Motoring Services Strategy

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 20th June 2013 Written Statements

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

The Department for Transport is committed to delivering better quality and better value motoring services to the public and business. I am therefore pleased to announce today that a new single agency will bring together the testing and standards services that are currently provided by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) and the Driving Standards Agency (DSA). These services will be delivered by the two agencies under a single chief executive and transitional board from July this year.

Bringing together the testing and standards services currently provided by VOSA and DSA will enable a single agency to deliver the same high-quality service, but with greater efficiency, potentially allowing for the reduction of fees. It will be easier for customers to navigate the services offered, and will reduce the administrative burden for those individuals and businesses that currently have regular contact with both DSA and VOSA. The initial move will take place in July this year—a single chief executive and transitional board will oversee the two trading funds. The trading funds will continue in their current form for at least the next 12 months. By that time we expect the detail of the structural reorganisation to be complete.

This move will result in an improved service to the public. We will work to ensure that there is no detrimental effect on the high quality of customer service delivery during the transitional phase. We are also working closely with employees from the agencies to help support them through the changes.

This announcement follows the consultation on our motoring services strategy which ran from 13 December 2012 to 7 March 2013. The strategy proposed rationalising the roles and numbers of agencies to provide an improved and more efficient delivery of motoring services to customers. Respondents to the consultation were generally supportive of this proposal, recognising the benefits that such a move would bring, but were keen to protect the quality of services.

I am also publishing the summary of responses to that consultation. Decisions on any other proposals detailed in the motoring services strategy will be announced in due course.

EU Transport Council

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Monday 17th June 2013 Written Statements

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

I attended the final Transport Council of the Irish presidency in Luxembourg on Monday 10 June.

Transport Council agreed general approaches on five proposals: the interoperability of the rail system; roadworthiness roadside inspection and the associated vehicle registration measure; occurrence reporting in civil aviation and marine equipment.

The Commission had originally proposed that the European Rail Agency should undertake all vehicle authorisations on the proposal on the interoperability of the rail system (part of the fourth railway package). The presidency’s compromise text discussed in Council took on board the UK’s suggestion to give operators the choice to use national safety authorities where rolling stock would only be used domestically. I was therefore able to fully support this proposal.

The Council considered the proposal for a regulation on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles and a proposal for a directive on the registration documents of vehicles (the last two parts of the roadworthiness package—the Council had agreed its position on the proposal to change the periodic testing regime in December 2012). The Council agreed its position on the registration documents without discussion, while the roadside inspection proposal prompted a round table discussion. The most contentious issue was whether to exclude the N1 category of vehicles (vans and smaller lorries not exceeding 3.5 tonnes) from the scope of the proposal. I was able to support the presidency’s text, and in particular the exclusion of N1 vehicles.

I was also able to fully support the general approach on the proposal on occurrence reporting in civil aviation amending regulation (EU) No 996/2010 and repealing directive 2003/42/EC, Commission regulation (EC) No 1321/2007 and Commission regulation (EC) No 1330/ 2007. This proposal will update the rules requiring member states to establish reporting systems for aviation safety incidents.

I was able to support the presidency’s text on the proposal for a directive on marine equipment, having previously secured concessions, including on the use of delegated acts.

The presidency reported on the progress that had been achieved in negotiation with the European Parliament on the proposal for a regulation establishing the connecting Europe facility. The proposal will provide the legal base to give funding support to trans-European networks projects. The presidency hoped the file could be concluded soon.

Under any other business, the Commission reported on the latest developments on the aviation emissions trading scheme in the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). I stressed the importance of achieving a positive outcome at the ICAO Assembly in September and the need for the Commission to develop a comprehensive engagement and negotiating strategy.

The Commission also introduced its recently issued proposal to revise the 2004 rules on air passenger rights which it hoped would bring clarity following the ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in relation to denied boarding, and liabilities for airlines as a result of a number of extraordinary events in aviation since 2010. While welcoming the proposal, I noted that the UK would only be able to accept the regulation if it applied in full to Gibraltar airport.

The Commission introduced its new proposal on ports. I made the case strongly that there is no need for the proposal. I explained that there were significant new investments already going into ports, and that while transparency for public funding should be generally welcomed, for self-financing private ports they should remain subject to normal business accounting rules.

The Commission provided an update on its work on passenger ship safety which looks at measures to improve the safety of passenger ships, especially following the Costa Concordia disaster. The Commission did not currently foresee any legislative proposals, as much of the detail focussed on work that could be done within the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). The Commission said that it considered the IMO the best avenue to secure any changes.

Lithuania will take over the EU presidency from 1 July, and outlined their transport agenda. They would be seeking an agreement with the European Parliament on all elements of the roadworthiness package, occurrence reporting in Civil Aviation and on the marine equipment directive. They would also finalise agreement with the European Parliament on the European Marine Safety Agency funding regulation. for outstanding legislation, Lithuania would advance technical discussions on the fourth railway package and seek a general approach on air passenger rights.

Finally, I participated in the signing of a comprehensive air services agreement between the EU and Israel.

EU Transport Council

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 6th June 2013 Written Statements

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

I will attend the final Transport Council of the Irish presidency (the presidency) taking place in Luxembourg on Monday 10 June.

There will be a progress report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe facility. In general, I support this proposal and welcome the progress that has been made. However, on the transport side, there remain some issues relating to transport corridors which we are working to resolve.

The presidency intends to agree general approaches on four proposals.

The first is a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the rail system within the European Union (Recast) (part of the fourth railway package). I fully support this proposal and the adoption of a general approach by the Council.

The second is a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles and a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council directive 1999/37/EC on the registration documents of vehicles (roadworthiness package). There are some issues to be resolved on the technical roadside inspection of commercial vehicles aspect of the package where we are concerned about the inclusion of vans. I will express this concern at Council and I will seek to limit the impact on vans. I will be supporting the presidency proposal for a directive on the registration documents of vehicles.

The third is a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on occurrence reporting in civil aviation amending regulation (EU) No 996/2010 and repealing directive 2003/42/EC, Commission regulation (EC) No 1321/2007 and Commission regulation (EC) No 1330/2007. I fully support this proposal and the adoption of general approach by the Council.

The last is a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on marine equipment and repealing directive 96/98/EC. This proposal originally contained provisions that would have imposed significant new burdens on the UK maritime industry, such as requirements for electronic tagging and the submissions of patents. During negotiation, we were able to secure the removal of these provisions, and bring the proposal back into line with the existing regime and minimise its impact on business. The UK now supports all the objectives of the proposal, and is content with the current version.

Under any other business, the Commission will present its proposals on the ports policy review and air passenger rights. The Commission will also provide information on the aviation emissions trading scheme (ETS), aviation price transparency and passenger ship safety.

Motoring Offences (Fixed Penalty Levels)

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Wednesday 5th June 2013 Written Statements

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

In June 2012 the Government consulted on increasing the fixed penalty levels for most motoring offences and making careless driving a fixed penalty offence. The Government have today published their response to this consultation.

The changes will give the police the power to issue fixed penalty notices for careless driving and allow them greater flexibility when dealing with less serious careless driving offences—such as tailgating or middle lane hogging—as well as freeing them from resource-intensive court processes. The police will also be able to offer educational training as an alternative to licence endorsement. Drivers will still be able to appeal any decision in court.

Careless drivers put lives at risk and are also a major source of concern and irritation for law-abiding motorists.

Fixed penalty levels for most motoring offences—including using a mobile phone at the wheel and not wearing a seatbelt—will rise to £100 to bring them into line with the penalties for similar non-motoring fixed penalties. Fixed penalty levels for most of these motoring offences have not increased since 2000 and these changes are intended to ensure that penalties for motoring offences reflect the seriousness of the offence and are consistent with similar penalty offences—such as disorder.

The fixed penalty for careless driving will be £100 with three points on the driver’s licence. The most serious examples will continue to go through court, where offenders may face higher penalties.

The changes, which we aim to bring into force in July this year, are being introduced following extensive public consultation with road safety groups and police forces.

We are also increasing penalties for a range of other driving offences to a level which reflects their seriousness and which will ensure that they are consistent with other similar penalty offences:

A non-endorsable £30 fixed penalty notice will rise to £50;

An endorsable £60 and non-endorsable fixed penalty notice will rise to £100;

An endorsable £120 fixed penalty notice will rise to £200;

The fixed penalty notice for driving with no insurance will rise from £200 to £300.



Graduated fixed penalties (mainly for commercial goods and passenger-carrying vehicles and includes offences like drivers’ hours and overloading) and financial deposits (for drivers without a satisfactory UK address) will also increase:

A £30 non-endorsable fine will rise to £50;

A £60 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £100;

A £120 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £200;

A £200 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £300.

Endorsable road traffic offences contribute to a significant number of casualties. For example, in 2011, excess speed contributed to 213 deaths and using a mobile phone while driving contributed to 374 road casualties.

Though penalty levels will increase, penalty points will not change. Fixed penalty notices for parking, waiting and obstruction offences will also remain unchanged.

Lower Thames Crossing

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Tuesday 21st May 2013 Written Statements

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

The existing river crossing capacity in the lower Thames area—the Dartford-Thurrock crossing—is operating above the capacity it was designed for, and there is already serious congestion at the crossing with negative consequences for business productivity and the national economy. This crossing forms a key route within the strategic road network. It completes the orbital route of the M25 around London and provides the only Thames river crossing east of London. In addition, the Dartford-Thurrock crossing is located in the Thames Gateway area, where we expect substantial redevelopment and growth.

We therefore propose that a second crossing should be built across the Lower Thames and I am today publishing a consultation document inviting views on the relative merits of three options for locating a new road-based river crossing in the Lower Thames area and a variant of one of these three options.

The three options are:

Option A—at the site of the existing A282 Dartford-Thurrock river crossing;

Option B—connecting the A2 with the A1089; and

Option C—connecting the M2 with the A13 and the M25 between junctions 29 and 30.

A variant for Option C would additionally widen the A229 between the M2 and M20.

Government are committed to tackling the congestion at the Dartford-Thurrock crossing and will improve traffic flows by introducing free flow charging technology to replace the existing cash charge collection and extensive toll plazas. However, even with these improvements there will be a future need for additional river crossing capacity. That is why Government identified a new lower Thames crossing as one of its top 40 infrastructure projects in the national infrastructure plan 2011 and committed to reviewing and consulting on options for locating the new crossing.

The technical analysis undertaken for and by my Department is now complete. It has confirmed the need for additional road based river crossing capacity and concluded that that all three options—including one with the variant—would accommodate additional traffic growth and reduce congestion at the existing crossing albeit to varying extents. In addition, the review has concluded that it would technically be feasible to deliver a scheme at all of the options.

The consultation document and related technical reports, which I am publishing today, set out the findings of the technical analysis for the three options considered and the variant. It presents information about the impacts of providing a crossing at each of the options and invites views from all interested parties.

The responses received to this consultation will be analysed and interpreted to help inform our decision on where to locate a new crossing. In weighing up the relative merits of the alternate locations, Government will need to consider the relative economic, environmental and social impacts as well as the potential cost, affordability and value for money.

This is the first stage of decision making. Subject to the decision on location, work will commence on the development of a scheme at the selected location and this will involve further consultation.

I am pleased to announce that the consultation will run from Tuesday 21 May until Tuesday 16 July. Anyone with an interest is invited to take part. A consultation document and instructions for responding can be found on my Department’s website. An electronic copy has been lodged with the Library of the House.

Department for Transport officials will also be available to answer questions with public information events on the following dates:

Thursday 13 June, Dartford library, 2-8pm;

Saturday 15 June, Grays library, 10am-5pm;

Monday 17 June, Chadwell library, 2-7pm;

Thursday 20 June, Bluewater shopping centre, 10am-9pm;

Friday 21 June, Lakeside shopping centre, 10am-10pm; and

Saturday 22 June, Gravesend library, 9am-5pm.

Route-based Strategies

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Monday 20th May 2013 Written Statements

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

Our motorways and trunk roads play a vital role in the economic prosperity of this country. This is why this Government are committed to implementing a robust approach to identifying, prioritising and planning where vital investment is needed on this network, to help keep traffic moving and facilitate economic growth, housing and jobs.

In May 2012 we set out in our response to Alan Cook’s review of the strategic road network in England, plans for a new smarter approach to investment planning for this network, through route-based strategies. As part of this we made clear that these documents would see greater collaboration with local stakeholders through local authorities and local enterprise partnerships to determine the nature, need and timing of future investment that might be required on the network. Central to this would be the need to understand local economic growth aspirations and priorities to ensure that investment plans better balance local as well as national needs.

We further outlined that the Highways Agency would produce a small number of strategies to test this new approach and learn lessons before developing a wider programme. Today the Highways Agency is publishing the first three route-based strategies which cover; the M62 between Leeds and Manchester; the A12 between its junction with the M25 and A14 and the A120 east of Colchester; and the A1 West of Newcastle. These documents are available on the Highways Agency website.

We now intend to roll out route-based strategies across the entire network. The production of the first three strategies has generated some key lessons which have informed our thinking on how best to deliver the network wide programme of strategies and prioritise the outcomes.

The strategies will be developed in two stages. In the first stage the Highways Agency will work with local stakeholders to develop a uniform set of route-based strategies for all routes on the network. The strategies will identify performance issues on routes and future challenges, taking account of local growth challenges and priorities. The emphasis for this stage will be on establishing the evidence base as opposed to identifying solutions, which will take place in the next stage. It is intended that this first stage will be completed by spring 2014.

The Highways Agency and the Department will then use this evidence to prioritise and take forward a programme of work to identify indicative solutions which will cover operational, maintenance and if appropriate, road improvement schemes to inform investment plans for the next full spending review in 2015 and beyond. The Highways Agency will ensure they engage further with local stakeholders as the indicative solutions are developed and it is anticipated that this second stage will commence in spring 2014 and complete by March 2015.

Over the next few months the Highways Agency will be talking to key stakeholders to: seek further views and lessons learnt on the production of the first three strategies; share their plans on delivery of the wider programme; and to start to seek input to developing the evidence base for the wider programme of strategies. I have seen first hand the willingness of stakeholders to work with the Highways Agency to identify priorities and needs and do hope that they will continue to do so as the strategies are developed.

I am confident that this strong evidence-led approach will enable us to develop investment plans with a longer-term focus and that better balance national and local needs, create healthy pipelines of investment and crucially deliver investment where it is needed most to boost the economic growth and competiveness of this country.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 25th April 2013 Commons Chamber

[Rebecca Harris (Castle Point) (Con)]

3. What steps his Department is taking to reduce congestion on the road network in south Essex; and if he will make a statement.

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

Tackling congestion as a barrier to growth is a key issue for the Department. In Essex we have invested in major schemes, such as the £63 million improvement to the Sadler’s Farm junction on the A13, funded schemes to tackle pinchpoints on both the strategic and the local roads, and provided £5.3 million of additional funding for maintenance in Essex to ensure that its roads are of the highest quality.

[Rebecca Harris]

We are grateful for the improvements that we have already seen in south Essex, but the Minister is aware of the long-running campaign for a third road off Canvey Island, having visited the area himself. Local residents and local business leaders in particular think the case for a third access road is now more compelling than ever in terms of growth, because of the many business developments taking place along the Thames Gateway. Will the Minister or the Secretary of State meet me and others to discuss the business case for a third road?

[Stephen Hammond]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for pointing out that I am well aware of her long-running campaign, and I pay tribute to her and her county councillor Ray Howard for the work that they have done on the scheme. I or my the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (Norman Baker), would be delighted to meet her and to discuss the need for a third access road.

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

My hon. Friend will be aware that Essex council has made it a top priority to press for an extra M11 junction, 7A, into Harlow. Will my hon. Friend meet me, Essex council and relevant authorities in order that we can make the case for this important junction?

[Stephen Hammond]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that request. He will know that we have already committed £3 million for improvements at the A414 Clock Tower junction in his constituency in the last round of local pinchpoint funding. I will, of course, be happy to accept an invitation to meet him and his colleagues about the junction on the M11.

[Mr Brian H. Donohoe (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)]

4. What plans he has for road maintenance funding.

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

The Highways Agency, which is responsible for operating, maintaining and improving the strategic road network in England, has a budget this financial year for some £750 million worth of highways maintenance, excluding the costs associated with private finance initiative projects. The Department is also providing £890 million this financial year to local highway authorities in England for highways maintenance. Funding for highways maintenance in Scotland is a matter for the Scottish Government.

[Mr Donohoe]

Across the whole United Kingdom, potholes are appearing in all our roads because of the cuts taking place. I remember my grandmother telling me, “A stitch in time saves nine.” It is for the Government to start believing that that is a good way forward for the maintenance of our roads. It is costing local government more money in compensation for cars in accidents as a result of potholes than it would for them to repair the roads.

[Stephen Hammond]

I would gently point out that before local authorities start suggesting that the problem is due to cuts in the maintenance budget, they should recognise the more than £3 billion that this Government are giving to maintenance over the life of this Government, the £200 million given in March 2011 for severe weather, and the extra money given at the last autumn statement. The potholes review has published a number of conditions that local councils ought to meet to ensure that they do indeed follow the “stitch in time saves nine” adage from the hon. Gentleman, rather than just putting a band aid solution in place.

[Stephen Mosley (City of Chester) (Con)]

In Chester, potholes have been caused by the bad weather—the freezing rain and snow we have had over the past winter, which has been a bad one. What additional help can the Minister offer my local authority to help put right the damage caused by the weather?

[Stephen Hammond]

I would like to be able to control the weather, but of course I cannot. It is right that the Government recognise that the pothole damage has undoubtedly been caused by the weather. That is why the Chancellor announced additional funding in the autumn statement.

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

Will the Minister please clarify the rather confused briefing put out a few weeks ago on funding to help ease congestion on the M4 around Newport? We have had another incident this week, so it would be really useful to know what progress is being made.

[Stephen Hammond]

I am not sure where the confused briefing came from, but I assume that it must be the Welsh Government, because funding for the M4 around Newport is, as the hon. Lady knows, a matter for them.

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

One of the lead stories on the BBC’s “Breakfast” this morning was about potholes. The National Audit Office calculates that it would be cheaper to repair our roads than to deal with the damage and injuries caused by potholes. Regardless of whether they are the result of the weather or the cuts, has the Minister had discussions with Treasury colleagues on trying to get additional funding to use those infrastructure projects to get the UK economy moving?

[Stephen Hammond]

I announced earlier the huge amount of money the Government are committing to highways maintenance. We have continual discussions with the Treasury on the money needed for that, and I am delighted that this Government’s settlement for highways maintenance has been better than that achieved by the previous Government. We remain committed to ensuring that potholes are repaired, and I remind local authorities of their obligations.

[Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab)]

5. What obligation will be placed on any future holder of the east coast main line rail franchise to co-operate with High Speed 2 to ensure that classic compatible train services connect the north-east and York to High Speed 2.

--- Later in debate ---

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

T5. The A64 is an extremely dangerous and highly congested road serving businesses along the route right through Thirsk and Malton between York, Filey and Scarborough. Will it qualify for a pinchpoint scheme, and what other criteria will it need to meet?

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

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. She will know that the criteria for pinchpoint funds were set out with regard to the first three rounds. They fall under a certain financial limit and are completed by March 2015. We are in discussions on how further tranches will work in terms of the extension of the date of completion. I am convinced that given the record of the A64—one of the criteria is safety—it will be looked on favourably.

[Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab)]

The east coast main line has returned £640 million to the public purse since 2009. Sadly, private ownership has failed the travelling public of the east coast franchise. What possible public benefit can be gained by another wasteful and expensive round of refranchising, when east coast is already where the vast majority of the public want it, in public ownership?

Road Safety

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 25th April 2013 Westminster Hall

[Mrs Ellman]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. He was a member of the Committee when we conducted our inquiry, and I clearly remember him raising the matter in his questioning. The views that he expressed in the Committee are on the record, as his comments today will be.

We were informed during our inquiry by the then Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), that a consultation period would begin soon. However, to date there has been no formal consultation on this proposal and there have been rumours in the media that the Government no longer wish to pursue that policy. Will the Minister update us on the Government’s position? I would be grateful if he also told us what work the Department has carried out to assess the impact of trialling this proposal, which was one suggestion. Will he assure us that any decision to increase the speed limit will follow a debate in the House on a votable motion, as the Committee requested?

In conclusion, road safety is a vital issue. Behind every casualty statistic is a human tragedy. Road safety is a matter on which the Government should show more leadership. It is immensely regrettable that 2011 saw the first annual increase in the number of people killed in road accidents since 2003, and that the number of people killed or seriously injured also increased in that period.

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

I am sure the hon. Lady wants to put on the record the fact that, although she is absolutely right that the figures for 2011 are entirely regrettable and unacceptable, the provisional figures for 2012 show a welcome drop back to the trend that we saw before the blip caused by the bad weather in 2011.

[Mrs Ellman]

I am aware of the provisional figures. We need to see the official figures so that we can analyse them properly and ensure that they are the start of a return to the trend over a number of years of reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured on our roads. I know that the Government are firm in their commitment to bring more safety to our roads and to reduce casualties, and I look forward to hearing more proposals about how they will put their commitment into practice.

--- Later in debate ---

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

It is good to see you in the Chair, Mr Bayley. I can only echo the sentiments of the hon. Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Jim Fitzpatrick). It is always a pleasure to follow him; he has a sensible and pragmatic approach to the present subject and to others in his portfolio. I shall of course probably not be able to deal with all the points that I have been asked about.

I welcome the Select Committee report, and listened carefully to the speech of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs Ellman). As I have mentioned, I suspect that I shall not, in the relatively short time that will be available to me, cover all her questions or those of the shadow Minister; however, because of that, should they care to write to me, I shall make sure that those questions are answered fully.

The number of fatalities has now returned to a downward trend. There was a 7% decrease in the 12 months to the end of September 2012, in comparison with the previous 12 months. There were 1,770 deaths, and that is the lowest number on record for a 12-month period. However, as I have often said, and as the Opposition have said too—it is not a party political issue—road fatalities are not statistics, but someone’s mother, father, brother, sister, son or daughter. Those are real lives, cut short. I accept that the strategic framework does not carry targets, but that does not mean that there is not a clear vision for continuing to avoid complacency and drive down the number of casualties. We will be judged on the actions that we take, and the outcomes.

I want to talk briefly about enforcement. We are creating a new offence of driving with a specified drug in the body, above certain limits, to make it easier to enforce the law against drug-driving. We are consulting on improving the enforcement of the drink-driving laws, and changing the treatment of fixed penalty notices. I expect to make a further announcement about that relatively shortly. We shall make it easier for the police to tackle careless driving, by consulting on making it a fixed penalty notice offence.

I shall use the bulk of my time to talk about young drivers. That continues to be a matter of paramount concern. One fifth of the people killed or seriously injured in collisions on the roads in 2011—those are the most recent absolutely accurate numbers—were aged 17 to 24. As pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for North Herefordshire (Bill Wiggin) and others, it is not only young drivers whom we need to educate; we should educate young people about the roads before they become drivers. I appreciate, welcome and encourage initiatives by charities and car clubs to start people thinking at 14 about how they should interact safely with the road. We shall put continuing funding into Bikeability for the next two years before the general election.

Our forthcoming young drivers Green Paper will consider a range of innovative proposals for reforming young driver training and thus improving safety. I do not want to prejudge the options or the outcome, but I expect the Green Paper to include temporary restrictions on young drivers after they pass their test; there is a delicate balance between making those drivers safer and not impinging on their freedoms. I expect that it will also include a minimum learning period before candidates are allowed to sit the test; allowing learners to practise some form of motorway driving; and providing incentives for young drivers to continue their training once they have passed their test.

That is one area in which we are working with the insurance industry. We want to consider measures to reduce premiums and improve safety. Research shows that telematics can significantly reduce crash rates and risky driving behaviour. I welcome the increase in the number of insurers using that technology. Improving the safety of young drivers will not only reduce casualty rates, but make insurance more affordable, so that fewer people will commit an offence in that respect.

I should like to say much more about young drivers, but because of time pressure I shall now move on to the THINK! campaigns. Those marketing campaigns continue to play an extraordinarily important role in reminding drivers of key road safety messages. In the autumn, we launched one for drivers and cyclists, reminding them to consider their behaviour towards others. We recently launched a campaign urging drivers to look out for motorcyclists, particularly at those junctions where they have been proved to be vulnerable. That campaign follows coherently from what we set up last autumn.

That is not all, however, and it should not be. The £107 million made available by the Government through 2012 to improve the cycling infrastructure in England includes £35 million for attention to those junctions that we have judged, and local authorities have presented, as the most dangerous for cyclists. As the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr Leech) said, we have made it easier for councils to introduce zones with speed limits of 20 mph. We have also made it simpler for councils to install Trixi mirrors to improve cyclist visibility at junctions.

Improving cycling safety remains a key priority for the whole Government. I was delighted about attending the launch of the all-party group report, yesterday, and about the commitments that were made. My colleague as Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker), continues to work with cycling stakeholders on what more can be done. As I pledged yesterday, he and that group will consider the recommendations of the report, and submit a Government response. We intend to treat it like a Select Committee report, as we committed ourselves to do at its hearings.

We are also improving pedestrian safety. The local sustainable transport fund is providing £600 million for projects to support local growth and reduce carbon emissions, but many of the schemes improve aspects of the routes that pedestrians most commonly use, and crossings. There are also schemes to boost safety awareness. We expect any further extension of the fund to include those benefits. We are also updating the THINK! education assets that we provide for use in schools. I expect when the next iteration is launched, it will have much more accessible material.

Last month, we launched the new research portal, the road safety observatory. It gives road safety professionals access to research on a variety of topics. The site is part funded by the Department and a board drawn from various road safety bodies. The observatory will be a live site, updated whenever new research is produced. Such sites help local authorities to assess their own progress, establish where action is needed and identify best practice. The project is not an attempt just to name and shame; it is intended to be positive, so that local authorities will see where best practice has been established, and follow it.

The Department is aware that several local authorities use such sites to look at their performance. We have been pleased with the response so far from road safety bodies, with respect to the value and validity of the research and statistics. We had not yet heard the concerns expressed by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside, but I will ensure that we keep that matter under review when we are preparing any response. I do not have a list of the costs of establishment or maintenance that she asked for, but I undertake to provide those details to her in a letter.

As to the Green Paper time scale, I should perhaps have said that we intend to consult on the proposals before the summer recess, and hopefully by the end of June. I anticipate a full 12-week consultation. I now seem to have a little longer for my speech than I expected, so I may pick up some more points that were made in the debate.

[Hugh Bayley (in the Chair)]

My guess is maybe two or three minutes.

[Stephen Hammond]

I am grateful, Mr Bayley.

The hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside asked me how often there are meetings of the cycle safety stakeholder group. It meets four times a year. It met in January and is next due to meet in May. The motorcycle test review was brought up, in particular, by the hon. Member for Poplar and Limehouse. There was a delay in the test review research, due to recruiting a number of candidates to ensure that the test had validity, but that difficulty has been overcome. I am expecting to receive the final report of those tests, again, in the month of May, and the Government commit to making a statement further to that.

It is fitting that this debate is taking place only a few days before UN global road safety week. That week’s very existence is a reminder of how tragically common, as the hon. Gentleman so rightly pointed out, road deaths are across the globe, and still are in this country. It is also a reminder of how preventable many of those deaths are and how much we still have to do. We welcome the UN’s launch of a decade for action on road safety, and the Government recognise that in our road safety policies.

We are proud of the country’s road safety record, but far from complacent and determined to improve on it: by training and testing drivers more effectively, particularly young drivers; by raising the awareness of road safety; by legislating in response to changing road conditions; by ensuring that the enforcement agencies and the police have the right ability to enforce the law with regard to drivers and vehicles; and by investing in our roads, particularly concentrating some of that investment on the most dangerous road junctions.

Road safety remains a top priority for the Government. The Transport Committee’s report makes an important contribution to the country’s strategy for road safety. We will continue to consider the Committee’s recommendations, as we look at ways in which lives in this country can by saved by preventing road accidents.

[Hugh Bayley (in the Chair)]

I thank all Members for co-operating to make sure that we could bring the debate to an end.

Question put and agreed to.

Executive Agencies (Business Plans 2013-14)

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Monday 15th April 2013 Written Statements

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

I am pleased to announce that all of the Department for Transport’s Executive agencies published their annual business plans on the 3 April. The Highways Agency (HA), the Driving Standards Agency (DSA), the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), the Vehicle Certification Agency (VGA), the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) business plans are now available electronically on agency websites and copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. The business plans set out the agencies’ budgets, key priorities, activities and performance measures for 2013-14. Service users and members of the public will be able to assess how the agencies have performed against the delivery of their business plans through their annual reports that will be published next year.

The Department also published on the same day the first performance specification for the strategic road network which sets out five outcomes and underlying key performance deliverables for this network for the period 2013-15. This meets a key recommendation made by Alan Cook in his review of the strategic road network and outlines the Government’s commitment to improve the future efficiency and reliability of Highways Agency roads. This is about establishing a more transparent and robust system for monitoring the performance of the Highways Agency leading to a more effective strategic road network for all road users. The Highways Agency’s latest business plan sets out the activities which will contribute towards the delivering of this performance specification.

Road Safety

Stephen Hammond Excerpts

Thursday 21st March 2013 Written Statements

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

I am today launching two new websites: the road safety comparison site and the road safety observatory.

The road safety comparison site will help the public and road safety professionals compare the road safety performance of local authorities. We also committed to part-funding the road safety observatory, which provides access to academic road safety research. In launching these two new sites we are fulfilling our commitment made in the “Strategic Framework for Road Safety” published 11 May 2011.

The road safety comparison site makes clear to the public, local authorities and other partners how a local highway authority is performing by putting collision and casualty numbers into context. By setting those numbers against population, traffic levels, road length and authority spend we have produced a set of indicators showing performance over the last seven years and where that authority stands against others. The site also provides a mapping facility that can be filtered so that a user can, for example, see how many cyclists or children have been involved in collisions on a particular road.

The road safety observatory provides a resource for professionals and practitioners, giving them the access to empirical road safety research by taking that research and summarising it in plain English. This site has been part funded by the Department and the project run by a board drawn from various road safety bodies, including RoadSafe, the Parliamentary Accounts Committee for Transport Safety (PACTS), the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), the RAC Foundation, the Association of Directors for the Environment, Planning and Transport (ADEPT), Road Safety GB, the South West Public Health Observatory, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Automobile Association.

The observatory will be a live site and will be updated as and when new research is produced.