Transport
The Secretary of State was asked—
Roads
The initial work conducted by my Department indicates that a well designed road pricing scheme could offer real potential to cut congestion. The draft road transport Bill will seek to increase the opportunity for local authorities to introduce pricing pilots. Those pilots will help to inform decisions about national road pricing.
Will the Secretary of State please tell us whether provision for road pricing will be made in the draft road transport Bill—[Interruption.]
Forgive me, Mr. Speaker, but I did not fully hear the hon. Gentleman’s question. Will he repeat it?
Will the Secretary of State please tell us if provision for road pricing will be made in the draft road transport Bill?
I am grateful for the clarification. The intention in the draft Bill will be to make it easier to establish local pilots. Concern has been expressed in the House about the interoperability of technologies; we are discussing that and similar matters with local authorities. However, our intention would be to introduce separate legislation, were we to decide in due course to introduce a national system of road pricing. That is not the intention in the draft Bill.
I am sure that my right hon. Friend is familiar with the statistical bulletin, “Traffic Speeds in English Urban Areas: 2004”, which shows clearly that the speed of traffic in almost every urban centre in Greater Manchester is increasing. Why then is it sensible to start examination of congestion charging in Greater Manchester, rather than on inter-urban roads for which the Government are responsible and which are becoming more congested?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that characteristically helpful observation on transport publications. Our intention is to work effectively with local authorities as they develop local solutions to local problems. I have met representatives of the Manchester local authorities as they develop local solutions that work to meet the needs of the local economy. They are worried that, if congestion is not tackled in the months and years to come, it will have considerable potential to affect the economic dynamism and regeneration of that city.
Is not national road pricing just another excuse to tax the already over-taxed motorist, especially given that the alternative—public transport—is almost entirely absent in many parts of the country, including rural areas? Where there is provision in the form of commuter trains, for instance, they are full to the brim, uncomfortable to travel in, and almost unsafe. What will the Minister do about that?
We have seen considerable improvements in performance and reliability on Britain’s railways. I have to say that I struggle to understand the Conservative party’s position on road pricing, notwithstanding the terms of the question that I have just been asked. On 8 November, the Leader of the Opposition said that he was interested in
“new solutions for road charging based on usage and time of day”.
That seems to me to be wholly at odds with the hon. Lady’s question.
In metropolitan areas, if road pricing is not to end up being just another unpopular tax, it must be preceded by attractive, affordable and efficient public transport alternatives to the car. What plans does the Secretary of State have to provide such services?
I fully agree that, if local schemes are to be successful, it is essential that they be partnered by the sort of improvements in public transports for which my hon. Friend has campaigned for many years. I believe that the transport innovation fund offers real potential to achieve local solutions to local problems. A key element of tackling those problems will be improvement in the public transport offerings in those communities.
It might be easier to make a decision on road pricing strategy if we clearly understood the Government’s policy. May I press the Secretary of State on that? When the Prime Minister wrote to the right hon. Gentleman appointing him Secretary of State, he stated:
“We therefore need to advance the debate on the introduction of a national road-user charging scheme…. I would like you to identify the other key steps for the successful introduction of road-user charging within the next decade.”
However, at Transport questions last month, the Secretary of State said,
“At the previous Transport Question Time, I made it clear that the anticipated time scale, if a national road pricing scheme were to be developed, would be the middle of the next decade.”—[Official Report, 17 October 2006; Vol. 450, c. 715.]
Is it the Government’s strategy to introduce a national road pricing scheme, or not?
Our intention at this stage is to advance the debate on a national road pricing scheme, while we develop learning and expertise based on the local pilots that will be facilitated by the draft Bill announced in the Gracious Speech last week. It seems to us entirely consistent to say that we should have practical experience on the ground which will, in turn, inform the national debate and the decision on whether to have a national road pricing scheme in the next 10 years.
That is a maybe.
Indeed it is. Let us press the Secretary of State on the technology and the learning. When his predecessor first outlined the strategy, he said that such a scheme would be based on satellite technology. Does it remain the Secretary of State’s policy to use satellite-based technology to underpin a national scheme, and will it be a requirement that any pilot use that technology, to ensure that it can serve as a meaningful pilot for a national scheme?
The hon. Gentleman has on previous occasions, at the Dispatch Box and in speeches outside the House, raised concerns about the technology that would be appropriate for a national system of road pricing. For exactly that reason, we are engaged in discussions on technology solutions not only with the private sector but with local authorities to ensure that we gain experience that is scalable, so that it can inform a national system of road pricing, and appropriate given the technology challenges that we face. I would have thought that the Opposition would be keen for us to work with the private sector and with local authorities to ensure that we get the right technology in place.
In the spirit of the Secretary of State’s reply, will he support two Bills that I am about to introduce to Parliament, on the Ramsgate pilot scheme for road pricing and on entry to England from Scotland road pricing? They would enable him to test his technologies at £1.50 a car, which is the sentence that he is giving to my constituents and those of my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Dr. Stoate) when he expects them to pay £1.50 each time they cross the River Thames. That is unacceptable; he can experiment as much as he likes, but he cannot do it with the people of Kent or Essex.
I fear I might disappoint my hon. Friend, but on the basis of his advocacy of the two Bills that he is proposing, it is unlikely that I will be able to support him in the Division Lobby.
Transport Innovation Fund
The transport innovation fund money will become available from 2008-09. However, in advance of that, in November 2005, my predecessor awarded pump-priming funding to seven areas to develop transport innovation fund proposals to tackle congestion. On 6 November, I announced to the House that three further areas were being awarded money.
I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. In Wigan, the poor transport infrastructure is a major factor in holding back economic regeneration. Will he ensure that economic regeneration is at the forefront of decisions on exactly where to allocate the transport innovation fund in the future?
As I have said, I have already been engaged in discussions with Greater Manchester authorities about the potential use of the transport innovation fund. I shall ensure that the points raised by my hon. Friend are passed on directly.
Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of the fastest growing and most congested areas in the UK is north-east Wales and west Cheshire, where the Deeside hub project is taking forward cross-border arrangements? Will my right hon. Friend assure me that the fact that the transport innovation fund is restricted to England will not prevent proposals from being taken forward to ease congestion affecting the cross-border region?
I am glad to say that we are seeing economic growth not only in one part of the United Kingdom but across it. I have had the opportunity in recent weeks to meet the Transport Minister of the Welsh Assembly Government, and I will be happy to take up the point raised by my hon. Friend.
Buses
I have taken account of the concerns that many hon. Members have raised with me on the standard of deregulated bus services and will shortly set out proposals on the direction of future bus policy. Legislative measures will be included in the draft road transport Bill.
It used to be a joke when people said, “You wait for hours and then three come at once”, but that is exactly the impact of deregulation on my constituents. Will the Secretary of State confirm that when he introduces legislation he will make provision for social enterprises, such as Durham Integrated Transport and the Dene valley community transport scheme?
I know of the important work that such organisations provide in supporting bus travel in rural and in urban areas, and I welcome their important contribution. As I understand it, Durham has successfully bid for funding for three rural bus challenge schemes. We support the efforts of the sector in a number of ways, and my officials are happy to discuss how we can further increase its effectiveness in years to come.
The Secretary of State will be aware that bus use is highest among the poorest 20 per cent. of our population and that the decline in bus use has hit hardest those who are least able to afford an alternative. Does he accept that the deregulation of the mid-1980s has failed? After eight and a half years of Labour Government, when will we see some action to give local communities back the power they need to provide the bus services that their communities want?
If I interpret the question rightly, it seems to be an endorsement of the proposals that I am contemplating. Certainly, I recognise that in the 20 years since deregulation, some communities have not enjoyed the bus service to which they are entitled. It is therefore important not simply to highlight areas where there are successful local bus services, such as Brighton, York and Oxford, but to focus on communities, not least those in many Labour constituencies, to which buses can be a vital life-line. That is why I intend to bring forward proposals and draft legislation to address the exact point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman). I fully recognise that, in many local communities, bus services are a vital link to economic and social regeneration.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the road transport Bill must redress the balance in favour of bus passengers, whose experience of bus travel all too often leads them to believe that business interests override passenger interests in areas such as south Yorkshire?
Certainly, in many areas a free-for-all has left the needs of passengers far behind, and that is why it is important that, in the proposals that we bring forward, we recognise that there is a genuine desire for improved bus services in many communities across the country.
The Secretary of State will know that No. 10’s website on the draft transport Bill states that it will enable
“local authorities to improve the standard of bus services”.
He will also know that, since deregulation, the average age of the fleet has fallen as investment has risen, and that fares have risen at less than half the rate of council tax. In 2006, overall satisfaction levels are increasing. His predecessor as Secretary of State said:
“I would be wary of saying that we should go back to the pre-1986 situation.”—[Official Report, 2 July 2003; Vol. 408, c. 404.]
Will the Secretary of State confirm today that that remains the policy of the Government, and that his proposals will not take us back to the era of regulated buses?
It encourages me greatly, in respect of the debate that we are about to have, if the hon. Gentleman is suggesting on behalf of the Opposition that he is content with, and indeed complacent about, the bus services enjoyed in every community in the country. It is an entirely false choice to say that we should either go back to the state-owned and state-controlled system that existed before 1986, or accept that the present system is beyond improvement. I believe that improvements can and should be made, and it is on that basis that I shall, in due course, bring forward proposals.
While my right hon. Friend considers the evidence, before bringing forward the draft Bill, will he look at the experience of people in Merseyside? Passenger numbers have halved since deregulation 20 years ago, there has been an increase of 30 per cent. in fares, and there have been no extra bus miles. There is an unstable system under which bus routes can be, and indeed are, changed regularly; legally, they can be changed every 56 days.
I will certainly look into that. The Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Gillian Merron), who has responsibility for buses, and I engaged in a series of discussions and made a number of visits over the summer and in recent months to try to ensure that we are informed; that will be the basis of the proposals that we will bring forward in due course. Tomorrow, I will meet the “big five” bus operators to discuss our emerging thinking on bus travel. I fear that the situation described by my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Angela Eagle) is not unique to her area, and that is why we need to take action. It is on that basis that we will bring forward our proposals.
Buses in Northern Ireland were not deregulated, of course, and they are still under public ownership. Will that successful model be offered as an option in the draft Bill for Wales?
The hon. Gentleman is factually correct: in 1986, the deregulation that took place everywhere else did not take place in Northern Ireland. That should act as a cautionary note to anybody who suggests that there is a single approach to the provision of effective bus services that will work in every community. That certainly has been one of the examples that we have considered while preparing our proposals, and it is on that basis that, in due course, we will bring them forward.
Speed Limits
The most recent assessment is the independent four-year evaluation of the national safety camera programme, which was published on 15 December 2005. It confirms that safety cameras continue to be a valuable and cost-effective method of enforcing speed limits. Cameras are, however, just one method that the police use to detect speeding.
Given that the Minister’s own Department’s statistics show that only 15 per cent. of all accidents are caused by excessive speed, is it not time that he reviewed the extraordinary explosion in the number of speed cameras? Is he aware that millions of perfectly safe drivers are being banned for missing a limit— almost understandably, given the kaleidoscope of road signs on the road today? Will he confirm that one camera earned £750,000 last year, and is that not the real reason why we have so many speed cameras?
I could not agree less. The hon. Gentleman quoted the Department’s statistics wrongly, as they show that about a quarter of road fatalities involve speeding in one form or another. The deployment of safety cameras has had a pervasive effect on attitudes to speed on the roads, not just at camera sites but throughout the road network. The fact of the matter is that cameras work. We took steps last year to make sure that there is no possible financial incentive for those who decide whether cameras are installed. The hon. Gentleman said that £0.75 million was raised by one camera, which suggests that a heck of a lot of people were speeding in that area. If they stopped doing so they would not pay a penny.
Will my hon. Friend reconsider the Department’s proposal to reduce penalty points for speeding at over 30 mph in light of its effective safety poster depicting a child who says, “If I’m knocked over at 30 mph there is an 80 per cent. chance that I will live. If I’m knocked over at 40 mph there’s an 80 per cent. chance that I will die.”?
I very much understand my hon. Friend’s position, which she has expressed forcefully many times. The Road Safety Act 2006 gives us the power to vary the number of points on standing penalties that people receive for speeding, but that does not mean that we have to do so. We have undertaken to conduct a thorough consultation on proposals for variable penalties. I am sure that my hon. Friend will wish to comment, and we will take account of the consultation when we make our final decision on how to move ahead.
In many villages in my constituency, speed cameras cannot be justified under existing criteria. What are the Government’s plans to enforce speed limits in those villages for the safety of local residents?
We have told everyone responsible for speed enforcement and road safety partnerships around the country that they should only deploy cameras as a last resort, if other speed enforcement measures are not appropriate. Such measures include variable speed signs and changes to the speed limit in areas where a lower or higher limit is indicated as a result of the accident statistics on a certain piece of road. As a result of changes to the financing of road safety partnerships, local authorities will receive £110 million extra a year, some of which can be spent on appropriate safety measures in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency.
Will my hon. Friend continue robustly to resist the considerable hysteria of the motoring lobby, which appears to suggest that people’s lives are less important than the fines that some motorists have to pay? Moreover, will he look carefully at the Transport Committee report, which provides various solutions, including the use of more enforcement measures, with effective tools such as old-fashioned policemen?
I have already read the report from the Select Committee, which my hon. Friend chairs. I agree with a large proportion of it, and we will make a considered response in the near future. She is absolutely right that old-fashioned road policing is not an alternative to cameras—both are needed. Cameras play a role, and can be extremely effective, but we also need effective road policing to do things that cameras cannot do.
Roads
The Department for Transport recognises that overall value for money may be enhanced by co-ordinating the delivery of road schemes on neighbouring parts of the road network. Consequently, while having regard to budget constraints and regional prioritisations, every effort is made to deliver schemes to a cost-efficient timetable.
The Government are committed to building the A5/M1 link, which will require a new junction, 11A, on the M1. Building that new junction at the same time as widening the M1 would cost £14.6 million less than building it afterwards. Is it not a wholly unacceptable waste of taxpayers’ money to build junction 11A after the M1 has been widened, as the Government intend to do?
I share the hon. Gentleman’s disappointment that the region chose to de-prioritise that road scheme and to delay it until 2013, rather than going ahead with it in 2008 as the Government originally intended. Starting the work in 2008 would have allowed us to build the junction at the same time as widening the M1. While we accept the region’s advice, we have written to its representatives to say that we intend to continue with the design work and the other work necessary to allow us at least to construct the junction at the same time as widening the M1. If there is any slippage in the regional funding allocation of moneys to allow us to do this, we intend to construct the junction at the same time as carrying out the widening, for the very reasons that the hon. Gentleman has outlined.
Road Transport Emissions
The Government have a range of policies across four areas to tackle carbon dioxide emissions from road transport. These policies aim to reduce the carbon content of fuel, to improve the fuel efficiency of vehicles, to encourage more sustainable travel choices, and to work with the EU to consider seriously the inclusion of transport in emissions trading.
The Minister knows that carbon emissions from transport have increased from 27 per cent. to 33 per cent. He also knows that the Mayor of London is going to tax 4x4s by increasing the congestion charge for such vehicles to £25. In the Queen’s Speech last week, we also heard about road pricing. Will the Minister now reassure the House that any increase in the taxation on motors will not just be used as a money-making exercise, and that it will go towards research and development to find alternative sources of fuel?
We already invest substantially in research projects to look for alternative sources of fuel. We are also working hard on the renewable transport fuel obligation, which will ensure that 5 per cent. of road fuel is obtained from renewable sources by 2010. That will present a great opportunity to reduce carbon emissions from land transport by 1 million tonnes a year; it will also be a great opportunity for the agriculture sector to provide the biomass to create that fuel. I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that we need to work hard on these issues, but the Government are committed to doing so and are already doing so.
One way to reduce carbon emissions from road transport is to encourage greater use of rail freight. Tesco and Eddie Stobart have shown us that there is a place for rail freight in an integrated haulage strategy. Should not Ministers be talking to other supermarkets and road hauliers, and to organisations such as Royal Mail, to encourage them to transport more of their freight by rail over long distances?
I can assure my hon. Friend that we are having those conversations. In fact, I spent yesterday afternoon with two executives from Eddie Stobart, and they were telling me about the success of the scheme that they have set up with Tesco. The sustainable distribution fund also allows us to provide grant aid for schemes that take freight off the roads and on to either railways, waterways or coastal shipping as a way of reducing carbon emissions. These are matters for the private sector, but we are doing everything that we can to encourage it to do exactly as my hon. Friend suggests.
Has the Minister made any assessment of the 60-tonne, 25.25 m trucks that have recently been test-driven not only by members of the Select Committee but by officials in his Department? Such trucks are already operating on the roads of three European Union member states. Does he agree that deploying them on specific routes might well reduce the amount of carbon dioxide produced by road transport?
I looked at this matter last year and studied the issues carefully. I understand the economic and environmental arguments for 60-tonne trucks, but I came to the conclusion that I could not guarantee that they would be restricted to routes that were suitable for them. The reality would be that they would leave the main motorways and highways and end up in rural villages, many of which are represented by Conservative Members, who would soon be on their feet telling me that it was a bad idea to allow such vehicles on to the roads. On that basis, I decided not to move forward with any further tests on 60-tonne trucks at this time.
I know my hon. Friend is aware of the levels of carbon dioxide that are badly affecting residents in Tinsley, in my constituency. When he met a delegation from the area recently, he gave us certain assurances which I hope he will be prepared to put on record. He assured us that the widening of the M1 would not go ahead if carbon dioxide emissions increased as a result, that wherever possible measures would be introduced to try to reduce them, and that there would be a full environmental impact study whose findings would be available for public consultation. Will he now confirm those assurances?
My hon. Friend has been vigorous in campaigning for the people of Tinsley, and specifically in drawing my attention to the concerns of schools on the route. I can assure him publicly that there will be a full environmental impact assessment. If we cannot mitigate the environmental consequences of the widening, it will not go ahead, so it is our responsibility to find ways of mitigating it. I can also assure my hon. Friend that I have noted the particular concerns of schools, and regard it as our responsibility to find an solution that is acceptable to parents and children and which will prevent them from suffering as a result of any widening of the road.
Buses
The provision of local bus services in Bournemouth is a matter for the bus operators and Bournemouth borough council. They have powers to subsidise non-commercial services. We will shortly set out detailed proposals on the direction of future bus policy, and legislative measures will be included in the draft road transport Bill.
I look forward to those proposals, but the Minister will know that the Liberal Democrat council recently sold off the local bus service, which angered many residents. Routes have been removed and reduced. Will the Minister remind the council of its duties under the Transport Act 1985? When there is a requirement to provide a bus service and there is a social need, the council should reach into its pockets.
I understand that network changes have taken place recently since the sale of the council-owned bus company, and that they have resulted in cuts in some services, although others are running more frequently. I have also been told that later this month Bournemouth borough council will consider replacing services that have been lost or reduced.
I emphasise to the hon. Gentleman that Bournemouth has received considerable support from the Government for bus services, not least through free concessionary bus travel for the over-60s and disabled people. More than a quarter of Bournemouth’s population fall into those categories. Moreover, the Government have provided some £3.5 million a year in bus service operators’ grant for Bournemouth, Poole and Dorset and local transport plan funding of over £2.6 million. Bournemouth borough council also receives funding for concessionary fares through its ever-increasing revenue support grant.
Night Flights
New night flying restrictions at Heathrow will run until October 2012, retaining previous seasonal limits on aircraft movements between 11.30 pm and 6 am. There will also be a stepped reduction in the seasonal noise quota available, encouraging airlines to use the quietest aircraft. That will result in some gradual reduction in night noise by October 2012.
Many of my constituents are woken at 4.30 am by jumbos coming in to land at Heathrow. They will welcome the new regime, which will result in a reduction of about 9 per cent. in the summer, although obviously they would prefer a complete ban on night flights. Is it not nonsense, however, for Wandsworth council, the Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise and others to suggest that the Civil Aviation Act 2006 will result in less noise from night flights, given that a Lords amendment knocked out the clause that would have enabled Ministers to set noise limits that would have given airlines a powerful incentive to use quieter aircraft?
I am happy to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to bear down on night noise. I congratulate my hon. Friend on his immense diligence in representing his constituents’ interests in this important matter, and I am very sympathetic to the points he has made.
The Civil Aviation Act has no impact on current night restrictions, although, as my hon. Friend says, we hoped that it would make it easier for restrictions to be as stringent as possible in future. That was serially misrepresented by the Opposition. We were not trying to remove a statutory cap. What we currently have in statute is a power to set restrictions, not a duty, with a requirement that any restrictions must be expressed as a limit on aircraft movements. We were seeking to ensure, as my hon. Friend rightly said, that if better ways to set restrictions appear in the future, the legislation would permit them to be used. I emphasise again that the Opposition failed to recognise that.
Railways
The Department announced on 22 September 2006 the award of the South Western rail franchise to Stagecoach South Western Trains Ltd for a period of 10 years from 4 February 2007, with the final three years dependent on service performance achieving pre-set targets.
How does the Minister reconcile the Department’s claim that the new franchise will reduce overcrowding on South West trains, especially for commuters, with the company’s explanation that it plans to increase the number of passengers by 20 per cent. by reducing the number of seats?
I have to question that comment by the hon. Gentleman. Some £70 million has already been invested in new trains in the South Western franchise, providing an extra 4,500 seats, some of which are already in service. The new franchise will commit Stagecoach to a 21 per cent. main line peak seats increase by the end of the franchise and a 20 per cent. increased capacity on peak-time suburban trains.
Will the Minister congratulate the Conservative-controlled Isle of Wight council on introducing free transport for pensioners on all Isle of Wight railway services and a 50p flat-rate fare for under-19s in full-time education? Will he find out from Stagecoach why, in its most recent glossy publication, it is unable to point to a single benefit to the Isle of Wight railway of uniting the South West Trains and Island Line franchises?
In October 2004, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced that the new South Western trains franchise would incorporate the Island Line unless it was decided that the needs of the Island Line would be better served by a form of community management as set out in the White Paper. Since then, the Island Line has been designated as a community rail line. I said in my written statement to the House:
“The decision on the future of the Island Line has been deferred to allow time for more extensive discussion with key stakeholders as to the most appropriate way forward, and recognising the recent Community Rail designation of the railway.”—[Official Report, 10 October 2006; Vol. 450, c. 21WS.]
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will take part in that consultation process.
Is the Minister aware that South West trains have to pass through Dawlish Warren on the coast of Devon? In spite of £9 million being spent by Network Rail and five full-time members of staff on site, trains are frequently stopped by high water and falling cliffs. Is he thinking of giving Network Rail additional money to bypass Dawlish Warren or of providing special armoured trains so that they can use the track in spite of the falling cliffs and the sea water flowing over it?
I can reveal to the House that there are no plans for armoured trains in the South West franchise at the moment. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to contact me, I will be happy to look into the matter for him. He will be interested to learn that the moving annual average passenger performance level for South West Trains is 90.1 per cent., and that will go up to 93.3 per cent. reliability by the end of the franchise. The current level compares with a national average of 87.6 per cent., so it is an extremely efficient service.
Concessionary Bus Travel
In April this year we introduced free off-peak local bus travel for older and disabled people. As announced in the Queen’s Speech, we will introduce a Bill that will extend that free off-peak travel to anywhere in England from April 2008.
The Government’s commitment to extending concessionary fares to all pensioners is very much appreciated by pensioners in my constituency, but is the Minister aware that Swindon council is one of several that have changed the definition so that the off-peak period now begins at 9.30 am rather than 9 o’clock? That has dismayed my pensioners, who like to get out and about early. Does my hon. Friend know of examples of councils—
Order. That is enough for the Minister to be getting on with.
My hon. Friend is a tireless campaigner for her constituents, more than 16,000 of whom benefit from the Government’s policy of providing free off-peak local bus travel for older and disabled people. The decision to reduce the discretionary element is a matter for Swindon council, although I expect local authorities to consider the needs of their older and disabled residents very carefully before reducing discretionary concessions. I certainly sympathise with my hon. Friend’s constituents.
The Minister said that the scheme will apply only to England, but cross-border travel causes huge problems in my constituency and other areas bordering Wales. What discussions is she having with colleagues in the Welsh Assembly Government to ensure that there is a seamless bus transport system from England into Wales and back again? That would be of great benefit to my constituents.
I can assure the House that discussions have taken place already with the devolved Administrations. I recommend that hon. Members look carefully at the details of the Bill to be introduced in the very near future.
Constitutional Affairs
The Minister of State was asked—
Community Justice Courts
The location of the 10 new community justice courts will be announced shortly by the Lord Chancellor.
My constituency has a remarkably sophisticated and well integrated community network, with close co-operation between residents groups and the police. On Friday, I shall chair a meeting involving residents’ groups from the Dyke House, Stranton and Grange areas and various agencies with a view to tackling problems with drugs. Given the strength of my community, will my right hon. and learned Friend press for Hartlepool to be a pilot area for a community justice court?
The Lord Chancellor will announce details of the new community justice courts shortly, but I should like to pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work that he has been doing in this area, about which he told the House in a debate in June. He is right to point out that the police and other agencies have done a great deal of work with community organisations. Generally speaking, people feel that the courts have yet to come to the party in that respect, and they still need to see how the courts are involved in the delivery of justice. I take my hon. Friend’s point, and there will be an announcement shortly.
Will the Minister explain the difference between a community magistrates court and a community justice court? Would it not have been better for the Government to fund the Crown Prosecution Service so that it could serve magistrates courts properly rather than creating havoc in Macclesfield with the new listing system, which is opposed by magistrates, solicitors, police and everyone involved in the delivery of local justice? I have written to the right hon. and learned Lady, but have not yet received the courtesy of a reply.
I am looking into the situation in Macclesfield and will write to the hon. Gentleman shortly, although the Government have greatly increased the resources going to the CPS. Community justice builds on the best work of magistrates, but there are some additional elements. In the Liverpool community justice centre, for example, local community organisations played a role in choosing the judge, who attends the sort of community reference groups that my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Wright) described. I believe that the community has a role in making proposals to the court about unpaid work sentences. In that way, the people who suffer from crime will be able to be paid back.
From her visit to Plymouth earlier this year, my right hon. and learned Friend will know that there is a good relationship between councillors and the local community safety partnership. Given our track record in successfully using antisocial behaviour orders, dispersal orders and so on, will she consider setting up community justice courts in Plymouth?
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s work with her colleagues in Plymouth and with all the agencies. It involves not only the police, the prosecutors and the courts but the voluntary sector and local authorities. There is a strong mood in the House, and we strongly back it, that the courts, while maintaining their strong independence and judging each case individually, must demonstrate more clearly that they understand the preoccupations of the community, and deliver justice accordingly.
Commercial Court
There are no specific plans to review the rules governing the commercial court. The commercial court users committee is expected to launch a standing sub-committee shortly to make recommendations for changes to the commercial court guide and for improving compliance with the existing terms of that guide.
I am sure that the Minister will agree that the commercial court has been an outstanding success, contributing huge amounts to Britain’s balance of payments through invisible exports. However, there is concern that it is not working as well as it might, and that this will jeopardise our position. Will she reflect on the answer that she just gave me and consider reviewing the rules to ensure that the court runs more efficiently? Will she in particular give attention to the length of trials, which obviously adds to the cost and weakens our competitive position?
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right; the commercial court has been doing some outstanding work and deals often with complex and difficult cases. I hope that I can reassure him by telling him that at the end of October a lively symposium was held, which brought together the judiciary, solicitors, barristers, academics and others, and a sub-committee is to be set up to perform a review. Some of the suggestions made at the symposium included listing cases so that proper reading time is available for the legal profession, limiting the length of witness statements and stricter but realistic timetables for cases. I hope that that goes some way to reassuring the hon. Gentleman that we keep the matter under review.
I declare my interest as a barrister, although not in the commercial court. The Minister will be aware of the litigation involving BCCI and the case brought by the liquidators against the Bank of England. She will have read the judgment of the learned judge, who was highly critical of the liquidators’ misuse of creditors’ money in order to proceed with that case. What lessons can be learned from that case, and can we act on those lessons as quickly as possible rather than wait for a users committee to review the situation?
My right hon. Friend makes some important points. The BCCI case affected many people in a very difficult and negative way. Mr. Justice David Steel, the judge in charge of the commercial court, said that the BCCI case was such an unusual and exceptional case that there were no direct lessons to be learned. However, key stakeholders from the legal commercial sector will be part of the review. I hope that we will be able to identify some of those problems. It is a complex case, and we want to ensure that the right solutions are found. We could not have anticipated just how complex some of the issues are, which is why I welcome the sub-committee.
Sex Trafficking
In my former role as Solicitor-General, and in my current role as Department for Constitutional Affairs member of the inter-ministerial group on sexual offending, I regularly discuss with my ministerial colleagues at the Home Office the treatment of people trafficked into the UK for the purposes of sexual exploitation.
Two hundred years ago, a Bill was about to be introduced to the House of Lords to abolish slavery. Today at Heathrow airport, a person can buy a young woman for between £4,000 and £5,000 to act as their sex slave. There are more than 4,000 such slaves in the country today held against their will, suffering the most appalling violence, intimidation and abuse. Is it not time for the Government to sign the Council of Europe convention on human trafficking to help put to an end this evil trade in human beings?
The question of the directive will be addressed when we produce our action plan on human trafficking. We have been consulting on it and will bring it out in the new year. We have been taking action on human trafficking over a number of years, and the hon. Gentleman describes the problem rightly and clearly. We have to focus on supporting and protecting the victims, but we must tackle the traffickers and prosecute them. We also have to concentrate on the demand side of the sex trade, because women are being brought in for sexual exploitation, often abducted against their will. It is called prostitution but it is actually rape, and we need to look not only at the supply side but also the demand side. We should look at what is being done in other countries to make sure that we do not have the demand that leads to the exploitation of vulnerable women who are trafficked in to be used for sexual purposes by British men.
What progress has my right hon. and learned Friend made on some of the issues that came out of the successful conference in my constituency that she attended to talk about trafficking? In particular, what progress has been made in making sure that agencies liaise so that when women and children in a country are found to have been trafficked they are properly supported and their cases and concerns are properly dealt with?
I thank my hon. Friend for inviting me to that conference in her Northampton constituency. She had involved the Women’s Institute, for which the matter has high priority. One of the WI’s key social objectives is to work with other voluntary organisations, local authorities and agencies on the ground to highlight the problem of the trafficking of young women and children and to stamp it out, so progress is very much under way. I can remember the first time I heard the words “human trafficking”; the phenomenon is relatively recent in terms of its extent as one of the evil undersides of globalisation, but we have recognised the problem and are taking strong action against it.
Is the Minister aware that if a trafficked woman seeks refuge she gets a raw deal in this country? As a nation, we are not responding to the Human Rights Act 1998 and giving those women the protection we should give them. Does she agree?
I agree that protection is patchy. It is not as good as we want in all areas, although I want to mention the Poppy project. In some areas, if a young woman is referred to the Poppy project she will be really well looked after and protected and, in turn, is likely to help the criminal justice and immigration agencies to tackle the source of the problem. We want to make absolutely sure that there is good support for victims across the board, but the other thing we need to do from this country—and are increasingly doing—is send a clear message to perpetrators from other countries who want to get into trafficking that there will be severe sentences for those who are caught.
When I was Solicitor-General I referred to the Court of Appeal a case in which the sentence was 11 years; the Court fully understood the message that needed to be sent and increased the sentence for that offender to 23 years and stripped them of their assets all through Europe. It is right that the House should focus on the issue. We have introduced new criminal offences to tackle trafficking, but we must be vigilant and we must also look at the demand side. Many of us find that difficult to contemplate, but we have to face up to it.
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree with the recent report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights that we should see trafficked women not as criminals and immigration offenders but as the victims of a serious crime, and that we should introduce reflection periods to enable them to come to terms with being a victim of crime? In relation to the Poppy project, which we visited during our inquiry, does she agree that we must ensure that there is long-term, secure funding and an expansion of the scheme, as it provides only 25 beds at any one time?
I agree with my hon. Friend. The Poppy project has been very useful, not only in helping the individual women whom it looks after but in working out what more needs to be done, and guiding and helping the Government to develop public policy. The Home Office says that it deals with the immigration status of victims of trafficking on a case-by-case basis. But as my hon. Friend knows, we have been consulting on that, as part of the development of our UK action plan on human trafficking, in which the Joint Committee on Human Rights has played a key part, and further information will be coming forward shortly.
Is it true that immigration officials recently warned Ministers that every week more than 100 unaccompanied children are illegally brought into the UK? Is the right hon. and learned Lady also aware of the various cases documented by the Soroptimists, including one case of a girl who escaped sex slavery and went to her local GP, who referred her to the police, who brought in social services, who referred the girl to the housing authority, who then referred the girl back to social services? That shows a total lack of co-ordination. Surely that tragic case illustrates the need for a national strategy for dealing with trafficking victims.
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new position; I am sure that he will make a very good contribution in that role. He makes an important point about unaccompanied children. Sometimes when unaccompanied children arrive in this country they are here for perfectly normal and innocent reasons, such as visiting a family member, but sometimes they are not, and unaccompanied children are very vulnerable indeed. Sometimes they are referred to social services and put in foster care, only to fall into the hands of their traffickers again. The problem is incredibly difficult to deal with but the hon. Gentleman is right to say that what really matters is proper co-ordination. If a child is passed from one agency to another, not only is that difficult and traumatic but sometimes the child is picked up again by the traffickers.
The hon. Gentleman is right to bring this matter to the attention of the House. I shall be happy to meet him to further discuss our approach to child trafficking, and I look forward to his making a contribution as we develop policy on it.
FOI Complaints
The Information Commissioner received 4,599 Freedom of Information Act complaints between 1 January 2005 and 31 October 2006.
I am grateful to the Minister for her answer. She will have read the Select Committee report “Freedom of Information—one year on”. The Constitutional Affairs Committee received evidence that people had
“waited months for the Information Commissioner to start investigating their complaints.”
In the conclusion to that report, the Committee said that her Department should be taking
“a more proactive role in ensuring that Government Departments co-operate fully with the Commissioner”.
What steps has she taken since 28 June, when that report was issued, to ensure just that?
There was a backlog during 2005, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman is well aware, and another £100,000 was given very quickly to the Information Commissioner to help him get that backlog under control. Since then he has had an extra 11 per cent.—£850,000—in 2006-07 for the same purpose, and we are in discussions with him about how to optimise those processes to speed them up.
I was last asked questions on this subject only a little over a month ago, when it was pointed out to me that there were in particular some difficulties with health authorities. One of the hon. Gentleman’s Back-Bench colleagues had sent a lot of requests that had not been responded to. Since then, I have caused a reminder to go out to those authorities in particular, that we do expect prompt results. If this is not moving too tangentially away from what the hon. Gentleman said, the Information Commissioner has announced that he is going to strengthen his enforcement strategy. I think he previously wanted cultural change and guidance to work, but now, where recalcitrant local authorities and “persistent offenders”, as he puts it, in the public sector are not responding, he will serve enforcement notices and use his powers.
A real issue, and a cause of concern to the Information Commissioner, is that the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not cover those functions formerly of local authorities that were transferred to trusts such as Stockport Sports Trust, which is now making decisions behind closed doors. Does the Minister agree that changes to freedom of information rules are required to bring such bodies into line with those provisions and similar ones, such as the access to information provisions in the Local Government Act 1972?
My hon. Friend makes a strong point. I think that he has made it before, and I agreed with him then, as I do now, that just because we have brought 110,000 public bodies within the ambit of this provision does not mean that we have gone as far as we need to go. There is an analogous problem with the application of the Human Rights Act 1998 to the private suppliers who deliver public functions, and I assure my hon. Friend that the Government are looking into those problems.
As the Minister knows, it is important that her Department set an example in the field of freedom of information, as it is the responsible Department. She has stressed—she did so last month—how committed Ministers are to that. So why does her Department have a worse record than any other in granting freedom of information requests, even when the information is readily available? The average rate for all Departments is 62 per cent. but the Department for Constitutional Affairs has never managed to answer even half of such requests, and in the most recent quarter it scored a miserable 38 per cent. If the Department for Transport can have a result of 78 per cent. of requests answered where the issue is resolvable, why is the DCA such a sink Department in this area? Is it not time that it got its act together?
I dare say that, because it is full of lawyers, the Department is careful and cautious in its responses and it takes its time. In fact, over the last quarter 92 per cent. of all Government requests were responded to in time—they met the statutory deadline or a permitted deadline extension—and I reckon that 92 per cent. is rather a good proportion.
BILL PRESENTED
Statistics and Registration Service
Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, supported by the Prime Minister, Mr. Jack Straw, Hilary Armstrong, Mr. Secretary Hain, Secretary Alan Johnson, Secretary Ruth Kelly, Mr. Secretary Alexander, Mr. Stephen Timms, Dawn Primarolo, John Healey and Ed Balls, presented a Bill to establish and make provision about the Statistics Board; to make provision about offices and office-holders under the Registration Service Act 1953; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed. Explanatory notes to be printed [Bill 8].