Oral Answers to Questions
David Mundell Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Simon Lightwood
I will of course join my hon. Friend in commending the Mayor of London for the work that he is doing to keep the people who power our transport system safe. A well-functioning transport system is integral to growth. While we continue to decarbonise the transport system, we must also ensure that it is resilient to the impacts of climate change. The Government have published our climate adaptation strategy for transport, which sets out our vision for a climate-resilient transport system that underpins growth, keeps people and goods moving, and supports every part of the UK economy.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
Does the Minister hold any sway with the bus operator Stagecoach? If so, can he convey the concerns of my constituents about the reliability of the X74 service, which operates between Dumfries and Glasgow? Stagecoach has put older buses on this route, leading to poorer reliability and more cancellations. Given that most of the route is along a motorway, I am sure he understands how unsatisfactory breakdowns are.
Simon Lightwood
I of course agree that safe, reliable and affordable bus travel is really important. That is why we passed the Bus Services Act to empower local leaders to take greater control of bus services, and why we are providing £3 billion of extra support over the next couple of years to boost bus numbers. However, reliability is of course key, and I hope that Stagecoach is listening very carefully.
Carlisle-Settle Railway: 150th Anniversary
David Mundell Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Ms Minns
It is always a pleasure to be intervened on by the hon. Member. As I will go on to say, there are many lessons from the history of the railway line that we can apply to the challenges that community groups across the country raise when they are campaigning for their local railways. We can learn a lot from the Carlisle-Settle railway.
Entire settlements were established to house the workforce, who founded many of the villages along the line today. Their story is an important part of the railway’s heritage and deserves to be remembered alongside the engineering achievements for which the line is famous. The engineer responsible for the project was John Crossley. As Cumbrian ramblers will testify, the terrain over which he engineered the line is not forgiving. Construction was frequently halted by snow, flooding and frozen ground. One contractor withdrew altogether after underestimating the severity of the landscape and weather conditions. Despite those challenges, the line was completed and open for passenger services in 1876, just 11 years after Parliament had passed the enabling Act. I am sure the Minister wishes he had a few John Crossleys on hand for some of our rail projects today.
The railway required the construction of 14 tunnels and 22 viaducts. The most famous, the Ribblehead viaduct, stands 104 feet high and comprises 24 magnificent arches stretching across the north-west landscape. Soon after crossing Ribblehead, trains enter Blea Moor tunnel, which is driven deep beneath the moors for more than a mile and a half. The line also travels to Ais Gill summit, the highest point reached by any mainline railway in England. There are fascinating stories along the route. In Lazonby, local legend tells us that the tunnel was constructed at the request of a local vicar who did not wish the railway to pass directly in front of his vicarage. One hundred and fifty years later, the structures remain, as a testament to Victorian ingenuity, determination and ambition.
Despite its engineering significance and strategic importance, the future of the Carlisle-Settle railway became increasingly uncertain during the second half of the 20th century. In 1963, the Beeching report recommended the withdrawal of passenger services from the line. Although those proposals were not immediately implemented, station closures and service reductions followed. By 1970, all stations apart from Settle and Appleby had been closed and passenger services had been reduced to just two trains a day in each direction. In the 1970s, the railway suffered years of under-investment. Freight traffic was diverted on to the electrified west coast main line, ageing infrastructure deteriorated and viaducts and tunnels were allowed to fall into disrepair. By the early 1980s, British Rail was arguing that the cost of maintaining the railway could no longer be justified, and proposals were made to close it entirely.
What followed was one of the most inspiring grassroots campaigns in British railway history. In June 1981, before closure had even been formally announced, the Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line held their inaugural meeting in Settle town hall. They recognised the threat and they acted. Soon, they were joined by local authorities, rail users, railway development groups, environmental campaigners and communities along the route.
When closure notices appeared in 1984, the campaign intensified. Campaigners challenged BR’s assumptions and highlighted the railway’s wider value. They argued that its tourism potential had been overlooked. They argued that its role as a strategic diversionary route had been underestimated. They argued that closure would damage the communities who depended on the railway. They were right. The campaign also exposed what many regarded as a policy of closure by stealth: reduced services, diverted traffic and inflated repair estimates, all to justify closure.
The publicity surrounding the campaign encouraged people to start using the railway in unprecedented numbers. The number of passenger journeys rose dramatically, from 93,000 in 1983 to 450,000 by 1989. In 2025, almost 1 million journeys were made along the Carlisle-Settle railway.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I commend the hon. Lady for raising the issue: the Carlisle-Settle railway line is so important, and Carlisle is a great railway town with such a strong tradition. Does she agree that the points that she makes about the campaign for the Carlisle-Settle line are also applicable to the Borders railway extension from Carlisle to Tweedbank? That extension would bring the tourism benefits, scenery and opportunities that keeping the Settle-Carlisle line open has brought.
Ms Minns
I completely agree with the right hon. Member, who is my constituency neighbour and friend. The spirit that we see today in the Borders rail campaign is exactly that which we saw in the Carlisle-Settle line campaign. He is absolutely right about the economic benefits, which have already been demonstrated between Edinburgh and Tweedbank and could also be realised in the Carlisle-Tweedbank extension. I am grateful that this Government, alongside the Scottish Government, have ensured that funding is now in place for the viability work on the remaining leg between Tweedbank and Carlisle.
On 11 April 1989, the then Secretary of State for Transport, Paul Channon, announced that consent for closure would be refused, as repair costs were found to be lower than was originally claimed, and passenger growth had demonstrated the continuing viability of the line. That remains one of the most significant victories for community transport campaigning anywhere in the United Kingdom. Today, as we celebrate the anniversary, we should acknowledge every person who played a role in that achievement: the volunteers, campaigners, railway staff, local councillors, passengers and community leaders who fought for the railway’s future. They ensured that future generations would continue to benefit from this remarkable line.
There is perhaps no more touching symbol of the campaign than Ruswarp the border collie, whose owner Graham Nuttall served as the first secretary of the Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line. Ruswarp famously signed, with his paw print, the petition to save the railway. After Graham Nuttall tragically lost his life while walking in Wales in 1990, Ruswarp remained at his side for 11 weeks before they were found. Today, a bronze statue stands at Garsdale station, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge), commemorating Ruswarp’s loyalty and courage. It has become one of the most beloved landmarks on the railway and a reminder of the devotion that people have shown to protecting the line.
The story of the Carlisle-Settle railway did not end with its reprieve. In many ways, a new chapter had begun. Today, the line is operated by Northern Trains and supported by an outstanding partnership of organisations. The Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line continue their invaluable advocacy and volunteering work, the Settle and Carlisle Railway Trust helps to preserve and promote its heritage, and the Settle-Carlisle Railway Development Company serves as an accredited community rail partnership, working to encourage tourism, education and community engagement. Their efforts have transformed the railway into one of Britain’s great rail success stories.
The line continues to bring thousands of visitors into Cumbria, Westmorland and Yorkshire every year. It supports our local economies, connects our rural communities and introduces new generations to our railway heritage. This anniversary year demonstrates that spirit perfectly. Schools, volunteers, artists and community groups are all helping to tell the railway story through events and exhibitions. I was particularly pleased to see the commissioning of a new play, “Lives Along the Line”, by Yorkshire playwright Joan Barnard, which the Vagabond theatre group will perform this summer at Appleby public hall and the Victoria Hall in Settle. The play will bring to life the stories of the people whose lives have been shaped by the railway over the past century and a half.
What makes the Carlisle-Settle railway so special? It is one of the most beautiful railway journeys in the world. Few railways can rival its combination of dramatic landscapes, historic stations and iconic engineering. From my home of Carlisle, through the Eden valley and to Yorkshire’s three peaks, it offers views that attract visitors from across Britain and beyond. However, its importance extends far beyond tourism. For many communities, it remains a vital transport link, providing access to employment, education, healthcare and leisure opportunities. For rural communities along the route, it remains every bit as important as those who campaigned to save it understood it would be.
The railway also continues to play an important strategic role in the rail network. When the west coast main line is closed because of engineering works, weather events, which are sadly all too familiar in my part of the country, or any other disruption, the Carlisle-Settle railway provides an invaluable diversionary route. In an age in which resilience and redundancy within critical infrastructure are increasingly important, the line’s value stretches far beyond the communities it serves. The railway’s resilience was demonstrated once again following Storm Desmond and the major landslip at Eden Brows in 2015 and 2016. The subsequent repairs demonstrated the continued commitment to preserving this vital railway for future generations.
As we look ahead to what I hope will be another 150 years of the Carlisle-Settle line, we should remember the lesson at the heart of its story, which is that infrastructure should never be judged purely through the lens of short-term accounting; we must also recognise the social value, strategic importance, connectivity, resilience and heritage. Had closure gone ahead in 1989, Britain would have lost one of its greatest railways. Instead, thanks to the determination of campaigners and communities, we are celebrating its 150th anniversary.
I ask the Minister, my friend and fellow rail enthusiast, for reassurance that the long-term future of the Carlisle-Settle railway remains secure, that the Government recognise its ongoing strategic value to our national rail network, and that the community organisations and volunteers who do so much to support the line will continue to receive the backing that they deserve. I also ask him to join me in paying tribute to the Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line, the Settle and Carlisle Railway Trust, the Settle-Carlisle Railway Development Company and all those whose dedication continues to sustain this remarkable railway.
Most importantly, I ask the Minister to join me in thanking the visionaries who refused to accept that this railway’s story was over. Because of them, trains still run between Carlisle and Settle; because of them, communities remain connected; because of them, future generations will continue to enjoy one of the finest railway journeys anywhere in the world. Long may that continue.
Free Bus Travel: Over-60s
David Mundell Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for his introduction to the debate. His contribution, along with that of my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington), reminded me that I should be grateful that Edinburgh benefits from a publicly owned bus and tram service. Both are award winning nationally and compete against commercial services. In Edinburgh, the bus service runs essentially without subsidy and often returns a dividend to its owner—the people of Edinburgh—to be spent in Edinburgh, while its bus drivers are among the best paid in the country. I am sure, Mr Mundell, that you have experience of Lothian Buses, and that you will not disagree with me that the worst Lothian bus is better than the best London bus, by far. I note that you are smiling, so I will take that as agreement.
Members might be glad to hear that I want to use this debate not just to speak about Lothian Buses, but to pay tribute to my Scottish Labour colleague Sarah Boyack MSP, who is set to retire this year. I use the word retire gently, because I do not think she particularly enjoys hearing it. As you will remember, Mr Mundell, she served in Donald Dewar’s Cabinet as Scotland’s first Transport Minister. Scotland had a hotchpotch of concessionary travel delivered by local authorities across the country, but Sarah changed that in her role by taking steps to establish national minimum standards of service for all old age pensioners—that is what older people were called back then—and disabled people. To start with, that was free travel outside morning peak times, but it was soon expanded to free 24/7 travel, and more recently to include all people under 22. I do not know what Sarah would say was her greatest achievement in politics, but I feel that free bus travel for older people, disabled people and now younger people must have had the greatest impact of all her decisions.
This is not just about saving money; it is about ensuring that people can keep in touch with friends and family, thereby helping tackle social isolation that many older and disabled people face. Interestingly, when Sarah started on this journey, there were different thresholds for access to free service, because retirement ages were different back then, but over time, they have aligned to allow those aged over 60 to access free travel. Although my head tells me that it does not make sense to provide free bus travel to over-60s who are travelling to well-paid jobs in Edinburgh, many people in that age range—I am only 1,254 days away from being eligible for my free bus pass in Scotland—see that pass as a reward from the country for their contribution to the community or greater society. People hold it dearly, and it would be brave of any Scottish Government to suggest that it should be removed.
I hope that Members across all parties will listen to the experience in Scotland, and I hope that the Chair will join me in wishing Sarah well as she approaches her non-retirement.
David Mundell (in the Chair)
Indeed I do join the hon. Gentleman in wishing Sarah Boyack well. She has made a huge contribution to the Scottish Parliament in the 26 years she has served there, in different capacities.
Oral Answers to Questions
David Mundell Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lilian Greenwood
My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. We are holding the DVSA to account for successfully implementing the measures in last December’s seven-point plan. Some 165 new driving examiners have already passed their training and are working in driving test centres, and last year the DVSA provided 1.95 million tests. This month, it will launch an accelerated consultation on improvements to the test booking system to end the reselling of tests and the exploitation of learners, which is completely unacceptable.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
Does the Minister acknowledge that part of what has happened as a result of the pressure tests has been a displacement of learner drivers to test centres in rural areas, where they perceive that there might be less waiting time? That is prejudicing against local applicants. Will she do everything she can to ensure that local applicants for tests get priority?
Lilian Greenwood
The right hon. Gentleman raises an important point. We know that people are booking tests in parts of the country where they have no intention of taking a test, because they can swap that for a test in another driving test centre. That is one of the issues addressed in the call for evidence that was launched in December. We have heard that evidence, and we will consult on further changes to the booking system that might address the issue that he raises.
Disruption at Heathrow
David Mundell Excerpts(1 year, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Heidi Alexander
I recognise that Heathrow provides really important connectivity for our regional airports, and therefore for my hon. Friend’s constituents. I can assure her that I will keep the House updated, once both the internal review commissioned by Heathrow comes back and the report by NESO has been published.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
Obviously, this event was on a catastrophic scale, but there is regular disruption at Heathrow. One of the consequences of that is the wholesale cancellation of flights between Heathrow and Scotland, which I have raised previously in this Chamber. When Ruth Kelly does her report on Heathrow’s resilience, will she look at its wider resilience and its ability to cope with weather-related or other technical issues, so that they do not lead to the wholesale cancellation of flights between Scotland and London?
Heidi Alexander
I am not writing the terms of reference for the Kelly review, because it has been commissioned by Heathrow airport itself, and I hesitate to stand at the Dispatch Box and try to amend the terms of a private company’s review. The aviation Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), tells me that the right hon. Gentleman has written to him about this issue, and he is due to come back to him on it. The matter is also being considered by the aviation futures forum.
Oral Answers to Questions
David Mundell Excerpts(1 year, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Simon Lightwood
I agree that investment in our transport infrastructure across the country is essential to our growth mission. I am aware of the investment zone bid involving Glasgow airport, and the aviation Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), would be delighted to visit in the near future.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I do not know whether the Secretary of State is aware that large swathes of British Airways flights between London and Scotland are automatically cancelled when there are serious weather or technical issues at Heathrow. British Airways says that if the Secretary of State’s officials, the Civil Aviation Authority, Heathrow and airlines worked together, the number of cancellations could be minimised, even in those circumstances, so will she facilitate those discussions?
Mike Kane
The right hon. Member raises an important point. The resilience of the UK aviation sector is important, and key to its success, so we will facilitate any discussions to make sure we are always on an improvement trajectory.
Oral Answers to Questions
David Mundell Excerpts(1 year, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
My condolences to John Prescott’s family. I am long enough in the tooth to remember when he was the Transport Secretary.
A feasibility study on the Borders rail link was a fundamental part of the Borderlands growth deal. For some reason, the Scottish Government do not seem to prioritise transport links with England, so it is vital that the Department pushes that forward.
Louise Haigh
I am engaged with the Transport Minister in Scotland on exactly that issue.
A226 Galley Hill Road
David Mundell Excerpts(2 years, 2 months ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
David Mundell (in the Chair)
I will call Gareth Johnson to move the motion and then the Minister to respond. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates.
Gareth Johnson (Dartford) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for repairs to the A226 Galley Hill Road.
This debate relates to the road named Galley Hill in my constituency of Dartford. It is part of the A226 route, often referred to as London Road, which runs from Dartford, through Gravesend—represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Adam Holloway), who would also like to contribute to the debate—to the A2 in Rochester. It is a vital thoroughfare that is relied on by local residents, businesses and haulage serving the local community and beyond. On 10 April last year, a stretch of the road that sits on a chalk spine collapsed, taking the road, footpath and utilities down on to business premises, and rendering the road completely impassable. To understand what may have caused the collapse, it is necessary to look at the road’s recent history.
In the September prior to the collapse, I met Kent County Council and Thames Water to discuss the road. A significant number of water leaks were taking place in London Road at the time, which was causing mayhem for people living in the area. At that meeting, I discovered that there had been no fewer than 47 serious water leaks in the previous four years, which is possibly the highest number of leaks on any stretch of road in the whole county of Kent. I do not know for certain whether the leaks caused the collapse of the road or whether the road itself was responsible for damaging the water pipes; that is an area of contention between Thames Water and KCC, and an issue that must be resolved to establish liability. I had hoped that they would resolve the issue of liability quickly; alas, they have not.
What we do know is that the road being closed for over a year has caused misery for people just trying to go about their daily business. Heavy goods vehicles have been using the narrow Swanscombe High Street; KCC has put in a temporary traffic order to stop them doing so, but that has not entirely solved the problems. A significant number of businesses in the area, on either side of Galley Hill, have seen their takings reduced because of the lengthy diversion to circumvent the collapsed road.
I met the previous Roads Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden), to ask for his assistance and show him the road. He agreed, and came down to Galley Hill to have a look at the road and see the problem for himself. At that stage, it was hoped that liability could be established and that a contractor could get on with repairing or replacing the road. The current Minister, who is in his place, has met with me numerous times and with Kent County Council. I pay tribute to him for the keen interest he has shown in this issue and for trying to find a solution, which is typical of his attitude to such issues, and I am grateful to him for that. What we cannot have is for nothing to happen while Kent County Council and Thames Water resolve their dispute. It is highly likely that one of them will have to pick up the bill, but the residents of Swanscombe, Greenhithe and Northfleet should not be held to ransom while that is decided.
Adding to the complication is the fact that, in order to survey the road to establish the cause of the collapse, Kent County Council has to enter private land. The road is adjacent to three separate plots of land, each with its own owner. Two of the owners have agreed to allow Kent County Council access, but one is refusing, making surveys almost impossible to carry out. I am pleased that Kent County Council has now agreed to take legal action to gain access, but I plead with it to hasten its approach to this issue. In short, Kent County Council needs to find out as quickly as possible what caused the collapse. Local Kent County councillor Peter Harman, from a residents’ group, has been trying extremely hard to persuade the landowner to allow access but so far, unfortunately, to no avail.
I have secured this debate to formally ask the Government to step in to pay for the repair or replacement of the road while Kent County Council and Thames Water are arguing about liability. Whichever of them is liable can compensate the Government at a later date but, crucially, local residents would be able to see the prospect of an end to the misery they are suffering. I accept that the Government need to know what that liability is, so those surveys need to be carried out as soon as possible. The Government also need Kent County Council and Thames Water to agree to this course of action. My understanding—I will be corrected by the Minister during his speech if I have got this wrong—is that only Kent County Council has given its consent and that Thames Water has not responded to the Government. Just last week, I asked Thames Water for a meeting prior to this debate so that we could discuss the issues around liability and the way forward. I have had no response either from Thames Water, which is just not fair on local people, who are—we should not forget—its customers.
This is a very frustrating situation, and it has gone on for far too long. Kent County Council needs to carry out these surveys by legal action or otherwise. Thames Water needs to actually engage with people, and it cannot be surprised when people point the finger at it, given the history of leaks in the local area. I ask the Minister to do what he can to find a solution, and most importantly, for this road to be repaired or replaced so that local people can at last get their lives back.
Rail Services
David Mundell Excerpts(3 years, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Harper
I think there were two substantive questions there and I will deal with both of them, but, first, I will accept the hon. Gentleman’s welcome for my decision— I think there was a welcome there.
On industrial action, it does take two to reach a deal. From our side, fair and reasonable offers have been put on the table. They are broadly in line with the offers made to the RMT staff who work for Network Rail which, when put to the members of the union, were accepted overwhelmingly, with a 90% turnout and 76% in favour. Similar value offers with reform have been made to RMT staff working for the train operating companies and have not been put to the members. So the clear outstanding issue is not a new offer but for the offers to be put to the members of the trade unions to enable them to make a decision. There is also an offer on the table for train drivers in the ASLEF union, which has not been put to members. As I said, that would take their average salaries to £65,000 a year. I think that offer is at least worth putting to them. That is the outstanding piece of work that needs to take place. We have done our bit of that job.
The reason why the Scottish Government reached conclusions was that they caved in. They have not delivered reform, and I think they have overpaid with taxpayers’ money. There is a balance to strike in offers that are fair and reasonable to the workers in the industry and the passengers it serves, as well as to the taxpayer. That is a responsibility that I take very seriously.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I have repeatedly called out in the Chamber the appalling levels of service that my constituents at Lockerbie station have received over a long period from TransPennine Express and the failure of its management to address those issues. Therefore, I and my constituents very much welcome the decision, because they had no confidence that TransPennine would be able to turn the situation round. As the Secretary of State says, this is a reset, where all stakeholders, including those in Scotland, can come together so that passengers can have the level of service that they both need and expect. Will he expand a little on what he will be doing to ensure that that reset can produce results?
Mr Harper
Gladly. My right hon. Friend has indeed raised this issue on a number of occasions. First, my officials will be working with officials in the Scottish Government. This morning, I spoke to Kevin Stewart MSP, the Scottish Transport Minister, to explain the decision and how we will be working with the Scottish Government, looking at services currently under the operator of last resort, which cover the whole of the north of England, as well as cross-border services, which are important to my right hon. Friend. I also spoke to the elected Mayors in the North of England who cover those areas to explain the decision and confirm that we will be working closely with them on the best possible pattern of services going forward. I hope that that demonstrates the Government’s intention to use this reset moment as constructively as possible. I hope that everyone else will respond in like manner.
Avanti West Coast Contract Renewal
David Mundell Excerpts(3 years, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Kevin Foster
What metrics will we use? As with all rail contract awards, the Government will act in accordance with the franchising policy statement made under section 26(1) of the Railways Act 1993, which is already publicly available, in assessing whether to award a new contract. As I have said a number of times from this Dispatch Box, we are clear that the current service is unacceptable and will look for significant improvements before April if we are to extend this contract any further.
I always say that bringing something in-house is not necessarily a magic bullet, as the hon. Member for Coventry South (Zarah Sultana) demonstrated with her recent tweet when travelling on London North Eastern Railway, which is operated by the operator of last resort. For example, there might be issues related to infrastructure, which is of course publicly owned.
Avanti has a plan for improvement and the significant restoration of services in December, and we are seeing new train drivers being trained. Of course, we are seeing the wider impact of industrial action on the network, on which we and the Opposition have very clear views. They support it one day and not the next.
We believe there is a credible plan. There is daily interaction between Avanti and the Department for Transport, with weekly interaction at the most senior level. Ministers are regularly updated, too. We are making sure that a firm eye is kept on this, and we receive regular representations from Members of this House on what needs to happen to ensure this line provides the type of service we all want to see.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I have previously raised my concern about the capacity of FirstGroup, which is a partner of Avanti that also operates the TransPennine service that has been absolutely appalling over recent months, particularly for my constituents who use Lockerbie station. Is the Minister clear that FirstGroup has the capacity both to operate TransPennine and be part of the Avanti partnership and, in both, achieve improvements on the currently unacceptable levels of service?