§ 2.48 p.m
§ Lord Brougham and Vaux asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ What is the scale of British Rail's investment programme over the next three years, and how this compares with the previous three-year period.
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, British Rail's investment programme is already at its highest level for 25 years. British Rail plans to invest £3.7 billion over the next three years. This represents a real increase of 75 per cent. over the three years to March 1990.
§ Lord Brougham and VauxMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Can he give the House an indication of how the increased funding will improve conditions for commuters?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, British Rail has a massive programme to renew rolling stock, improve the quality of services and relieve over-crowding. Twelve hundred new coaches will be brought into operation by Network SouthEast over the next three years.
§ Lord UnderhillMy Lords, in the light of what the noble Viscount said in his Answer, can I take it that he is now confirming the point which I put to him during our debate on the infrastructure of the railways? It was that the investment of British Rail is not funded by the Government, but is provided by British Rail itself from fares and charges and also from land and other asset sales. Does the noble Viscount also agree that the increased investment by British Rail is matched by the huge decrease in the public service obligation? A Statement on the subject was made yesterday by the Secretary of State. Are we not now in the position where Britain gives less public support to its railways than any other country in the European Community? The result is that we have lower wages, higher fares and, frankly, an inadequate railway system.
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, the Government want to see carefully phased reductions in subsidy. That should be possible without excessive fare increases. There is no point in subsidies if people are prepared to pay the fair price. The Opposition thinks it can criticise the Government because there is overcrowding and because it thinks fares are too high. However, the two do not add up.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the people who will do worst out of yesterday's announcement are the people in the South-East? I should have thought the Government had some interest in keeping people in the South-East happy. However, as the Government are now intent on phasing out all subsidies, would it not be equitable and right that fares should now be allowed to be set against income tax?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, that is an interesting point, although I should not have thought it would 260 come from the noble Lord opposite. Investment of some £1.2 billion is planned for the next three years in Network SouthEast, of which 70 per cent. will be spent on new rolling stock, replacing old vehicles and providing for growth. Investment is planned to rise by 30 per cent. in real terms between 1989 to 1990 and between 1992 to 1993.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, as regards the calculations that the Government assert about rail fares, what are their expectations of the increase in rail fares, particularly for commuters in the South East of England?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, that is a matter for British Rail.
§ The Earl of LauderdaleMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that a very encouraging development is that British Rail, which has held waste land by the hundreds of acres for years, is now developing that waste land, obtaining revenue and investing it?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, I agree entirely with my noble friend.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, will the noble Viscount answer the question I put to him on whether the Government will allow fares to be set against income tax?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, I said that that was an interesting question, but I am not prepared to answer it.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that many people who live in London and pay the high cost of living in London might greatly resent being taxed in order to support people who live in nice places outside London and travel into London? It seems to me that my noble friend's idea is one that we have not carefully thought out.
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, this is another of those occasions where I must decline to act as a referee between the two noble Lords.
§ Lord Brougham and VauxMy Lords, how does Her Majesty's Government's investment in British Rail compare with that of 1978–79?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, I cannot give that information without notice.
§ Lord EzraMy Lords, while the news which the noble Viscount has given us is very welcome, in his opinion does he consider that this increased capital investment will meet the much increased needs for railway services in this country? Will we, at the end of this period, reach the much higher standards that exist on the Continent?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, that is what we are hoping and planning for.
§ Lord Dean of BeswickMy Lords, is the Minister aware that, even with the recent announcement concerning investment in our rail programme, compared with our compatriots in the EC we are bottom of the league? When do the Government expect this situation to alter and when will they invest comparable sums in our railway industry to those invested by other parts of continental Europe?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, the measures announced by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State will ensure that that situation is reached as soon as possible.
§ Lord UnderhillMy Lords, in the light of what the noble Viscount said in reply to the question about investment in 1979, would he care to look at column 342 of the Official Report of another place of 3rd November? In a Written Answer he will see that the increase in investment compared with 1979 is shown to be, at current prices, fairly slight. There was a period of three or four years after the present Government took office when investment reached its lowest point for many years. Figures concerning 25-year periods can be thrown around at random, but if the Minister considers the table he will find the situation is slightly different from what is suggested.
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, I shall certainly look at the table, but at the moment we are looking forward not backwards.
§ Lord Donaldson of KingsbridgeMy Lords, when the noble Viscount told a noble Lord that he would not answer his question, did he mean that it was not appropriate to do so, and that if the noble Lord concerned would put down another Question at a later stage it would be answered? That is the courtesy that I have always been used to during 20 years in this House.
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, if I was discourteous I apologise to the noble Lord concerned. If the noble Lord cares to put down that Question I shall certainly try to answer it. I should have said in reply to the noble Lord that I could not answer his question rather than I would not answer it. That is perhaps more courteous.
§ Lord Harmar-NichollsMy Lords, is it not the case that this House is not in a position to comment on taxation? Is that not the sole responsibility of another place?
§ Viscount DavidsonMy Lords, I think we are going out of our depth. We are certainly going out of my depth.