All 2 Debates between Baroness Kramer and Lord Palmer

Transport: London Bridge Station

Debate between Baroness Kramer and Lord Palmer
Tuesday 13th January 2015

(9 years, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Kramer Portrait Baroness Kramer
- Hansard - -

As your Lordships know, I am always happy to meet on these issues, so that is something that I shall be glad to try to accommodate. Whether we need to do so in two phases or one is not entirely clear but I hope that we can discuss this matter. The underlying issue of congestion on the railways is obviously behind many of the problems that we face. This massive set of improvements around the London Bridge area, costing about £1.5 billion, will play an absolutely key role in removing one of the major bottlenecks in the system, even though it will take several years to achieve that.

Lord Palmer Portrait Lord Palmer (CB)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, are not the fiasco at London Bridge, and indeed the chaos at Finsbury Park—I was caught up in it after Christmas—and Paddington, a very good cause to renationalise everything to do with our railways?

Baroness Kramer Portrait Baroness Kramer
- Hansard - -

I point out to your Lordships that quite a number of the problems that have occurred have been National Rail problems, which is the one part of the system that we directly own. One of the lessons that I have learnt from watching all the problems that have been taking place—they are inexcusable and must be dealt with—is that the rail network is complex and that there is a need to make sure that it is in manageable sections which, although they have to work together, are totally driven around their primary responsibility.

Railways: Passenger Demand

Debate between Baroness Kramer and Lord Palmer
Thursday 31st October 2013

(10 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Kramer Portrait Baroness Kramer
- Hansard - -

My Lords, we would be looking at something like 14 years of weekend closures, which is extraordinary disruption. That assumes a very aggressive construction schedule of two simultaneous schemes on each route at any one time. If it was done in a more usual pattern, there would be even more weekends of closures. The question of freight is a serious one, because the alternatives would not add a single additional freight path on the southern section of the west coast main line, whereas, by transferring long distance passengers to HS2, there is a possibility of up to 20 additional freight paths on that same congested set of lines.

Lord Palmer Portrait Lord Palmer (CB)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Could the Minister explain why the Government are so keen to denationalise the east coast main line when it is performing so well and contributing so generously to Treasury funds? I declare an interest as a frequent traveller on that line.

Baroness Kramer Portrait Baroness Kramer
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I shall reply only briefly, because this wanders away from the topic of the Question. The important issue is that we need significant investment in the east coast main line. The Government and DOR have done an excellent job of stabilising the service; we look to the future and to investment and growth. That is why the Government are making the decision to move ahead with the franchise, to provide a far better and improved service in future.