§ Mr. VazTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many visits abroad he has made during 1993; and what was(a) the cost of each visit to public funds and (b) the purpose of each visit.
§ Mr. MacGregorI have made eight visits abroad so far during 1993. The cost of each visit, including some travel costs of accompanying officials, was as follows:
§ Mr. KeyI have now considered all the replies to the consultation on the Trans-Pennine study strategy report.
The responses to that consultation were divided on the desirable way forward. While there were many who saw the need for improvements to the road network in the Pennine region for economic reasons, there were many who rejected any further major road improvements because of the likely impact on the natural environment.
I have therefore decided to end public uncertainty and proceed with a limited package of measures focused on particular problems. No new schemes will be added to the national roads programme at this stage.
Although the A69 was outside the study area it was identified as a significant strategic route in responses and I will consider the need and justification for its specific improvement in the programme review which is currently under way.
We have already recognised the strategic importance of the A66 in our current programme of improvements and I do not intend to propose further schemes for the A66 at this stage. There will be no improvements to routes east of the M65 at Colne.
The M62 will remain the main trans-Pennine route and we will be taking forward improvements to the motorway already in the national programme. Following the recent decision to take the Ml-M62 link out of the programme, we shall be investigating the need for increasing the capacity of the relevant lengths of the M1 and M62, to deal with increasing levels of traffic, to improve road safety and help economic growth in the area. Any proposals for further improvements which may emerge from these 411W investigations will be considered for entry to the trunk road programme at a later date, and would be subject to the usual consultations and statutory procedures.
We remain committed to our policy that no major development should take place in national parks, save in exceptional circumstances. We stand by our decision at the start of the consultation period that we will not upgrade the A628-A616 to dual carriageway through the Peak district national park. No additional major schemes will be added to the national programme in this corridor, although some minor, limited, schemes may be necessary to relieve environmental problems and improve safety.
Some respondents called for traffic restraint measures to be adopted in the Peak district national park. Whilst such measures would reduce traffic in the park they would also increase the pressure on the routes to the south of the park and so the Department will not be pursuing this option.
A number of responses asked us to look at the scope for transferring passenger traffic from road to rail. A Trans-Pennine rail study, undertaken by a consortium of local authorities and passenger transport authorities, has indicated that any improvements to the rail network would have only a marginal effect on road traffic flows.