§ 39. Mr. Fosterasked the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received since the publication of the Serpell report.
§ Mr. David MitchellI refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 7 July to the hon. Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan).—[Vol. 45, c.165.]
§ 41. Mr. Wigleyasked the Secretary of State for Transport which of the options in the Serpell report have been ruled out by Her Majesty's Government; and which are still under consideration.
§ Mr. Tom KingThe Serpell report provides illustrations of the broad costs of operating a range of different networks on various assumptions. There is no question of the Government choosing between them. Our objective is a high quality and efficient railway service for the benefit of the travelling public. In our view that can be achieved without embarking on a programme of major route closures.
§ 42. Mr. Adleyasked the Secretary of State for Transport whether he has yet reached any conclusion following the publication of the Serpell report; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Tom KingI refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Swansea, East (Mr. Anderson).
§ 28. Mr. Andersonasked the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to announce Her Majesty's Government's response to the Serpell report.
§ Mr. Tom KingWe are giving the board our full backing in pursuing the possible improvements identified in the Serpell reports, including potential cost savings of 245W more than £200 million a year by 1986. The committee's work also provides a contribution to the debate on longer term issues. We shall not reach hasty decisions on these. But we have already concluded that a high quality and efficient railway service can be achieved without embarking on a programme of major route closures.