HC Deb 30 January 1997 vol 289 cc360-2W
Mrs. Ann Winterton

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what recent representations he has received concerning the proposed start date of the Wheelock bypass; what funds have been allocated for the scheme in the next financial year; and what commitments have been given to fund the scheme in the future; [13185]

(2) what criteria were used to assess competing bids for road construction projects under the transport policies and programme submissions; to what extent the proposed Wheelock bypass met those criteria; and if he will make a statement; [13186]

(3) what representations he has received concerning the difficulties experienced by local highways authorities in entering into contracts for construction of major road projects without resources of funding beyond the initial year (a) in respect of the proposed Wheelock bypass and (b) in general; and if he will make a statement. [13187]

Mr. Watts

I have received six written representations concerning the start date of the Wheelock bypass.

For 1997–98, £2 million of expenditure on the Wheelock bypass has been accepted for transport supplementary grant. Previous allocations for this scheme are £0.75 million for 1995–96 and £2 million for 1996–97. TSG is payable at a rate of 50 per cent. of the accepted expenditure, with the balance allocated as borrowing approvals.

No specific commitment about future funding have been given in respect of this scheme. Local authority circular 2/96 repeated the message that major road improvement schemes—those costing over £2 million—which have been accepted for TSG are normally funded through to completion. This is dependant upon progress and costs remaining broadly in line with those when the scheme was first accepted for TSG. The circular further explained that it might be necessary to restrict funding and spread support over a longer period.

If Cheshire county council let a construction contract before the next local transport capital settlement, then subject to these caveats it may expect funding for 1998–99 to follow.

In assessing bids for major road construction projects which had been accepted for TSG in the 1996–97 local transport capital settlement, the following points were taken into account:

  • whether the bid is for a relatively small amount which it would be reasonable for a local authority to fund;
  • whether it is for residual expenditure (later than the second year after the scheme is complete);
  • whether cost increases are fully justified;
  • whether progress on part or all of a scheme has been maintained according to earlier forecasts;
  • whether it appears to represent a realistic view of possible progress; and
  • whether, where a scheme or part had yet to start, it is imperative that the scheme go ahead without delay.

Spending on the Wheelock bypass scheme in 1995–96 was only £0.374 million, and for 1996–97 only £0.75 million is budgeted. In the light of this, I could not be certain that any allocation for the Wheelock bypass 1997–98 would be used in full for the scheme.

I have received only one recent representation from a local authority seeking assurances regarding future allocations before entering into a contractual commitment. This was not in relation to the Wheelock bypass.