Object.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement about the publication of regional guidance for those bidding under the single regeneration budget. [444]

We will publish further guidance to spell out the principles on which the fourth round of the single regeneration budget will be taken forward. Those principles are a requirement that proposals should contribute to our commitment to attack the multiple causes of economic and social decline; a greater emphasis on tackling need; and a requirement that proposals take account of existing strategies for promoting economic development and tackling deprivation.

May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment to all three of his new posts? I am sure that he will serve in all of them with great distinction. May I also welcome the Government's emphasis on the regional nature of their guidance? I hope that this is the beginning of a process that will bring an end to the lottery system that has pitted our towns and cities against one another in an unfair competition, and has resulted in great hardship for those who have not been successful. When my right hon. Friend publishes his guidance, will he ensure that it is as accurate and as detailed as possible to make up for the shambles and chaos that has been the hallmark of the Conservative Government's regeneration policies in the past 18 years?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. He has established a considerable reputation on the issue of urban regeneration. I attended many of the conferences that he helped to organise. I assure him that we will not entertain the sort of beauty contest that we had for regeneration schemes under the previous Administration. We are more concerned about how our policy can be developed in the regions, how we should deal with need and the consequences for urban regeneration schemes of the release of capital receipts. Our criteria will be different.

Will the new guidance include guidance on regional selective assistance? Will the Secretary of State tell the House whether he has succeeded or failed in his attempt to take that responsibility by mugging the President of the Board of Trade?

Our regional schemes will reflect the importance that we attach to regional development, as was shown by our announcement on regional development agencies. That is one of the clear differences between the policies of the current Government and those of the previous Administration. As to whether grants cause any problems between my right hon. Friend and me, that is merely press gossip. It is easy to reach agreement on these matters to ensure that we have a proper regional policy, so as to achieve greater prosperity in the regions and to get more people back to work. There are regional development agencies for Scotland and Wales, but they were denied to the English regions by the previous Government.

When my right hon. Friend reviews the single regeneration budget, will he take into consideration the devastating effect that the pit closure programme has had on many regions? Will he also consider whether the coal-mining industry could be developed in some of the areas in which coal mines have been closed? There is a golden opportunity to create jobs in those areas. There is room for discussion on the development of the coal-mining industry. We should end the lottery of the single regeneration budget. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that areas of gross deprivation are given serious consideration in any changes that he introduces?

Yes, I can assure my hon. Friend that that is what we will want to do.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what role he envisages for parish councils in rural areas. [445]

Parish councils have two main roles: to represent community views and to deliver important local services. They are of particular value in representing and serving small, tightly knit communities in rural areas.

Given the Government's clear attack on country pursuits and the rural way of life, may I tell the Minister how much my constituents welcome the recent extension of powers for parish councils in rural areas? They believe that the new powers are the essence of local democracy, and they certainly do not want a regional assembly for East Anglia which would be costly for the taxpayer and would constitute yet another layer of bureaucracy.

Many myths continue to prevail on the Opposition Benches. Perhaps Opposition Members will eventually learn that many people in rural areas voted for Members of Parliament who now sit on the Government Benches.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what representations he has received from local authorities regarding the phased release of council house sale receipts. [446]

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on his proposals to release the capital receipts from the sale of council houses. [447]

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans he has to release capital receipts for housing. [448]

The Local Government (Supplementary Credit Approvals) Bill lays the basis for the Government's capital receipts initiative. The Bill itself is simply an enabling measure that provides for previously set aside capital receipts to be taken into account when supplementary credit approvals are issued. A consultation document, which will be available shortly, will set out our detailed implementation proposals. We will be considering all representations received during that consultation exercise very carefully. A number of local authorities, however, have already written expressing their support for the initiative.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on both his appointment and his Bill. Many local authorities will welcome the Bill, as it will give them an opportunity to build houses for rent, to modernise old housing stock and to provide many building workers with real jobs in the community to help to alleviate unemployment. Can my right hon. Friend say how many housing starts he expects in the forthcoming terms of the Labour Government, so that we may compare the Labour Government's record of success with the abject failure of the Conservative Government?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. I assure him that those idle resources can now be used effectively to put people to work and to build houses for those in the community. The measure of the success of that, in terms of both housing and putting people to work, will soon be clearly evident to all who study the position. The amount of resources that will be available—phased in over a period—will be determined in the Budget, and we must therefore wait for the Budget.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his announcement about capital receipts, which is long overdue. People in my constituency, Harlow, have been waiting for 18 years to hear it. I know from experience in my constituency—and, indeed, from work undertaken recently by the School for Advanced Urban Studies and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation—that people are more likely to remain unemployed, particularly young people, if they are trained only up to NVQ2 level. To get secure long-term employment, training to at least NVQ3 level is necessary. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the release of council receipts will be tied in some way to training provision and NVQ qualifications so that people in my constituency and elsewhere will get the benefit not only of new and renovated homes but of an important step along the road of the Government's programme for welfare into work?

The best questions are the very short ones.

My hon. Friend makes an important point which will condition the phasing of the resources. The shortage of skills in the building industry requires to be addressed. We are short of every kind of skill, and that is the legacy of 18 years of Tory government. I assure my hon. Friend that the money will provide not only jobs and homes but will be used to train our people in the proper skills so that they can contribute to providing jobs.

I also warmly congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment. Does he agree that his answers have confirmed the importance that we attach to improving our social housing sector? They will be a welcome boost to the building industry in my constituency and good news for the thousands of families in the Furness area who live in local authority homes.

They will be good news, and I agree with a great deal of what my hon. Friend says. Releasing such resources gives the Government a great opportunity to make changes in various areas. Those changes may be to the quality of houses or to the quality of production in the industry. They will also make a difference to the number of people who are available for training in building industries. The opportunity provided for the industry is that we will be able to guarantee resources over a longer time than the industry would normally expect for its housing programme. That will give a firm start to a good programme for houses and jobs.

Can the Secretary of State confirm that the use of capital receipts will represent an increase in public expenditure on current published totals? What will be the effect of their use on the public sector borrowing requirement?

I think that that was supplementary question No.2 in the document that was given to Conservative Back Benchers. [Interruption.] Clearly, the use of those receipts will lead to an increase in public expenditure, and we shall have close discussions with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on that matter. Make no mistake about it: we fought an election on the receipts being released to improve housing. That will happen, and in five years the public will judge us not only on public expenditure but on decent housing and on getting people back to work. Those are our criteria.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Bill that he mentioned is a Great Britain Bill rather than a United Kingdom one. There is also a housing problem in Northern Ireland, especially about repairs. What discussions has he initiated with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to ensure that the benefits that will flow from that Bill are also applied in the Province?

Capital receipts in Wales, for example, will be dealt with by the Secretary of State for Wales. They are dealt with differently in Scotland where there will be separate discussions between the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland will also conduct such discussions with the Chancellor.

The right hon. Gentleman describes the receipts as idle resources. Does he agree that they generate interest which helps to defray interest on outstanding local government loans or, alternatively, help to reduce council tax? If they are spent, the inevitable consequence of the loss of interest is that tax will go up.

Those are the matters of concern which we are discussing with the Chancellor. The constant concerns of Conservative Members are interest payments and money. We are concerned about jobs and houses, and that is the fundamental difference between us.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the phased release of capital receipts from the sale of council houses will be welcomed throughout the country, not just for the reasons given, but because it will give local authorities the opportunity to refurbish housing stock that has design deficiencies and that, in many cases, has been waiting far too many years for refurbishment? There are examples of that in my constituency. I am sure that councils would also welcome clarification on whether the rules on the spending of those receipts apply in the same way to accumulated receipts as to future receipts.

Like many hon. Members, I have buildings in my constituency that have not been constructed to proper standards and cause great problems. It causes great offence to our constituents when we tell them that we cannot do anything, despite money being available in the accounts. We intend to release it so that we can say to our constituents, "The resources are there. We will put unemployed building workers to work to provide you with housing and refurbishment." This is about quality housing and that is what we intend to have.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman about future receipts? Will a proportion of the receipts have to be set aside by local authorities, or will they be able to spend them?

Again, the amounts of money that are available to local authorities to spend will be in our proposals on the phased release. It will be depend on those discussions. The amount available in total per year will be divided accordingly. We will make those decisions in good time and inform hon. Members in good time, when we produce the Bill.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will introduce measures to increase the total standard spending assessments in areas of high unemployment. [449]

We will introduce measures that will lead to a fairer distribution of grant. Unemployment currently forms part of the economic index used in the calculation of standard spending assessments. That is one of the aspects of SSAs that we are reviewing this year, and we have notified the Local Government Association that we will do so in consultation with the assn. The Government are also committed to supporting areas of high unemployment through the welfare-to-work programme.

Does my hon. Friend recall that, when we were a party of protest for 18 years and sat on the Opposition Benches, we used to regale the Tories and anyone else who cared to listen about the fact that Westminster and Wandsworth were getting money that should have gone to areas of high unemployment and to city areas that were deprived of money? Now that we are no longer a party of protest but a party of power, will my hon. Friend give guarantees, alongside those that he has already given, that areas of high unemployment, such as coalfield areas, will benefit and that places such as Westminster will not get the sort of money that they have received in the past?

My hon. Friend makes a fair point. Most fair-minded observers are shocked by a system that ensures that Westminster, which contains some of the most affluent areas in our country, features at number four in the social index ranking, whereas Bolsover features only in 322nd position. That is clearly not a just arrangement and we certainly intend to re-examine Westminster's treatment by the previous Administration.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the fact that not only urban areas but rural areas suffer from unfairness? One of the major unfairnesses is the area cost adjustment. Will he reopen the review on the basis not of Professor Elliott's review, which, when asked the wrong question produced the wrong answer, but of a fair reflection of the costs of unemployment?

The hon. Gentleman makes a valid point about one of the many intricacies of the local government finance system and he will not be surprised to know that we have entered into discussions with the Local Government Association about a range of issues; indeed we have mentioned the area cost adjustment. However, complex considerations need to be considered carefully and he will understand that we are going to do that before reaching any firm decision on the matter.

I welcome my hon. Friend to his post. In addition to looking at areas of high unemployment with the change in formula, will he look at areas with high ethnic minority populations to ensure that they get a fair share of the redistribution of grant?

My hon. Friend will be aware that the presence of significant numbers of people from ethnic minorities is one of the factors taken into account in the indices used to calculate SSAs. It is one of the considerations that indicate a need for expenditure by local authorities. Clearly, in our review of those indices, we are considering that factor along with the other factors, in particular the issue of unemployment to which my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) referred.

Will the hon. Gentleman give the House the assurance that if a local authority's SSA reduces because of a change in methodology, that decline will be limited by damping and will he confirm that he will continue the established practice of limiting the reduction to a maximum of 2 per cent?

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we have already mentioned the issue of damping in our preliminary discussions. No decisions have been reached and we will need to discuss all those concerns much more fully with the relevant bodies, in particular the Local Government Association, before we reach final decisions on the review that we are currently undertaking.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he plans to begin a process of consultation leading to greater access to the countryside. [450]

In our manifesto, we made it clear that our policies for the countryside include greater freedom for people to explore our open countryside. We are considering the options for giving effect to our policies, and we intend to issue a consultation paper on our proposals in the summer. The principle of access is not negotiable, but we shall take full account of views expressed about how it should be put into effect. We shall make sure that the measures we introduce are practical and of lasting benefit to the people of this country.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to this important subject. Will he pursue this path with vigour, but be mindful of the obstacles that lie in the way, some of which have been frustrating legislation since 1884? In view of that, will he consult widely so that a balanced view can be reached which listens to all the voices that make demands on the countryside?

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his long-term interest in the subject and his experience last year with his Access to the Countryside Bill. That is experience on which we are building. I take my hon. Friend's point and that is why we have said that we will set in hand a full consultation which will extend through the summer. We will be inviting submissions up to the end of November. We will be listening carefully to all interests because I am aware that this is politically contentious. Having listened to all those interests and sought to achieve the best consensus we can, we will bring forward legislation, but I believe that it will not be in this Session.

Does the hon. Gentleman support the right to roam?

Yes.

Will my hon. Friend accept that the best way that people in the countryside, particularly those such as the Country Landowners Association and others, could carry forward the debate would be to encourage far more voluntary access agreements in the next 12 months? That would show good intent on their part and might make negotiations between all the parties much easier.

My hon. Friend is right. I am glad to say that the Country Landowners Association has already provided an initiative by extending voluntary access in a number of cases. I hope to talk to the CLA shortly about the success of those initiatives so that we can build on them. It is also important to look at how those voluntary initiatives, which have been willingly agreed and entered into, can be fitted into the nationwide pattern of access that we are now intending.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on the Government's programme for enhancing biodiversity. [451]

The Government are fully committed to carrying forward the work of the biodiversity convention, both domestically and internationally. In the UK, our immediate priorities are the implementation of the published species and habitat action plans and the provision of further guidance on local biodiversity action plans. Internationally, the UK has a significant aid programme in support of biodiversity objectives and we will be hosting an international biodiversity workshop in the autumn.

I thank the hon. Lady for her answer. Will she remember, arising from the earlier exchanges, that the interests of biodiversity and access are not always identical? Can the hon. Lady bring herself to pay an appropriate tribute to my right hon. and hon. Friends, particularly my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) for his efforts at the Rio summit and for introducing the biodiversity initiative in this country? Will she also pay tribute to local interests such as non-governmental organisations and the voluntary sector as well as local authorities for taking these matters forward?

I thank the hon. Gentleman. I am only too happy to pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal for the work that he did in this important area. However, success depends on partnerships at both national and local level. While we are delivering the 116 endangered species action plans and the habitat protection plans, we must remember that there are other important issues, such as the reform of the common agricultural policy and global pollution and we will be taking action on those matters in the next few months. I look forward to the Opposition's support in all those areas.

In the approach to the United Nations General Assembly special session, one contentious issue for developing countries will be the lack of financial support from the developed world for their work on biodiversity. Will the Minister work with the Department for International Development to secure additional funds for that work from the United Kingdom? We could then play a leading role in taking forward biodiversity internationally and in helping those developing countries, rather than simply watching them destroy the natural rain forests and other unique habitats.

Partnership at both national and global level is crucial if there is to be reasonable progress. My Department is already working closely with the new Department for International Development to take forward the important issues referred to by the hon. Gentleman, with whose observations I agree. Work is continuing and I hope that it will reach a reasonable conclusion at many of the international forums to which we will be contributing over the next year and beyond.

Will the hon. Lady deal with the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) about how she believes it will be possible easily to enhance greater biodiversity in, for example, the uplands of Britain if there is to be unrestrained access?

The hon. Gentleman is exaggerating—in line with his very exaggerated personality—the implications of the right to roam as expressed by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment in his earlier answer. We are talking not about unrestricted access, but about access to the countryside—with that right to access being balanced by a responsibility to look after the countryside when one is in it. We are undertaking extensive consultation on the matter. The hon. Gentleman should not exaggerate to make a point.

I congratulate the hon. Lady on her appointment and thank her for her generous tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, Coastal, which I believe was appropriate.

I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that I agree with much of what he said and also to confirm my earlier tribute. I was interested to discover that the Darwin initiative is, as we speak, exporting British knowledge and expertise. For example, it is currently involved in a scheme for the sustainable support of—[Interruption.] No, not birds, but seahorses in the Philippines.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will ensure that areas of outstanding natural beauty and other sensitive areas are protected from the effects of commercial development in the form of mobile telephone masts. [452]

The Government are committed to protecting the environment, particularly areas of outstanding natural beauty and other protected areas where development can be intrusive. In my Department's "Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications", we encourage local planning authorities to propose specific policies in their development plans for siting telecommunications development, having regard to the Department's guidance on the need to protect the environment.

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his appointment and thank him for his response. May I also press him—as I pressed Ministers in the previous Government—on the concerns expressed in my constituency over imminent development, pending a planning inquiry, in what is known as Constable country? Does he agree that development of telecommunications masts in that area would be inappropriate? Will he stand by the assurance given by his predecessor that masts, even if they are sited outside an AONB, should be a material consideration for the planning inquiry to consider if they loom over an AONB?

I can understand the hon. Gentleman's concern, as he has long been campaigning on that issue. He will know that the previous Government initiated consultation. That is now almost complete, and the results should be on my desk in the next few weeks. I shall ensure that my Department corresponds with him on the findings. It would be wrong for me to intervene now in any planning inquiry, but I shall consider seriously any results that I receive. There should be discussions with the industry on whether we can rationalise some of the carrying equipment so that there is joint rather than single use, which I know has been one of his concerns.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on his plans to develop a national air transport strategy. [474]

The Government will pursue aviation policies that support United Kingdom industry and benefit the consumer. Over the coming weeks, I shall be examining the role of aviation within our overall transport policies.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply and I add my congratulations on his appointment. I am sure that he will acknowledge the significance of regional airports as an important part of the nation's transport infrastructure. Will he therefore ensure that their importance across the UK and internationally is rightly reflected in his aviation strategy?

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind remarks and I can assure him that the regional dimension of most decisions—whether they are on the environment or transport issues—will be considered very seriously. Regional airports have a major part to play and they were identified in the 1985 airports policy White Paper. We are continuing to ensure that they play an important part in UK aviation policy.

In his strategy, does the Deputy Prime Minister recognise the threat to our environment caused by the increase in air travel? Does he realise that a key factor in controlling that environmental impact is control and management of surface access to airports? In his strategy, does he therefore have plans to limit surface access by private cars—belonging not only to passengers but to staff—and to direct investment into attractive and affordable public transport links to our airports? Specifically, does he plan to switch investment from the proposed widening of the M25 to rejuvenating the much-desired crossrail project?

Those are serious questions in any transport policy review and the connection between aviation, rail and road—the aspects of any integrated policy—must be considered. I hope soon to make a statement on what we mean by an integrated transport policy. [Laughter.] Yes, those have often been used as buzzwords, often by Conservative Members, but we intend to define their meaning. If any satisfaction can be found in controlling the environmental problems that have resulted from the Conservatives' privatisation of the public transport system, it is absolutely essential that we do so. The M25 widening and a spur to terminal 5 are important issues and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport will be commenting on the review of the roads programme. We wish, however, to connect and improve public transport to our airports as much as we want to improve access by motor vehicles.

I welcome the members of the new transport team to their first Transport Questions and congratulate Ministers on their appointments. On air transport, will the Deputy Prime Minister now resolve the total confusion that arose during the general election campaign over the Labour party's policy on national air traffic control? Does he plan to privatise it or not?

I am grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's kind comments about me and the team. The confusion arose from the previous Government's original decision that no statement was to be made about air traffic control until the House had been informed about any public interest and safety. As the right hon. Gentleman wholly failed to make such a statement, we are making that assessment. A decision will be made at the appropriate time.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on current levels of investment in the trunk road and motorway systems. [475]

Provision for investment in improvement and maintenance of the trunk roads network in England for 1997–98 is some £1,491 million net. We are, however, committed to carrying out a strategic review of the trunk roads programme.

In view of the importance of road infrastructure investment, especially to a strong and growing economy inherited from the previous Government, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that spending pledges made before 1 May will be honoured? Will he reassure my constituents in Cheshire and people elsewhere that the widening of the M6 will go ahead as planned on time?

I am a little surprised at the hon. Lady's remarks. She was a supporter of a Government who massively cut the roads programme, not on the basis of an objective analysis of the relative merits of various schemes but on the basis of a need simply to cut public expenditure. I assure her that we shall adopt a much more balanced approach to those matters. We shall take into account a range of factors and we shall certainly stand by all the pledges that we gave during the general election campaign.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, despite what the hon. Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton) said, many people are opposed to the widening of the M6, not only on environmental grounds but on strategic ones relating to the road network, especially around the north of Birmingham? Is my right hon. Friend also aware that, while the outcome of the discussions is awaited, the money spent on widening the M6 could be more usefully spent on modernising the west coast main line, which is next to the M6?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. Those are important decisions and I can assure him that we shall be taking into account accessibility, safety, economy and, as he said, perhaps above all, the environmental impact.

I must acknowledge in all fairness that these are early days, but will the Minister give us some flavour of his own thinking on the possibility of urban and inter-urban motorway and trunk road pricing as a way of securing investment?

The hon. Gentleman will accept that, in the first instance, we have to carry out a fundamental review of the roads programme. Of course, when it comes to spending on roads, and especially public transport as we are determined to have an integrated transport policy, we shall have to examine a range of issues.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to review the proposed widening of the M25. [476]

The widening of the M25 between junctions 8 and 10, which is under construction, will continue. We intend to announce shortly our proposals for reviewing the trunk roads programme, including other M25 schemes.

I greatly welcome the review, but will my right hon. Friend give a specific commitment that, should the grotesque proposed widening of the M25 to 10 lanes between junctions 12 and 14 and to 12 lanes between junctions 14 and 15 proceed, at his instruction, it will be, in contrast to what happened before, the subject of a planning inquiry which was denied the objectors by the previous Government? It is crucial that there should be scrutiny and accountability. In the meantime, will the grotesque widening proposals be the subject of the review to which my right hon. Friend just referred?

The issue is the review into those major trunkways. We shall make an announcement about that review. When we have made those decisions, other matters relating to whether planning inquiries go ahead will depend on the judgment of the review.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister consider the effect of Heathrow-bound traffic on the density of traffic in the M25 area, particularly to the west of London? Will he bear in mind both the possibility of a fifth terminal bringing yet more traffic on to the M25 if it is approved and the need for improved rail access, even after the completion of the high-speed link to Paddington, westwards to Langley and the west country and south-eastwards to Waterloo and beyond?

With his specialised knowledge of the aviation industry, the hon. Gentleman puts his finger on an important point about connections to airports. The widening of the M25 near the spur to the Heathrow terminal is an important issue, although it is not directly connected to the inquiry. I shall have to consider the proposals that come out of the terminal 5 inquiry. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport will consider the review of the widening of the M25. The important point is to ask whether we can integrate better and use other forms of public connections to railways, and not only for Heathrow. We shall put our minds to those issues, which are essential for anyone who believes in an integrated transport policy.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to assist electrification of the main railway line from Paddington to south Wales and the west. [477]

The United Kingdom has secured £0.65 million of European Union funding for a study of potential improvements to the Great Western line. The study is being carried out by Railtrack and is already under way. The Government are committed to the railway network being run in the public interest with higher levels of investment and we are considering how best to achieve that.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her new job. Will she confirm that the service between London Paddington and Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea is the last major inter-city line in western Europe that uses diesel, not electricity? The GWR company can improve its livery, but it cannot improve delivery under the current technology. Does she agree that, until it goes electric, the initials GWR will stand, not, as they did in the old days, for God's wonderful railway, but for a godawful woeful railway?

I thank my hon. Friend for his welcome. I reiterate our central commitment to ensuring that the vast amounts of public money that are still going to our railways should produce the best quality public services. My understanding is that, as part of a 10-year plan, Great Western Trains will invest up to £30 million to deliver a more flexible rolling stock fleet. It is part of our commitment to creating a genuine public service on our railways that all franchisees will be closely monitored to ensure that they meet the commitments that they have given.

Will the Minister explain how the higher levels of investment to which she has just committed herself will be assisted by a windfall tax on Railtrack?

I find it astonishing that the right hon. Gentleman, who, as Secretary of State for Transport, oversaw the profligate waste of taxpayers' money on rail privatisation, including £450 million for consultancy fees alone, should make such a point. I repeat that the Government are committed to the vast amounts of public money that are still going into our railway system being used to produce the highest quality services.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to encourage environmentally sustainable transport policies. [478]

Protection and enhancement of the environment will be at the heart of our approach to government. We shall develop an integrated transport policy designed to provide genuine choice to meet people's future needs in line with our overall goal of environmentally sustainable economic and social development.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that one of the best ways to promote sustainability is through greater use of market instruments?

People in any of our major cities around the country, which have been subjected to the privatisation of the bus services, leading to the choking of much of our city space, will not agree with that policy. Integration of our transport system means a better use of public and private transportation and will be better for the environment. When we make our statement on integration, the hon. Gentleman will be able to make a judgment on it.

What plans does my right hon. Friend have to encourage alternative forms of transport to work other than the car, especially in view of the fact that the previous Administration ran down public transport, particularly buses, in such a shameful fashion?

The House will be glad to see my hon. Friend in her place today in view of the unfortunate accident she suffered on the London underground. Both sides of the House will agree that we must do as much as we can to improve the safety of transport; that will be at the heart of our approach. Improving safety is one important aspect on which we shall spend some time.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he expects to publish new plans for the proposed M4-A34 interchange at Chieveley. [479]

In view of the strategic review of the roads programme, it is too early to say what our plans for this interchange will be.

Does the Minister accept that although this interchange programme is not needed for the Newbury bypass, it will have a significant effect in my area in that there is an increase in rat running down the B4000 through Stockcross and down the A4 through Thatcham to get to the interchanges on either side of interchange 13? Therefore, the sooner that we go ahead with this programme, the better.

I hear what the hon. Gentleman says; I know of the interest he has taken in the matter. As he knows, a national scheme was published for the improvement of the interchange, but, because it is envisaged that it will be a long time before the scheme is started—as the hon. Gentleman would expect, the interchange will be part of the review—there will be an impact on the timing of any interim improvement scheme for the roundabout.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what steps he plans to take to encourage greater use of railways in East Sussex; and if he will make a statement. [480]

Our objective for the whole of the passenger network is to see more people travelling by rail. We want higher levels of investment, proper enforcement of train operators' service commitments and all the benefits of having a national railway network. We are considering what action is necessary to achieve those things.

Does the Minister recognise that, under the previous Government, money spent on roads was called investment whereas money spent on rail was called subsidy? There is a need to redress that balance. Is she aware that, in my constituency of Lewes, there is considerable potential for increased rail traffic, especially along the corridor from Lewes to Polegate, where the previous Government identified a multi-million-pound dual carriageway scheme, but had no plans for the railway? Will she work with me to secure investment in the local railway system and cheaper fares for the public? In view of the great importance of transport issues for my constituents, will she or the Secretary of State agree to an early meeting with me to discuss the issues in more detail?

To answer the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question, yes, I should be delighted to have a meeting with him. I well remember my visit to his constituency before the general election. I am aware that there is great popular feeling in his constituency about the extension of what people regard as existing infrastructure which could be patched in to the main line. I would be very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans his Department has to ensure that trains coming from the channel tunnel will be able to (a) continue north of London and (b) link with modernised services to (i) Scotland, (ii) Wales and (iii) the north of England. [481]

I understand that London and Continental Railways, owners of Eurostar UK Ltd., plans to start regional channel tunnel services to and from Paris this year.

I welcome my hon. Friend to her new starring role. Does she share my concern that, on the information I have, there will be no link between Manchester and Glasgow on the west coast line for the Eurostar service? Can she give the people and businesses of Scotland, Wales and northern England some assurance that the franchise company now running the former British Rail services will provide a rail track north of London that will be capable of bearing the speeds that are expected from the Eurotunnel-London rail link?

I thank my hon. Friend for his greeting, albeit that I believe that I have a supporting as opposed to a starring role. We are extremely pleased that LCR lodged an application in January for a Transport and Works Act 1992 order. The application is to deal with the proposed new station at Stratford and its commitment to ensuring that Eurostar trains can, indeed, service our regions. That is inherent in the application for the order, which also carries with it a commitment to build a spur from the west coast main line to the channel tunnel rail link.

Does the hon. Lady recognise that it is not only Scotland, Wales and the north, where the Labour strongholds are, that have an interest in Eurostar services, but the south-west of England, especially my constituency of Bournemouth?

I reassure the hon. Gentleman that this Government came to power committed to govern for most of the people, regardless of where they live.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her appointment. Does she agree that it is necessary for people to be able to buy tickets easily for Eurostar trains that go north of London? Through ticketing should be available and it should be possible for the public to use the trains that go through the tunnel to travel between different parts of the United Kingdom, instead of being able to get on them only at Crewe, Manchester or Birmingham. We need a much more easily used railway system than we have at present for such services to be a success.

My hon. Friend makes a point that the whole Government strongly endorse. We are committed to ensuring that we have linkages that facilitate the ease of passengers, on trains and throughout a multi-modal system. We shall work with everyone concerned to produce that situation soon. One philosophical difference between this Government and the Tories is that we believe that public transport modes should co-operate, not compete, with each other for the benefit of the travelling public.

In the light of that philosophy, will the Minister consider seriously the electrification of the east coast main line to Aberdeen, which is another intercity link that is connected only by diesel to Europe? Is she aware that electrification would greatly increase the chance of piggyback freight and other forms of freight using the rail link?

I repeat that the Government are committed to seeing greater levels of investment in our railway network. My understanding is that Railtrack Freight is already conducting an inquiry into the possibilities of piggyback. When it finishes that survey, it will be presented to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and our auditors will look at it.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he expects the M66 from Denton to Middleton to open. [483]

As I said earlier, we are committed to a strategic review of the trunk road programme. A key early decision will be on how to handle those schemes at or near construction, of which the M66 scheme is a prime example.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that there was great disappointment in Tameside at the delay in letting the final contract for the scheme? The traffic congestion caused by the failure to complete it has caused great anxiety to my constituents. Will he give an assurance that it will be completed at an early date?

My hon. Friend is right and I am well aware of the importance, to Manchester and surrounding areas, of the scheme, which would effectively complete an outer-city bypass for Manchester. He has taken a great interest in the scheme and I assure him that we shall soon announce those schemes on which we shall have to take decisions in advance of the review.

How will the Minister justify continuing to answer for the Government on English roads as a Scottish Member of Parliament, when he supports proposals that would deny any say to Welsh and English Members on roads in Scotland? Does he think that that is a sustainable proposition?

This is the United Kingdom Parliament, which includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and I am privileged to serve in it.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what proposals he has to review existing maximum speed limits. [484]

Speed contributes to a third of all road accidents. I am concerned to reduce its impact and I shall consider a range of measures to manage speed, including speed limits.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to his new post. Is he aware of the increasing numbers of people, especially the elderly, who are effectively trapped in their own homes, as they are unable to cross nearby roads because of the speed and intensity of local traffic? Will he consider the proposal made by one of his predecessors, as an Opposition spokesman, to reduce speed limits outside all schools to 20 mph, which would immediately improve the safety of many children and young people?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who raises a number of very important points. I should point out to him—this covers part of what he said—that the failure to observe the 30 mph speed limit in our urban areas is of particular concern. That speed limit is frequently ignored and often a contributor to accidents.

Given that the speed limit on motorways is only 70 mph but on winding roads in Dorset, for instance, it is 60 mph, should we not be considering raising the maximum speed limit on motorways and other such roads and bringing some sense to what seems a nonsensical set of speed limits?

I cannot see a case for raising speed limits. Something like a third of all accidents are caused by excessive speed. Road accident statistics for 1996 have not yet been published, but in 1995, 1,200 people were killed in accidents associated with speeding.