading the trains.
I am afraid that at the moment I cannot comment on the noble Lord's other point about footpaths and bridleways being stopped up by the proposals in the Bill. However, I have taken that on board and perhaps I may be able to write to him. I have already said enough to indicate that the Government welcome this Bill. It will bring significant advantages to British Rail and to Stansted Airport when the proposed expansion there goes ahead.
§ The Chairman of CommitteesMy Lords, I do not think I need make further comment on the matters of concern in respect of this Bill, but perhaps I may assure the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, that his remarks will be conveyed to the British Railways Board.
On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons with amendments.