Docklands Light Railway: Stations (Hansard, 21 April 1994)

HL Deb 21 April 1994 vol 554 cc277-9 277

§ Baroness Stedman asked Her Majesty's Government:

§ Whether, in view of the undertakings given by the promoters of the London Docklands Railway (Lewisham) Act 1993 to the Select Committee of this House which considered the Bill, they approve of the circulation by the promoters of a "consultation document" which suggests that stations should not after all be built at Island Gardens on the Isle of Dogs and at Cutty Sark in Greenwich.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (The Earl of Arran)
My Lords, the Government asked the Docklands Light Railway Limited and the London Docklands Development Corporation to consult interested parties on a proposal to delete stations from the Lewisham extension when approval was given for the project to go ahead under the private finance initiative. The enabling Act allows proposed stations to be built but does not make their provision mandatory. I should emphasise that this is a proposal only and no final decision has been taken.

§ Baroness Stedman
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. I know that it is only a consultation document. However, is the Minister aware that undertakings were requested from the promoters regarding the new station at Island Gardens to compensate the residents there for all the trouble they would have while the tunnel was being built? Does he agree that the fact that the consultation paper leaves out the stations at Island Gardens and Cutty Sark flouts the will of Parliament in so far as those undertakings are concerned? Will the Minister consider consulting the Chairman of Committees to ensure that when the final decision is taken, the undertakings will be honoured?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, on the last part of the noble Baroness's question, I suspect that it would be improper and, indeed, ultra vires for me to approach the Chairman of Committees on the subject. The enabling Act has passed through your Lordships' House. The Lewisham extension will provide an important new transport link between the City, Docklands, Lewisham and Greenwich with a completely new river crossing, and will help in the regeneration of London, both north and south of the Thames.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, can the noble Earl help me on one point? What is the role, if any, of Her Majesty's Government in this matter? As I understand it, an Act has been passed by Parliament and 278 there may or may not have been certain undertakings given by certain parties who were required to give evidence under that Act. As the noble Earl rightly said, it would be wrong for the Government to talk to the Chairman of Committees other than on an informal basis. But can the noble Earl tell us what the Government's role in all this could or, indeed, should be?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the Government's role has to be seen from the point of view that this is an enabling Act. When my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment issued his press release on the Act, he said that the Government would have to consider whether the two stations might have to be deleted and that the viability of the whole line would be considered by both financial and engineering experts.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords, what is the point of a Select Committee of your Lordships' House spending a long time discussing and debating these matters and taking evidence in great detail if the results are immediately or potentially overturned by the Government stepping in? Surely that is quite wrong.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the noble Lord is not right: the Government are not stepping in. The Government's modus vivendi on this Act was always clear. We have always said that account would have to be taken of the viability of the line as a whole.

§ Lord Shepherd
My Lords, if it is not a matter for the Government, surely it must be a matter for the Leader of the House. I am subject to correction, but ray understanding is that when a Select Committee of this House considers a Bill of this nature, a Private Bill, it is not able to require amendments to he made prior to issuing its report. Therefore, when a Select Committee reports to the House, it is on the assumption that undertakings given to it will be fulfilled. If we cannot have a clear statement that those undertakings are to be applied fully, we come up against the problem that when other committees consider matters and assurances are given, the House or the committee could say that those assurances cannot be accepted. If it is not a matter for the Government, I think that it is very much a matter for the Leader of the House to ensure that undertakings given in the committee, on the basis of which your Lordships' House passed the Bill, are fulfilled.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I think that all the procedures in relation to the Bill and, indeed, the structure of the Bill as it passed through both Houses of Parliament were correct. If that is not the case, I stand to be corrected, but I am sure that my noble friend the Leader of the House would say that that is the case.

§ Lord Jenkins of Hillhead
My Lords, what then is the view of the Government on the validity of undertakings given to a Select Committee in these circumstances?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I think that we are getting right away from the Question—

Noble Lords
No!

279

§ The Earl of Arran
With respect, we are getting away from the Question, which is concerned with the Docklands Light Railway and the passing of the Act in your Lordships' House.

§ Lord Jenkins of Hillhead
My Lords, it is to do with assurances given to a Select Committee of this House in relation to the Docklands Light Railway. How the noble Earl can possibly say that my question gets away from the Question, I cannot understand—and nor, I believe, will your Lordships' House.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, is my noble friend answering?

Noble Lords
Order!

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, I do not know whether my noble friend is answering. I do not want to stop him.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins. It is a Question concerning the Docklands Light Railway and the aftermath of the Act going through your Lordships' House. It is not a Question for procedural decision this afternoon.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, we have been told two facts in the course of this exchange. The first is that the Bill was an enabling Bill and the second is that certain undertakings were given. Is not the way out for my noble friend to let the terms of the undertakings and the relevant sections of the Act be placed in the Library and sent to those Members of the House who have raised the matter?

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Wakeham)
My Lords, my noble and learned friend puts important points to the House. I believe that my noble friend Lord Arran has answered the Question absolutely correctly. I have heard questions from noble Lords in all parts of the House about undertakings given to a Select Committee. I give an undertaking to your Lordships that I shall consider those questions to see whether there are any issues that could give us cause for concern. I shall then decide what is the most appropriate way to deal with the situation.