EU Directive 2007/46/EC

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Wednesday 4th September 2013 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) on securing this debate. He said in his opening remarks that he had a passion for manufacturing and for small and medium-sized enterprises, and he was generous enough to suggest that he suspected I shared those passions. He was right. He was also right that tonight’s debate provides an opportunity for us to discuss the effect on businesses of directive 2007/46/EC. I would like to thank him and his office for their assistance on some of the thoughts he might express tonight; I hope that my response will thus be more informed.

I am aware that the hon. Gentleman has recently asked a number of questions about this directive, so I am pleased to respond to this evening’s debate. Before I talk about the directive, it would be right and proper to reflect on the significant progress made by the UK automotive sector. This is explained in the automotive strategy that was published in July, which was the culmination of work led by the Automotive Council. It is very encouraging for all of us to note and learn that the UK car industry is currently vibrant, particularly at a time when other European markets face significant challenges.

The UK produced 1.58 million vehicles in 2012, with £6 billion of investment in the industry by vehicle manufacturers over the last two years. That is good news for the UK. Some challenges have been presented at ports, and I am pleased to help the industry overcome them. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman—and, indeed, the Associate Parliamentary Manufacturing Group—would welcome that.

I turn, if I may, to the matter in hand. Clearly, the hon. Gentleman is concerned that the directive could have a detrimental effect on businesses. Just as he set out his concerns, I shall set out exactly how I think on the issue and briefly explain what the directive is all about. It concerns the approval of new road vehicles at EU level. It covers new road vehicles with four or more wheels, and there is a mandatory obligation on the UK, as on all member states, to apply its provisions.

The directive was implemented in the UK on 29 April 2009 by the Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2009, SI No. 717. The hon. Gentleman was right to point out that the key element of the directive was to establish a single European market for motor vehicles, meaning that a vehicle approved to pan-European standards can be registered anywhere within the European Union, without further testing or obstruction to placing it on the market anywhere within the EU. The dates of application depend on the vehicle category: it has already been implemented for most vehicles, and will be fully implemented in October 2014, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, for the largest goods vehicles.

Approvals under the directive are available from member states’ approval authorities. In the UK, this means the Vehicle Certification Agency, supported by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency and the Driver and Vehicle Agency in Northern Ireland. Approvals are enforced through the registration scheme operated by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. Only motor vehicles with the appropriate certificate can be registered for use in the UK. Manufacturers can choose whether to use the UK approval authority or one from another member state for the pan-European approval.

Approval of the directive is a regulatory simplification matter, as it avoids manufacturers having to comply with potentially 28 different sets of national regulations and requirements. On that basis, it was supported at the outset by the high-volume producers. Producers of specialist and low-volume vehicles are also covered by the small series or the individual approval schemes created by the Department. These are essential provisions and are key to helping overcome the burden of EU-wide rules for UK SMEs, and throughout the process the Department has always sought to provide clear advice and assistance to such companies. If the hon. Gentleman has evidence that companies, including SMEs, have not considered that to be the case, I shall be delighted to consider his representation.

Prior to implementation, during 2007-08, officials worked closely with the various sectors affected by the new requirements. That included hosting, in conjunction with the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, a road show involving 12 events around the United Kingdom to build engagement with industry.

At the time of the implementation of the national regulations, a full impact assessment was undertaken and published by the Department. Its objective was to determine how to implement the directive in a way that would minimise the burdens on UK businesses while maximising the safety and environmental benefits. Two options for implementation of the recast framework directive were assessed, the first being to implement only the pan-European scheme and to accept and issue only European approvals, and the second being to implement the pan-European scheme together with national schemes for small series approval and individual approvals.

A “small firms impact test” considered the financial and business implications for the companies. Some 250 SMEs were consulted as part of a telephone survey, and face-to-face interviews were conducted with 20 members of an overall group of 35 SMEs that had been carefully selected from the sub-sectors to provide a representative and balanced assessment. In addition, the Department sought the views of the Small Business Service and its successor, the Enterprise Directorate, in the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, as well as the views of the Federation of Small Businesses and a number of other stakeholders.

The SMEs that were consulted advised the Department that type approval would be too onerous for some companies, and it was therefore important to have the option of national approval schemes. It was clear that the EU-wide scheme could have a fairly major adverse impact on SMEs, which are defined as businesses with fewer than 250 employees, so UK regulations were developed to incorporate option 2—the national approvals option—alongside the mandatory pan-European scheme.

I accept that, on the face of it, the provision of national schemes under option 2 would appear to be gold-plating, as it goes beyond the EU minimum. However, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the last Government adopted the correct course of action, which the present Government have continued. It does have a beneficial impact on SMEs.

I have engaged in correspondence with the hon. Gentleman about Truck Craft Bodies Ltd and the effect that the directive has had on its business. As he will recall, I explained in a reply to him in May that the cost that the company had incurred for the approval of its vehicles was significantly less than the original estimate. I think he will accept the macro-point that the cost burden on UK business of accepting option 2 is significantly lower than the pan-European option would have been.

Officials at the VCA met representatives of Truck Craft Bodies Ltd on 8 November 2012. I believe that they have supported the company and helped it to prepare the relevant documentation for its product range. Two more other site visits were made to the company’s premises in April and May 2013 to carry out approval work. The company now has seven vehicle types approved, with a fee cost for work by VCA of less than £11,000. On the basis of its current rate of production, that indicates an average certification cost of £18 per vehicle over three years. It is worth noting that the VCA fees are set on a cost reimbursement basis, following the public consultation. That reflects the cost of providing the approval service to industry.

The hon. Gentleman made several comments about the impact assessment. I can assure him that the VCA does not request information that it already holds. Again, I make the offer that if he can produce evidence that the VCA has asked for information that he believes it already holds, I will be happy to consider that. However, we do not believe that the agency requests information it already holds. It is also true that every vehicle converter must have a commercial relationship with the original vehicle manufacturer, and there are competition and confidentiality issues if information supplied to one company is made freely available to another. That would have an impact on any decision to undertake a further impact assessment.

This is a matter that the wider motor industry and trade associations may wish to address, rather than have Government create more rules or regulations. The Department and its agencies continue to work with industry, both directly and through its trade bodies, to identify any matters where there is a lack of clarity in the application of regulations or a need for administrative adjustments.

It is important to recognise that the directive was finalised six years ago and the UK regulations were created four years ago, so the opportunity for any changes before the regulations are fully implemented is relatively minimal. However, the Government are not complacent about our commitment to removing unnecessary regulatory burdens, and if there is evidence that that is not happening I will instruct officials to redouble their efforts. Indeed, there will be a meeting between the VCA and the industry trade bodies to discuss that on 30 September.

The hon. Gentleman should also by now have received a reply from my colleagues at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills about whether any funding was available to help mitigate the costs that Truck Craft Bodies Ltd has incurred. I understand that information has been provided on checking for possible sources of funding and on the business link helpline, which provides advice to those who wish to improve and grow their operations.

To summarise, under its European obligations the UK had to implement the directive. The Department worked towards doing that in a manner which offered a high level of consultation and of assurance in respect of safety and environmental aspects, while limiting the burdens on UK businesses. There is a long history of regulating certain aspects of safety and environmental protection on road vehicles to provide a level playing field for industry, and in order to protect consumers, road users and society in general.

I hope I have satisfactorily explained the Government’s position on the approval of new vehicles. I have invited the hon. Gentleman to write to me about any evidence he feels he has about any specific occasions, and I will be delighted to see it. We are aiming to limit the impact of the directive wherever possible. We are aiming to limit the burdens on industry, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will be reassured by what I have said, but if he has any further issues he wishes to raise, I will gladly respond to them.

Question put and agreed to.

Crossrail Station at Woolwich

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Monday 2nd September 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My noble Friend, the Earl Attlee, made the following written ministerial statement in the Lords on 25 July:

I am pleased to inform the House that the Crossrail sponsors (the Department for Transport and Transport for London) yesterday instructed Crossrail Ltd to complete the Crossrail station at Woolwich. This instruction will allow the station at Woolwich to open alongside the rest of the central section of the Crossrail route, currently scheduled to happen in December 2018.

The then Secretary of State for Transport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), made a statement in February 2011 confirming that an agreement for building the station box at Woolwich had been finalised—16 February 2011, Official Report, column 88WS. Since then Berkeley Homes has proceeded with construction of the box, in line with that agreement. This work was completed ahead of schedule in March this year and the box has now been handed over to Crossrail Ltd.

Government had always made it clear that completion of the station would be conditional upon receiving sufficient funding contributions from those developers and businesses that stand to benefit from a Crossrail station at Woolwich.

The instruction to complete the station, therefore, follows the conclusion of an agreement to fund the fit-out works.

Crossrail Ltd is receiving fixed additional funding of £54 million. This is made up of contributions from the royal borough of Greenwich, through local developer contributions and a grant from the Greater London Authority; Berkeley Homes, the site developer; and Transport for London, whose contribution will be repaid through the additional farebox revenue generated by the station.

The remainder of the funding will be provided by Crossrail Ltd. Crossrail Ltd had made budgetary provision for works that were required to allow trains to run through the station box. This will be reallocated to the works required to complete the station.

A fully operational station at Woolwich will support the regeneration of this part of south-east London, supporting the local borough’s growth ambitions as well as significantly improving connectivity and access to job opportunities. It will also provide jobs during construction.

Crossrail Ltd will now begin the process of procuring the fit-out works and will be publishing an OJEU shortly.

HGV Road User Levy Bill

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 18th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I am today correcting a figure that I quoted during the Ways and Means resolution debate on the HGV Road User Levy Bill, on Tuesday 23 October 2012, and during the Second Reading debate on Tuesday 20 November 2012. There will be significantly fewer vehicles paying more than £300 a year extra when the levy is introduced than I previously stated.

The reason for the additional costs once the levy is introduced is because some vehicles currently pay close to or below EU minimum rates of vehicle excise duty (VED), and so VED cannot be reduced by the same amount as the levy, or indeed in some cases VED needs to be increased.

During the Ways and Means resolution debate I stated that

“our analysis of 7,000 rigid vehicles that tow a trailer has found that 40 vehicles would probably suffer a penalty of some £300, but that is only 40 out of 7,000, which is a significantly small part of the overall haulage fleet of the United Kingdom”—[Official Report, 23 October 2012, Vol. 551, c. 884.]

I also stated on Second Reading:

“there are a small number—about 7,000 of them on the road—of rigid vehicles with a trailer. Of those we estimate—the Department has done some analysis—that fewer than 50 will face potentially more than £300 extra in costs”—[Official Report, 20 November 2012, Vol. 553, col. 497.]

However, as a result of the Government continuing to consider and refine the analysis for these vehicles, an error in the source data was corrected, and improvements were made to the methodology used to set the VED rates that will apply from 1 April 2014. By making this improvement, it is possible for Her Majesty’s Treasury to amend the VED rates to reduce the number of vehicles paying over £300 more to just one vehicle. Even this additional cost represents less than 0.4% of the annual cost of running an HGV, which is normally in the range of £80,000 to £100,000.

There is no change to figures quoted in Parliament of 94% of vehicles paying no more than now, and 98% paying no more than an additional £50 per year, as a result of these changes. The Department for Transport will be republishing the full updated analysis on the consultation pages for “Charging Heavy Goods Vehicles” hosted on the gov.uk website:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/charging-heavy-goods-vehicles-consultation.

The updated analysis will enable vehicle operators to see the revised details of how much will be paid for each type of vehicle.

These figures will remain provisional, until Her Majesty’s Treasury confirm the new table of rates in the “Overview of Outstanding Legislation And Rates” document accompanying Budget 2014.

This once again reinforces the Government’s commitment to introduce the HGV road user levy in April 2014 at as minimal a cost to the UK haulage industry as we can realistically deliver.

Dartford/Thurrock River Crossing (Fees)

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 11th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

On 5 November 2012 the Highways Agency published detailed proposals to introduce post-payment and enforcement measures that would support the introduction of “free-flow” charging at the crossing. To support this change simultaneously the Department published detailed proposals to provide fair and effective enforcement of free-flow road user charging in accordance with the Transport Act 2000. Both consultations ran for a period of 12 weeks, and closed on 28 January 2013.

The Dartford crossing is vital to the local and national economy and introducing a free-flow charging arrangement will reduce congestion and improve journeys for the thousands of motorists and businesses who use the crossing every day. Following careful consideration of all the points made during both consultations I am today announcing the Department’s and Highways Agency’s conclusions and the intended actions.

The majority of respondents were supportive of the proposals to enable enforcement against drivers who do not pay a road-user charge. We are now able to take forward the legislation to make sure charges will be able to be effectively enforced when free-flow charging is introduced at the crossing next year.

Subject to the completion of the necessary parliamentary processes, the Department intends to implement the road-user charging scheme regulations and the agency will implement the new Dartford/Thurrock river crossing charging scheme order.

The full response to the agency’s charging scheme order consultation can be found on the Highways Agency’s website, and the Department’s response to the enforcement regulations consultation can be found on the Department for Transport’s pages of the Gov.uk website. Both these documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Motoring Services Strategy

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 11th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

I am pleased to announce today the next phase of the project to explore establishing a new commercial model for the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA).

Departments have been challenged to think about how they commission and deliver services with a view to looking at innovative options. We have looked at the VCA business model and have tested a range of options that would enable the business to grow and contribute to the wider UK economy while continuing to deliver its statutory functions, providing high-quality and valued services to its customers. We set out this proposition for consultation in the motoring services strategy late last year. The new commercial model should also seek to offer new opportunities to VCA staff, who will be essential to the continued success of the business going forward.

The Department for Transport is now going to start a market engagement exercise to further test the preferred option of a joint venture with a private sector partner. We expect to make a decision in the autumn on whether to proceed with a formal procurement.

London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Wednesday 10th July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Chope]

Whether it was a meaningless rubber-stamping exercise or something of substance would depend very much on the Minister. Although we would say that the code would be approved by the Secretary of State for Transport, in practice it would be brought before a more junior Minister, who would carry out the approval in the name of the Secretary of State. It is not for me to comment on the assiduous way in which various junior Ministers operate, but I have no doubt that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond), would be extremely assiduous if he was the Minister charged with this responsibility. The paper would be put before him by his officials and he would ask probing questions, perhaps on an iterative basis, whereby it might take a few days or weeks before the matter went through. He would take the responsibility seriously and examine the code, raising any concerns he had and suggesting any modifications that he wanted to have.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

My hon. Friend rightly says that I would be entirely assiduous should this onerous burden be placed upon me, as I am with any such instrument; I carefully read these things and scrutinise them. I can tell him that the Government’s view, having examined the amendment, is that there would be no need for the Secretary of State to approve the code of practice; the code could stand by itself.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Chope]

Is not the point that provision is already set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to deal with such issues? That is national legislation but the Bill seeks to modify it for London. My amendment would ensure that there is a proper safeguard for that proposed modification for London through the Secretary of State. My hon. Friend refers to localism, but surely such things should apply equally to all local authorities, not just those that bring forward Bills such as this.

[Stephen Hammond]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Mr Chope]

I am making an intervention.

Crossrail

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Tuesday 9th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

The Crossrail project has made significant progress over the last year and has now moved firmly into its main construction phase. There are currently around 8,000 people working at over 40 construction sites across London and six tunnel- boring machines are active underground, with the final two due to launch soon. As of 3 July over 14 km of tunnelling had been completed—representing around 33% of the final total. The project is now over 40% complete. Many significant milestones have been reached including two successful tunnel breakthroughs at Canary Wharf station. The project is well on the way to achieving the target of completing the first tunnels by the end of this year.

While we remain focused on the delivery of the infrastructure, work is now also well underway on planning for and delivering an operational railway. In March a change was announced to the funding of the procurement of the rolling stock and depot contract from one which involved a significant element of private finance to one that is fully publicly funded. This step was taken to ensure that the trains are ready for the opening of the new railway. The overall schedule for the award of the Crossrail rolling stock and depot contract remains unchanged, with a targeted contract award date of mid-2014.

Transport for London (TfL) will be responsible for the operation of the Crossrail services and is leading the procurement of the Crossrail train operator (CTOC). The procurement process has already begun with the pre-qualified bidders having been announced in June. The next step will be the publication of the invitation to tender in September this year, with the aim of awarding the concession in September 2014 and the start of operations between Liverpool Street (high-level) and Shenfield in May 2015. The Department is also working closely with TfL to ensure that the requirements of CTOC are reflected in the new or extended franchises which will operate on the Great Western and Greater Anglia routes.

Crossrail services via the central tunnel are on schedule to be operational from December 2018 with full services operating from late 2019.

The Crossrail board continues to forecast that the costs of constructing Crossrail will be within the agreed funding limits. We expect Crossrail to cost no more than £14.5 billion, excluding rolling stock costs.

All major contracts (excluding the rolling stock and depot contract) have now been awarded. To date, Crossrail Ltd has awarded direct contracts with a value of approximately £6 billion. UK businesses have benefited from the award of 97% of the contracts in the Crossrail supply chain, with 58% of contracts awarded to small and medium-sized enterprises and 43% awarded beyond London and the south-east.

During the passage of the Crossrail Bill through Parliament, a commitment was given that a statement would be published at least every 12 months until the completion of the construction of Crossrail, setting out information about the project’s funding and finances.

In line with this commitment, this statement comes within 12 months of the last one which was published on 10 July 2012, Official Report, column 22WS. The relevant information is as follows:

Motorcycle Test Review

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 4th July 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

Following research into the safety and feasibility of a single event on-road motorcycle test, I am today announcing the conclusion of the motorcycle test review.

The test review was commissioned to consider alternative ways of providing a single event practical motorcycle test that can be carried out on the road in a way that would maintain riding standards, protect safety and increase accessibility of the test for candidates, while meeting the requirements of the European legislation.

The test is currently carried out in two separate modules. Module 1 is undertaken off-road on a purpose-built manoeuvring area and tests the higher speed and slow manoeuvres. Module 2 is the practical on-road ride.

The research, which ended in March 2013, used test-ready learners to complete the proposed on-road manoeuvres and the existing module 1 manoeuvres under mock test conditions. Direct comparisons were made between the on-road and module 1 test.

The research concluded that an on-road test:

would result in a substantial increase in the number of incidents during tests;

increased the duration of the test, which would result in higher costs for both candidates and the Driving Standards Agency;

resulted in significantly more faults than the off-road test; and

was likely to encounter technical difficulties in identifying suitable sites with appropriate signage, and suitable speed measurement equipment.

I have therefore concluded that a single event on-road motorcycle test would not be in the interests of motorcycle test candidates or their trainers and examiners and have decided to conclude the motorcycle test review.

The research findings have been published today on the gov.uk website.

This does not mean that the review has been in vain. It has provided a welcome opportunity for the Department of Transport and the Driving Standards Agency to work with stakeholders to look at how the module 1 test could be improved. The Driving Standards Agency made changes to the module 1 test by reordering the manoeuvres and introducing greater flexibility in the way that riders speed is assessed. These changes were welcomed by both examiners and trainers and have resulted in fewer incidents, particularly during the hazard-avoidance exercise.

Since the review started, the Driving Standards Agency has implemented a range of improvements for stakeholders and customers taking tests in Great Britain. Test provision has been increased by opening three additional sites for module 1 tests and introducing module 2 tests at an additional eight driving test centres. More motorcycle examiners have been made available following a successful recruitment campaign; and improvements to the booking system has resulted in more test bookings being made available at times and dates that provide better access for motorcycle trainers and candidates.

The Government will continue to seek out new ways of improving motorcycle training and tackling motorcycle casualties, so that motorcycle incidents continue to fall.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 27th June 2013 Commons Chamber

[Karl MᶜCartney (Lincoln) (Con)]

3. What steps he is taking to reduce incidents of dangerous driving.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

We are taking forward the measures set out in the strategic framework for road safety. In 2012, a new offence of causing serious injury by dangerous driving came into force. We are also creating a new drug-driving offence and will consult on the limits shortly. We have also consulted on changes to make the enforcement of drink-driving laws more effective. Additionally, we intend to publish a Green Paper on young drivers later this year.

[Karl MᶜCartney]

My hon. Friend will be aware that in certain areas of our country there are drivers who have never taken a driving test. Has his Department investigated the potential benefits of requiring drivers to take a test every five or 10 years in order to reduce such incidents and make our roads safer by removing those who drive illegally?

[Stephen Hammond]

The Department has not investigated the potential benefits of that. We do not regard it as a priority, partly because if those people are driving illegally, they are unlikely to take the test. However, I can reassure my hon. Friend that we take illegal driving very seriously, and that the automatic number plate recognition system is helping us to crack down on illegal drivers.

[John Robertson (Glasgow North West) (Lab)]

Does the Minister now regret the axing of the targets on deaths and serious accidents on the roads, particularly in the light of the first increases in both categories for more than 10 years?

[Stephen Hammond]

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is out of touch. If he looks at the 2012 figures published this morning, he will see that deaths and serious injuries have reverted to the trend we had expected, and have fallen.

[Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con)]

When will the Minister’s Department implement part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 to prevent dangerous driving and to allow the prosecution of those who drive in cycle lanes and commit other moving traffic offences?

[Stephen Hammond]

My hon. Friend will be pleased to hear that we are having cross-departmental discussions on the matter. No decision has been taken yet, but I hope we will come to a conclusion in the near future.

[Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

When the Government announced trials of 80 mph limits on our motorways, there was dismay at the prospect of higher emissions, higher costs for drivers and collisions at higher speeds. The Minister announced in a recent speech that the trials were still on track, whereas the Secretary of State suggested in a press interview last Sunday that they were off the table. If there is one thing we need in road safety, it is clarity. Will the Minister tell us whether the Government are still pressing ahead with such a dangerous policy?

[Stephen Hammond]

The Government made an initial assessment of the possibility of introducing trials of 80 mph limits, but it is not a priority. What is a priority for this Government is the transformational investment that is delivering growth and road safety. Yesterday’s announcement by the Chancellor will give us the means to deliver that transformational change.

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

4. What progress he is making on funding the refurbishment of railway stations.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

Q5. What steps he is taking to support motorists; and if he will make a statement.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

Roads are vital to people and to the economy, but they have suffered from a lack of investment, and we expect traffic to increase in the years to come. Yesterday, the Chancellor announced the largest programme of investment on our roads for half a century to tackle congestion and support growth. As my hon. Friend will know, since we came to power we have been working hard to minimise costs for hard-pressed families by keeping fuel duty down.

[Robert Halfon]

The best way of helping Harlow motorists would be to provide an extra junction on the M11, junction 7a, which would reduce traffic and help businesses in my constituency. May I urge the Minister to give it his strong support?

[Stephen Hammond]

My hon. Friend will recall that I visited him in Harlow a few years ago and saw the scheme for myself. I know that there will be consultation on it over the summer, and that it is a priority for Essex county council. I do not think that I should prejudge the consultation, but, as he knows, I should be happy to meet him and his constituents to discuss the matter.

[Robert Flello (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)]

Will the Minister join me in congratulating Driver First Assist? It has provided great support for motorists, piloting work with the emergency services and the road haulage industry to promote crash-scene first aid and crash management skills among drivers. Will the Minister and the Secretary of State keep an eye out for an invitation to the national roll-out launch, which I believe is winging its way to their inboxes?

[Stephen Hammond]

I am delighted to support that initiative, and I look forward to the invitation. Let me also congratulate the road haulage industry on the work it has been doing to make its drivers aware of the danger posed to cyclists by vehicles, and on its excellent work in upgrading the technology in a number of vehicles.

[Jenny Chapman (Darlington) (Lab)]

6. What his policy is on the privatisation of east coast main line services; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seema Malhotra (Feltham and Heston) (Lab/Co-op)]

11. What his plans are for future investment in London’s transport network.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

In his spending round statement yesterday, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor announced that the Government will give the Mayor almost £9 billion of capital spending and additional financing power to the end of this decade. We will also consider the case for Crossrail 2. In return, we expect the Mayor to bear down on the running costs of Transport for London. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury will make a statement in a moment about investment in infrastructure, including investment in transport for London.

[Seema Malhotra]

The Piccadilly line is vital for thousands of my constituents travelling to work at the airport or to London and is a key route for Heathrow’s passengers. It is increasingly overcrowded and in need of upgrading. Will the Minister reassure me that where cuts are being made to Transport for London’s budget, made necessary by the Government’s failure to deliver growth, that will not put at risk this vital investment?

[Stephen Hammond]

The hon. Lady seems to have missed my response to her question, in which I said that we announced yesterday that we were giving the Mayor almost an extra £9 billion of capital. It is for the Mayor to make decisions about how he deploys that capital.

[Lyn Brown (West Ham) (Lab)]

Yesterday, when summing up the debate on HS2, the Minister of State, Department for Transport, failed to give comfort or even mention the Stratford solution to the congestion at Euston. Will the Government give a commitment to take seriously the cost-effective proposals for HS2 at Stratford to help the east of London, the City, Essex and Kent?

[Stephen Hammond]

My right hon. Friend obviously did not have quite enough time to mention Stratford in his closing remarks, but I assure the hon. Lady that the Government look at all these things seriously and will continue to do so.

[Simon Wright (Norwich South) (LD)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr David Ward (Bradford East) (LD)]

T5. My constituents face some of the highest car insurance premiums in the country. I am aware that many Departments have to be involved in this, but will the Minister reassure me that dealing with this terrible issue remains a top priority?

[Stephen Hammond]

I can indeed reassure the hon. Gentleman about that. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I hosted a follow-up summit on 25 March to discuss with the industry ways to bring down premiums. The Ministry of Justice has already banned referral fees and is consulting on steps to reduce the number of fraudulent whiplash claims. We are also taking steps to ensure that drivers are better prepared, the driving test is safer and there will be more responsible drivers on the road, which again will help to drive down premiums.

[Mr William Bain (Glasgow North East) (Lab)]

T2. In the past few years, rail fares have been rising almost three time as fast as wages, and are among the most expensive anywhere in Europe. What will the cap be on regulated rail fares by franchised rail operators in the 2015-16 financial year?

[Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)]

T6. This week, a private developer announced plans to invest £400 million in private housing in Worcestershire; it is also going to help with the dualling of the southern link road. Will the Department commit to working with my county council to ensure that we use the opportunity to unlock further investment in Worcester Parkway station and a new bridge across the River Severn to the heart of cyber valley in Malvern?

[Stephen Hammond]

I am happy to assure my hon. Friend that we will of course be pleased to work with the county council, as we already do. I was delighted that we were able to approve the Worcester integrated transport scheme last year, and my door is always open should she wish to make the case for her constituents.

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

T8. Will the Minister look into the scandal of Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency checks on the practices of private parking companies? Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is supposed to protect motorists from rogue car parking companies, such as the operator of Eastgate car park in Accrington, but the answer to a freedom of information request on 18 June revealed that, in breach of the 2012 Act, the DVLA is not checking either notices or correspondence between car parking companies and motorists.

[Stephen Hammond]

I visited the DVLA only a couple of weeks ago to look at the various departments there, and I know that the agency is alert to the problems of fraudulent car park operators. If the hon. Gentleman brings this particular case to me, I will make sure that we look into it.

[Sir Alan Haselhurst (Saffron Walden) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State accept that the transformation of the passenger experience at Stansted airport needs to be matched by a transformation in the time it takes to get to Stansted airport, specifically an improvement on the 51-minute journey, which I understand he undertook a week ago?

Approved Driving Instructors

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 27th June 2013 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond)]

The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) today launched a consultation on a reform of the regulatory framework for approved driving instructors (ADIs). The consultation seeks views on improving the way that people qualify to become driving instructors, including replacing the existing DSA qualifying tests with a new vocational qualification delivered by approved training centres and assessed by an external awarding organisation.

The new qualification would be aligned with DSA’s national standards that set out what skills are needed to be an effective driving instructor, and would reflect any changes introduced as a result of the Government’s upcoming Green Paper on young drivers.

The consultation also considers reforming the trainee licence scheme so that trainees would only be able to give paid tuition when accompanied by a fully qualified instructor; and seeks views on minor changes to the administration of the ADI register.

These proposals would also reduce the time and money that is currently wasted by many applicants as only 50% of them complete the current application process. Instead, the new system incorporates transferable credits which trainees will be able to carry forward to other vocational qualifications, if they change their mind about becoming an ADI. This allows for better job mobility.

The consultation will run from 27 June to 8 August 2013. The consultation paper is available at the following web address:

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/modernising-driver-training.