If he will make a statement on the Government's proposals for determining the standard spending assessment settlement for local authorities for 2000–01. [99006]

I was pleased to announce to the House last week that we have again provided a generous increase in grant for local authorities, which will enable them to continue to pursue with vigour their policies and the Government's priorities for action.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Is she aware that in authorities such as mine in Rotherham there is strong support for the principle of the three-year freeze in SSA changes and for the longer-term finance review? Will she give particular consideration in that review to the treatment of capital financing? Will she condemn last week's comments by councillor Peter Chalke, leader of the Tory county councils network? He said that the

"settlement demonstrates that the Labour Government is the enemy of the countryside."

I think that Councillor Chalke, along with some Conservative Members, made his remarks before he had studied the settlement. There were no changes in methodology. The settlement showed, as Conservative Members ultimately had to agree, that shire counties got an above average rise. We have to work hard to move forward and ensure that local people understand the settlement, which should reflect the additional money that the Government are putting in so that local people know the priority that is given to public services at local level.

Does the Minister accept that authorities that find that the SSA formula does not reflect fairly on them have been disadvantaged in year one, disadvantaged this year and further disadvantaged next year? Surely that is unfair. They are having to put up their council tax above the Government's targets and cut services. Surely they deserve a better deal than being told that there can be no changes to the unfair formula for three years.

As I announced to the House last week, we have continued damping arrangements that mean that no education authority receives less than a 1.5 per cent. increase. All authorities knew what they were to get over the three years. It is easier for any organisation to have a three-year plan rather than a single-year plan to decide how money is to be used and how to get the best from that spending.

On the long-term future of the SSA, does my right hon. Friend accept that the effect of the current formula is so bizarre and awry that a city such as Stoke-on-Trent receives hundreds of pounds per child less each year than areas of acute deprivation such as Surrey and Hertfordshire? Will she urge her working party to act as quickly as possible and will she undertake to be bold and radical in tackling a problem that has defeated government for the last 10 years?

My hon. Friend is right to point out that some of the effects of the current formula are difficult to justify locally. That is why we are having a root and branch review. We are working with authorities throughout the country in an attempt to find an alternative to the current SSA methodology. The overwhelming view that was expressed in the survey of authorities that we conducted was that SSAs are not working effectively. It is not just me but the authorities that have to be radical in how they look at future funding. We need a system that is as fair as possible, but they must recognise that it is inevitable that not everyone will be fully satisfied.

Will the Minister confirm that support for shire districts has plummeted under this Government? They have had a cut of £220 million, or 28 per cent., on what they received in 1997–98. Kent is facing an £8 million cut in total grant next year. Does she accept that it is no consolation to such councils, mainly in country areas, as they face great unfairness, higher council tax and cuts in services, that they have what she calls stability for three years? They would far rather have had the chance to come to see her last year or this year to persuade her to change the methodology. Does she accept that in talking about generosity and stability, she is merely disguising the true position, which is that many of the councils are being treated unfairly by the Government not only in year one, but in years two and three, so that it truly is a case of this Government being the enemy of the countryside?

That is arrant nonsense. As the hon. Gentleman knows, shire counties have done better than average this year. No shire county—not a single one—is having its grant cut. Every county and every metropolitan authority is receiving a minimum 1.5 per cent. increase, which does not equate to a cut of £8 million. The hon. Gentleman can project what he would like to spend next year, and then say that a salary has been cut because it is not meeting his budget. That is what he is talking about, but that is not proper budgeting. Kent, along with other areas, is receiving the minimum protection, but Kent is doing better than that. If one adds up the amounts going to shire counties and shire districts, the amount going to the countryside is, to put it mildly, generous.

If he will make a statement on the progress of the new deal for communities in Luton. [99007]

I was delighted to announce that Luton is one of the 22 areas eligible to put forward proposals for the transformation of a deprived neighbourhood under the second round of the new deal for communities. I will ensure that local people, businesses and organisations get the support that they need to deliver real equality of opportunity and choice in that neighbourhood.

I thank my right hon. Friend for her wisdom in selecting Luton as one of the pilot areas for the new deal for communities. Is she aware that, in the centre of my constituency, young people from Bangladeshi and Pakistani households are four times more likely to be unemployed than the national average, despite educational attainments that are similar to the national average? How does my right hon. Friend see the new deal for communities working in conjunction with other Government initiatives which Luton is pleased to receive to tackle that severe problem, so that all the youngsters in my constituency have an equal opportunity to find jobs?

The report that led to the launch of the new deal for communities pointed out that, in our most deprived neighbourhoods, it is much more difficult for people to find work, and that is particularly true for those from ethnic minorities. We should not tolerate that in our society, and we are determined to give local communities the tools to turn that around. One of the policy action teams has been looking at access to jobs, and another has been looking at skills. We are confident that we will be able to work with local communities to make sure that they are able to turn their areas around and to bring jobs, decent health standards, decent education and hope to those areas.

If he will make a statement on protection of the green belt in Mill Hill and Totteridge valley. [99008]

In most cases, this is a matter for the London borough of Barnet, though my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister expects the borough to have firm greenbelt protection policies in its development plan. My right hon. Friend will consider calling in planning applications that appear to conflict with greenbelt policies and deal with appeals in greenbelt cases in line with his commitment to green belts.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's decisions on recent planning applications for an enormous riding centre at Belmont stables and a plan by Barnet football club for a 10,000-seater stadium on greenbelt land were very much welcomed by my constituents. However, is my hon. Friend aware that Barnet FC has come forward with a plan to put a 9,999-seater stadium at exactly the same location with virtually identical plans? Will the Secretary of State take a robust line, as he has in the past, to defend the green belt against such depredations?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments on decisions taken by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister. My hon. Friend has indicated that a further application is apparently in the pipeline, so it would not be appropriate for me to make any comments about it, other than to reiterate that the application will be considered closely in line with the Government's stated policy on the green belt, as set out in planning policy guidance 2, and where there is a presumption against inappropriate development within the green belt.

The statement today will be welcomed by Londoners, not only in the northern part of London to which the Minister referred, but more extensively, because the Government's record in preserving metropolitan green belt has been abysmal, especially at Stevenage and in Sussex. Can the Minister assure us that from now on, especially as aide-de-camp to the right hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson), he will be vigilant in ensuring that the metropolitan green belt is preserved, because it is the heritage of Londoners as well as inhabitants of the communities in which it is located?

The hon. Gentleman is not correct in his views about the green belt. As he knows, my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore) has just complimented the Government on their decisions in protection of the green belt in London. The hon. Gentleman will also be aware that in the two and a half years since the Government came to power the amount of green belt has been extended by some 30,000 hectares, and we are clear about our commitment to the preservation of the green belt.

If he will make a statement about parks. [99009]

The House is well aware of my hon. Friend's commitment to improving access to areas of countryside and the parks. We welcome the recent report from his Environment Sub-Committee on town and country parks and we share its concern about the quality and future of our parks. We will publish our full response early in the new year.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he accept that parks give many people much pleasure, but that the past 30 years have seen a tremendous decline in municipal parks? We must reverse that decline. If we want to stop the drift from the north and from the cities to the countryside, it is important to regenerate our cities. Parks could be one of the key elements in that regeneration and should be a key part of the Government's forthcoming urban White Paper.

The Government share the Committee's concern about the decline of our parks. Since we came to power we have done several things about the green belt and parks. For example, by tightening the controls, we have halted the sale of playing fields, which the previous Administration encouraged. We have also recently announced a new opportunities fund for green spaces, which contains £125 million for developing green spaces, funded by the national lottery. We are currently preparing our urban White Paper and my hon. Friend's report will be considered in that process.

"The measure of any great civilisation is its cities, and the measure of any city's greatness is to be found in the quality of its public spaces, its parks and its squares."

If the Government feel that the New forest deserves more protection than it has already, why are they insisting on imposing the straitjacket of a national park on it? For many years the New forest has been protected by special legislation. If the Government have no parliamentary time for special legislation now, why do they not wait until they can do the job properly?

The hon. Gentleman properly represents the interests of his constituency—I understand that—but the country generally welcomed the announcement that we made about the two national parks, which followed what a Labour Government had done many years before. The parks policy is important and popular, and we are proud that we have implemented it 50 years after the first legislation to introduce national parks.

What measures the Government are taking to promote increased accessibility of housing for the elderly and disabled. [99010]

My Department is taking a number of steps to promote better access to housing for elderly and disabled people. We have extended part M of the building regulations to improve accessibility of new housing to disabled people, we have highlighted the needs of disabled people in guidance this year on local authority housing investment programmes, we are increasing the resources available for disabled facilities grants by a quarter over three years, and we will shortly be issuing new guidance to local authorities on registers of accessible housing.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. I am sure that he will wish to pay tribute to organisations such as Scope, which has campaigned for so long for accessible housing, and to local authorities which promote the concept of the lifetime home, something that I hope he will encourage. Can my hon. Friend also tell me how the very welcome initiative of extending part M to domestic properties will be monitored and enforced?

We certainly pay tribute to the work of the many voluntary organisations, including Scope and the Royal Association for Disability and Rehabilitation, which advised us thoroughly and well on the procedures leading up to the extension of part M of the building regulations. We are delighted to have their support.

How does the Minister reconcile the answers that he has given so far with his party's abolition of the advance corporation tax dividend tax credit, which has had a serious effect on charities' receipts? Charities such as the Royal United Kingdom Beneficent Association—RUKBA—which help elderly and disabled people to obtain quality housing and give them the support that they require say that they have suffered a marked reduction in income. Removing the ACT dividend tax credit sits ill with the Minister's answers today.

The hon. Gentleman is trying pretty hard, and stretching logic to an extraordinary extent, to make his point. I stress that the voluntary organisations which deal with disability have warmly welcomed the Government's actions. They applauded our action in extending part M of the building regulations which the previous Government had refused to do, despite the voluntary organisations' entreaties. It is sheer hypocrisy for the Conservative party to pretend that it is the friend of the voluntary sector.

What representations he has received concerning the operation of bus services in north-east Derbyshire; and if he will make a statement. [99012]

Three representations have been received regarding bus services in north-east Derbyshire since July 1999, two from my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Derbyshire (Mr. Barnes) and one from my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)

I could send my hon. Friend another 100 letters and two petitions about Stagecoach problems in north-east Derbyshire, but those have gone to the traffic commissioner. Will my hon. Friend agree that it pays to mobilise and organise where bus services are inadequate? Following his response to Thursday's Adjournment debate, there are signs that things are already improving for Stagecoach. The bus that I caught at a busy period on Monday morning was on time. Buses are being drafted in from Grimsby and London to tackle the problem. Is it my hon. Friend's view that as long an eye is kept on what takes place, matters will work out in the long run?

I am delighted to hear from my hon. Friend that things are already looking up. I entirely agree with him that campaigning can lead to improved services. If I may say so, my hon. Friend has proved himself a doughty campaigner on behalf of his constituents and of bus users in the wider Derbyshire area. As a result of his efforts, the bus operator and Derbyshire county council are working together to secure what I am sure will be significant improvements in local bus services.

Is the Minister aware that pensioners in north-east Derbyshire using the bus services benefit from a concessionary fare scheme, and that that scheme is funded by the local council? Is he further aware that since July 1998 the Government have tried to claim credit for the introduction of a Government-funded concessionary fare scheme for pensioners? Will he acknowledge that there is no money in the Government's budget for the next two years to fund a pensioner concessionary fare scheme, and will he therefore stop trying to take credit for that initiative? It is one thing to wait hours for a bus but quite a different matter to wait years for a Government-funded concessionary fare scheme.

I am fully aware that many Labour authorities provide concessionary bus fares, for which they deserve much credit. The hon. Gentleman will know that the Government intend to introduce a national concessionary fare scheme as part of our transport Bill.

What representations he has received regarding the level of business rates. [99013]

We have received over 270 responses to our consultation paper on a transition scheme to phase in large changes in rate bills, resulting from the revaluation due on 1 April 2000. The details of this scheme were announced on 25 November.

Is the Minister aware that some large out-of-town superstores in my constituency pay business rates equivalent to less than 10 per cent. of their profits, while some small retailers in the centres of Stowmarket and Bury St. Edmunds pay business rates equivalent to about 35 per cent. of profits? That is a huge burden on small business. Will the Minister explain exactly what she will do to reform the business rate regime to help small businesses in my constituency?

The hon. Gentleman is a relatively new Member of Parliament, and so perhaps does not realise that the uniform business rate was introduced by the previous Conservative Administration, which he supported. The hon. Gentleman will also know from what I said on Thursday that the Government are to review how the valuation is conducted and how it kicks in. I look forward to his comments then. However, I remind him that, because of the impact on small businesses and to take account of the points that he has raised, we have introduced a transitional scheme that benefits small businesses more than large ones.

What steps he is taking to cut the costs of auditing the accounts of parish councils. [99014]

Although audit fees are a matter for the independent Audit Commission, the Government are aware of the impact that they can have on small parish councils. The commission is currently piloting two exercises to see whether the cost of audits of parish councils can be reduced while the necessary level of assurance is maintained.

Does the Minister feel any sympathy for the parish clerk of Aston le Walls who has written to me to state that the parish council's audit fee for 1998 was only just under £500, plus value added tax? She is not the only one of my constituents in that position. The parish has a population of 350 persons, and a total precept of only about £3,500, so is not the audit cost totally out of line? Revenue must be safeguarded, but will the Minister urgently examine ways to introduce the necessary flexibility and a much cheaper audit process?

The figures that the hon. Gentleman gives are completely out of line: a precept of £3,500 is below the threshold of £5,000, and the average bill last year for a parish council of that size was £160. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will write to me to confirm the figures that he gave, and I shall certainly look into the matter, as the cost that he quoted bears no resemblance to last year's average. However, I remind him that the regulations establishing the current fee structure were introduced by the previous Conservative Government. As I said, the Audit Commission is conducting studies to determine whether appointing local auditors would bring down costs even further, especially for small parish councils.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and am pleased to hear of the review. As a sitting parish councillor and an accountant, I have visited nearly all 25 parish councils in North-West Leicestershire. The impact of the audit fee is a common issue to be raised. Will she urge the Audit commission to look even more closely at the effect on the smaller community—typically with a population of fewer than 1,000—to find out whether there are ways in which the audit fee can be capped relative to precept as a proportion, or in relation to the volume of transactions? The commission is grappling with an important and difficult problem.

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. I know of his work on parish councils and his commitment. A scheme exists already under which small parish councils can effectively roll three annual reviews into an audit. It is a triennial scheme and the councils can have an audit once every three years, thereby cutting their overheads substantially. I hear what my hon. Friend says. The Audit Commission is considering ways in which it can bring costs down, possibly by appointing local auditors and provided that the necessary levels of assurance can be guaranteed. I know that my hon. Friend will agree, however, that although we want to reduce the costs and burdens on parish councils, it is nevertheless important that they are subject to an independent audit, which is important for the protection of public money and for the protection of councillors, so that they are seen to be accounting properly for that money.

The Minister seeks to reassure parish councils. Will she acknowledge that her right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment, who is regrettably missing his second out of three departmental Question Times, although for reasons that I understand today, originally put much fear into the parish council movement by saying that the Government were thinking of abolishing such councils? Will the hon. Lady confirm that that idea was just an embarrassing mistake? Furthermore, can she tell us when we will see the rural White Paper, so that we can see in black and white what further attacks the Government are planning on hard-working parish councils?

We have no plans to abolish parish councils. The rural White Paper will be produced next summer.

I thank my hon. Friend for her answer and register an interest. Like my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire (Mr. Taylor) I am a member of a town council and I spend many hours toiling over its problems. As the Vice-President of the National Association of Local Councils, can I ask my hon. Friend whether she will continue to discuss with the association this very issue? As my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire said, it is by far the most important issue that small parish councils raise. I am sure that if we can find a solution to the problem, we will continue to have healthy local councils in many areas.

Yes, I do hear what my hon. Friend has said. To put the matter in context, given the large number of parish councils in the country, the Audit Commission has received 75 complaints this year about the level of fees, in particular from small councils. It is not a problem of enormous significance, but I accept that it affects small councils disproportionately. We await with interest the results of the Audit Commission's exercise and will talk to it about how it can implement its findings to the best possible effect for small parish councils.

What his policy is on supporting rural rail services. [99015]

We are determined to improve the railways so that they can offer an alternative to the car, not least in rural areas. The new rail passenger partnership scheme will provide additional funding for new or enhanced local and regional rail services that cannot be justified on financial grounds alone.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, but is he aware that the often inadequate service in the west country misses out enormous parts of the rural areas of Somerset, Devon and Cornwall? Is he also aware that the rail service could provide a much fuller contribution to rural public transport? That would require stations to be opened, reopened and refurbished. Who is to pay for that—Railtrack, the rail companies, the local authorities or central Government?

The hon. Gentleman will recall that it will be a duty of the new Strategic Rail Authority to promote and develop the rail system. We certainly expect it to pursue that task where rural rail services are concerned. Meanwhile, I am pleased to report that the shadow strategic rail authority has to date received 31 bids for funding under the rail passenger partnership scheme, which should follow through into further improvements in rural rail services.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, as a direct result of the Government's policies, the reopening of rural rail links for passengers is being considered for the first time since 1964? In my constituency, there is a good chance that the Vale of Glamorgan railway line will be just such a service. That will not only provide transport for our commuters and relieve congestion on our roads, but provide direct access to Cardiff international airport and remove pressure from the InterCity line. When my hon. Friend next speaks to the Transport Secretary of the Welsh Assembly, will he tell him that the Assembly will have the full support of this House if it awards a passenger transport grant for that line?

Yes, we certainly will.

Does the Minister agree that the opportunities afforded to him by privatisation of the railways open up the possibility of developing the rural rail network? Will he correct the possible misinterpretation of remarks made by his predecessor in office, the hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Ms Jackson)? She seemed to suggest that, in certain circumstances, rural railway lines could be replaced by buses. Will the Minister give the same commitment that we made, when the railways were privatised, that there will be no branch line closures?

Let me make it entirely clear that the remarks of my honourable and beloved predecessor on that matter were subject to gross misinterpretation. I emphasise that we have absolutely no plans to replace loss-making rural services with buses. I remind the hon. Gentleman that key services are contractually safeguarded through the passenger service requirements. In rural areas, where services are heavily dependent on subsidy, PSRs are closely based on the timetable that operated prior to privatisation. Discontinuation of services on branch lines can occur only after comprehensive closure procedures have been exhausted. Those powers have been used only rarely; I do not expect that to change.

What progress he has made in establishing regional Eurostar services north of London. [99016]

The provision of Eurostar services north of London is currently the subject of an extensive review, the results of which we expect to receive shortly.

When the decision whether to proceed is finally taken, will that decision be fully informed not only by the Government's excellent transport policies but by their equally excellent policies for regional economic development and social inclusion?

The review has to take into account a wide range of factors, not least of which are the viability of the service and environmental, social and economic considerations. We expect to receive its report shortly.

What assessment has the hon. Gentleman made of the technological impediments to the operation of regional Eurostar services? Will he favour us by providing a copy of that assessment in the Library?

When the report is available, all the technological aspects will also be dealt with, and the hon. Gentleman will be rewarded—he can spend many hours studying them.

Does the Minister agree that there is no finer example of what the previous Government left us than the north-south divide, and the fact that the Eurostar service does not run north of London? That is despite the promises made in the Channel Tunnel Act 1987 and despite the fact that millions of pounds of public money were put into the project. Does he also agree that if Eurostar is to run a service on the west coast main line, that line must be upgraded? Is he satisfied with the work that Railtrack is putting in? Does he agree that if it is to cost £4 billion to upgrade the west coast main line, that would be money well spent.

I understand that agreement has been reached on upgrading the west coast main line; I am sure that that will happen in the near future. As a Member who represents a constituency that is almost as far north as that of my hon. Friend, I share his desire to see Eurostar running services to the north. However, that will depend on what the review determines; the service must be viable.

Does the Minister understand that we are chronically short of railway capacity in this country, thanks to the Labour Government's policies? Was it not a great Labour lie to say that public transport would get better under this Government, when we all know that it is getting worse and is not providing the alternative that many want?

I have to say that, even by the right hon. Gentleman' s normal standards, that was an exceptionally cynical performance. Under the present Government, the number of trains is up by 1,000 a day. [HON. MEMBERS: "Passengers?"] The number of passengers is up by about 14 per cent.

If he will make a statement on the future of parish councils. [99017]

I repeat that we have no plans to abolish parish councils. Our clear and consistent policy is that parish councils will continue to play a key role in many of our towns and villages.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and agree with her that parish councils play a vital and valuable role in our towns and villages. Can she confirm that the Government have created 33 new parish councils since they came to power, and will she join me in condemning the irresponsible scaremongering contained in a letter that was sent to all parish councils in Suffolk by the leader and deputy leader of the Conservative group, saying that parish councils might be abolished? Is not that a waste of the money of council tax payers, who had to pay for the paper on which it was written?

I agree with my hon. Friend. It is a waste of taxpayers' money, and that scaremongering is being supported by Conservative Front-Bench Members for their own political ends. Yes, the Government have created another 33 parish councils since May 1997, and we intend to create another 25 before elections in May 2000. That is our commitment to parish councils. We want them to play an enhanced role in rural communities and in local governance at all levels. Therefore, we intend to strengthen and support parish councils.

At the Labour party conference, the Minister for the Environment said that parish councils should be replaced by something revolting called neighbourhood forums. Can the hon. Lady confirm that that is wrong, and that the proportion of elected members on parish councils will not be reduced?

My right hon. Friend did not make those remarks. That is not our policy, and I am very surprised that the hon. Gentleman, as a member of the Conservative party, purports to believe everything that he reads in the newspapers. I have made our policy clear—we support parish councils.

What assessment he has made of local strategies for regional development[99019]

I received regional strategies from the chairmen of the eight English regional development agencies on 26 October. We aim to respond to them by the end of the year.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the regional development agencies in England, together with Scottish Enterprise, the Welsh Development Agency and the Industrial Development Board for Northern Ireland, have at last put coherence into the economic development policy in the whole of the United Kingdom? What does my right hon. Friend believe the consequences of the Tory party's policy to abolish them would be?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the regional development agencies in the English regions have got off to a flying start. In their first six months of operation, hundreds of thousands of jobs have been created and many hundreds of millions of pounds have been invested. That is a matter of public record.

Yesterday, in London, the Prime Minister let it be known that there was, he felt, no such thing as a north-south divide. Just three days before that, on Friday, he was in his constituency in the north and said, "We are not happy with the north-south divide." Which is right—the answer that the Prime Minister gave in the north or the one that he gave in the south?

The right answer is the one that the Prime Minister has constantly given: he is concerned about growing disparities in the English regions. That is why the Government introduced regional development agencies to work on reducing the disparities between the English regions. After all, the Prime Minister spoke of concern for the many, and that is behind that policy.

What impact the establishment of the South East of England Development Agency has had on the south-east region. [99020]

The agency has successfully brought together regeneration, skills and business development programmes and staff from four separate organisations to provide an integrated approach to the promotion of sustainable economic development. The agency has also led a highly effective consultative process to develop the first regional economic strategy for that region.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does she agree that, as a result of the inward investment that has already been achieved by SEEDA together with the championing of venture capital, proposals to abolish or amend the operation of SEEDA would be neither wise nor common sense?

I agree with my hon. Friend. We inherited significant imbalances between regions. However, within regions there are also significant pockets of disadvantage that need to be tackled. If we are to have sustainable economic growth across the country, we need a much more active regional policy, with organisations such as SEEDA properly consulting and working with the public and other organisations in their regions so that they achieve sustainable development that addresses regional imbalances.

Does the Minister share my lack of surprise that the latest glossy publication to drop on my desk yesterday from SEEDA contained several pictures of its chairman meeting the great and the good? They would have done credit to the most egotistical prospective parliamentary candidate. One picture was of the chairman and the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions opening not a new business in the south-east but another set of offices for SEEDA.

We know how low the Tory party's reputation has sunk with business. I remind the hon. Gentleman that all the development agencies are chaired by business people. They look for support from all parties and they are not party political. He may want to improve the Conservative party's standing given how little money the party now receives from the wider business community, so it is a pity that he is prepared to attack the holders of those posts in any way.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that SEEDA's plan not only identifies a north-south divide—if there is one—but a south-south divide and identifies the under-performance of areas such as Hastings and Rye? Its plan suggests that one of the essential things that could be done is the building of the Hastings bypass. Will that suggestion be pursued?

It is of course true, as I told my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test (Dr. Whitehead), that there are imbalances within regions, and the Government are determined to take a holistic view of how to tackle those imbalances. Unlike the Conservative party, we are not prepared to put up with some people being able to get jobs while others cannot.

What steps he is taking to encourage train operating companies to reduce fare levels. [99021]

Increases in key fares have been restricted to below inflation increases for the second year running, with tougher caps placed on London operators to reflect poor performance over the past year. We look to train operators to consider whether increasing unregulated off-peak fares is the best way to attract new rail passengers.

I welcome that answer, but does the Minister agree that one reason why people do not often travel by train is the astronomical cost of many train journeys, which is far higher than the equivalent cost of petrol mileage for the same journey? Will he help to end the mindset that money spent on roads is investment while money spent on trains is subsidy? Does he agree that it might be a sensible use of his Department's money to help to achieve a cut in train fares? Will he investigate that before his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State resurrects the environmentally damaging roads programme?

I certainly agree that price is very important if one is hoping to attract people on to the railways. On average, regulated rail fares across the network will rise by less than inflation for the second year running, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will acknowledge that. The key fares are capped at 1 per cent. below the rate of inflation until 2003. Connex SouthCentral, which serves Lewes, has again had its fares capped below the rate of inflation, and I hope that he will join me in celebrating that.

Is my hon. Friend aware that since privatisation, the cost of subsidising the rail services between Loughborough and Leicester, which are subsidised by Leicestershire county council, doubled overnight simply because of the operating costs and profits built into the privatised system? Will my hon. Friend tell me what was the outcome of the review of the rail companies' operating costs and profits, so that the subsidy can be cut and the real benefit will be felt by the passengers, not the companies?

We shall in due course renegotiate the franchises, which will give us an opportunity to consider all the issues that my hon. Friend has raised.

Will the Minister agree to meet a delegation from my constituency who are concerned about fare levels and standards of service on the railways and the tube, which many of them use on their way to work?

The hon. Gentleman should not believe everything that he sees on the television; that can be very bad for you. I did not see the programme in question so I cannot comment on it. I, or one of my colleagues, would, of course, be glad to meet a delegation from his constituency to discuss the matters that he mentioned.

What assessment he has made of the impact of the M4 bus lane on average journey times. [99022]

The M4 bus lane pilot scheme is being monitored by the Transport Research Laboratory. The results show that in the first three months following the opening of the bus lane, buses and taxis are saving up to nine minutes in the morning and evening peak periods, while other vehicles are saving up to six minutes in the same periods. The reduction in the speed limits which accompanied the introduction of the bus lane resulted in slightly longer journey times outside the peak periods, but the overall effect was a reduction in total travel time of 3,500 hours a week for those using the road.

I am confident that the reduction in journey times is good for business people travelling between Slough and London. However, will my hon. Friend consider taking one more step to speed up journeys even further? Many of my constituents and I travel on the motorway in the early hours of the morning and, as my constituent Angela Kirk puts it:

"It is very annoying only being able to do 50 mph at 3 am when there is virtually no other car on the road."

My hon. Friend is right to represent the concerns of her constituents. I assure her that the matter will be considered as part of the continuing monitoring and review of the scheme, and especially the safety implications.

Why does the Minister not ensure that his measurements start from the place where the tailback begins, rather than from where traffic starts to move? Is it not true that no savings have been achieved and that, if it is measured properly, less traffic now uses the M4?

The fact is that there are significant time savings for drivers. It is worth noting two further positive aspects of the scheme. First, on current performance, there are benefits to the economy of £750,000 a year, which represents an excellent rate of return on an outlay of £1.9 million to cover the cost of the scheme. Secondly, although it is too early to draw firm conclusions, forecasts by safety experts predict a 20 per cent. reduction in accidents. The Metropolitan police, who manage the road, believe that the scheme has improved safety.

When the cleaner vehicles task force is expected to issue a report on its findings. [99024]

In July 1999, the cleaner vehicle task force published its first report, recommending practical measures to encourage the manufacture, purchase and use of cleaner, quieter, more fuel-efficient vehicles. The task force expects to publish another report in spring 2000. That report will take forward the key proposals and make further practical, cost-effective recommendations.

Does my hon. Friend agree that investigations into alternative fuels and their benefits could do much for the health of our nation, especially in terms of the incidence of asthma and cancer?

I certainly agree that that could make an important contribution to our constituents' quality of life. Two of the task force' s earlier recommendations have already been acted on: first, the development of a greener fleet certification scheme for company cars and, secondly, the launch of an internet guide to enable purchasers of new cars to find out their carbon dioxide emissions and air quality impact. In addition, the task force has contributed to the development of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders label. I am pleased to announce that, from tomorrow, every new car will carry the label, which will give details of emissions of local pollutants and carbon dioxide.

If the issue is one of quality of life and is worthy of an internet guide, why are the Government reducing the particulate emissions targets?

Help!

The House will be pleased to hear that help is on the way. There are difficulties with the European standards, but our finest minds are working on the problem.

What progress has been made in the development of local transport plans by local authorities. [99025]

Local authorities have produced 85 local transport plans covering the whole of England outside London. We are currently assessing the plans and will announce the allocation of resources in December.

Will my hon. Friend give an assessment of the transport plans he has received covering the London area? Are any of them sustainable transport plans such as Croydon's, which includes tramlink and cycling measures? What consideration has he given to park-and-ride schemes, to ease congestion resulting from retail developments? Will he discuss with his colleagues the possible redesignation of greenfield sites, with the aim of preventing environmental damage by major retail developments alongside transport links?

Let me say at once that the Government's position on the green belt has already been clarified during these exchanges. All 33 authorities in London have produced interim transport plans, Croydon being one of them. We are assessing the plans and we shall announce the allocation of resources in December.