Part of the debate – in Westminster Hall at 3:32 pm on 10 March 2010.
Stephen Hammond
Shadow Minister (Transport)
3:32,
10 March 2010
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Benton. My hon. Friend Hugh Robertson was surely right when he said that our hon. Friend Mr. Gale is not only liked, but respected in his area. He put one of the most eloquent cases on behalf of constituents that I have had the pleasure to listen to in my short time as a Member. I, too, have been contacted about that issue by some of his constituents, as he will know, and by those of other Members in Kent served by that line, and about the concerns my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent raised about the other line.
Having listened to the case put by my hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet, I do not think that anyone could be anything other than utterly impressed by its strength. He started by saying that there were 1,500 reasons why the line needs improving and, with all due respect to him, at one point I thought that he was going to go through them all. His stop-by-stop tour of the misery line, including the stop in the Constituency of the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, Paul Clark, was a powerful evocation of local people's concerns. One of the key roles of MPs, which we should never underestimate, is our ability to bring those concerns to the forefront in the House and in other places.
My hon. Friend was also right to talk about what he considered to be the failures of consultation. In a letter he received on the consultation, the concerns of so many people about the introduction of the timetable were dismissed in a statement that simply acknowledged that some people would be disappointed. That might strike some as complacent, and others as extremely condescending. Indeed, it is a telling point that the managing director of Southeastern, Charles Horton, when my hon. Friend met him, was clear about where much of the blame was attached, and I want to address that point in a few moments. Clearly, Mr. Horton thought that the Minister's response that people were well served by the services in 2009 was not necessarily right and that, had he had the opportunity to do so, he would not necessarily have put that into his franchise. The failure of the specified franchises is at the heart of the matter we are debating today.
My hon. Friend also quoted the Secretary of State, Lord Adonis, and was right that the message that the service is working successfully must cause a hollow laugh in his part of the country. Again, the operators are restricted from pursuing sensible timetabling and ending short trains. They must have the chance to look at exactly which stations might be better provided for at better times of the day. That is what needs to happen, rather than the huge over-specification of the timetable, which the Department for Transport has got itself into, as its franchising policy has failed and is failing. The move to longer franchises, which I recognise, will offer no reassurance unless it is accompanied by a move to less specified franchises.
My hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent identified three concerns and also referred to the Adjournment Debate, secured by our right hon. Friend Sir John Stanley, on
Like Gwyn Prosser, I am in little doubt that the new high-speed trains that run on High Speed 1 represent a great leap forward for our railways. This country has waited a long time for high speed to come into operation, and it is clearly an achievement that it now is in operation. The UK has 68 miles of high-speed services, compared with 3,480 miles on the continent. The Minister knows that an incoming Conservative Government would address that, but we will also ensure that any development of the high-speed network is integrated with the classic network, that the cost of travel is affordable and that it is not just a premium network, and that it sustains economic growth. I suspect that several Members will be looking to the test tomorrow-maybe-when the Secretary of State might talk about high-speed rail and the development of the network in the country as the Government see it.
Secretary of State was originally the title given to the two officials who conducted the Royal Correspondence under Elizabeth I. Now it is the title held by some of the more important Government Ministers, for example the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
An adjournment debate is a short half hour debate that is introduced by a backbencher at the end of each day's business in the House of Commons.
Adjournment debates are also held in the side chamber of Westminster Hall.
This technical procedure of debating a motion that the House should adjourn gives backbench members the opportunity to discuss issues of concern to them, and to have a minister respond to the points they raise.
The speaker holds a weekly ballot in order to decide which backbench members will get to choose the subject for each daily debate.
Backbenchers normally use this as an opportunity to debate issues related to their constituency.
An all-day adjournment debate is normally held on the final day before each parliamentary recess begins. On these occasions MPs do not have to give advance notice of the subjects which they intend to raise.
The leader of the House replies at the end of the debate to all of the issues raised.
Ministers make up the Government and almost all are members of the House of Lords or the House of Commons. There are three main types of Minister. Departmental Ministers are in charge of Government Departments. The Government is divided into different Departments which have responsibilities for different areas. For example the Treasury is in charge of Government spending. Departmental Ministers in the Cabinet are generally called 'Secretary of State' but some have special titles such as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ministers of State and Junior Ministers assist the ministers in charge of the department. They normally have responsibility for a particular area within the department and are sometimes given a title that reflects this - for example Minister of Transport.
In a general election, each Constituency chooses an MP to represent them. MPs have a responsibility to represnt the views of the Constituency in the House of Commons. There are 650 Constituencies, and thus 650 MPs. A citizen of a Constituency is known as a Constituent