Previous Section Index Home Page

Transport 10-Year Plan

Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to the answer of 26 February 2002, ref. 37227, columns 1207–08W, on the 10-year plan, if he will state (a) the time scale over which this review will take place, (b) the parties who will be involved in this review and (c) when the outcomes of this review will be made available. [40620]

Mr. Jamieson: We will be undertaking the first of the planned periodic reviews of the 10-year plan for transport over the next few months in conjunction with the Government spending review, as envisaged in the plan itself. The review will give an update on progress towards

11 Mar 2002 : Column 742W

the objectives set out in the plan and provides an opportunity to take account of new developments since its publication.

In carrying out the review we will be drawing on information and feedback from a wide range of sources, including forthcoming reports from the House of Commons Transport Sub-Committee and the Commission for Integrated Transport. There is no fixed timetable for the review, but we currently expect to publish the results in July.

En Route Centre, Swanwick

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the total internal costs, as defined in the Arthur D. Little report, of the New En Route Centre at Swanwick were up until the operational start date of the centre; and if he will make a statement. [40767]

Mr. Jamieson: Arthur D. Little (ADL) estimated that £76 million to £86 million would be incurred on the Swanwick project in direct internal NATS project management costs and Swanwick staff costs from project initiation until the operational date. ADL assumed that the centre would be operational from November 2001. In the event, the Swanwick Centre successfully entered operational service on 27 January 2002. Including this additional period, direct internal costs were £93.6 million.

Job Sharing

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the extent of job sharing in his Department. [41041]

Dr. Whitehead: Approximately 8 per cent. of DTLR central staff work part-time. Of these, a smaller percentage job share. Information specifically on job sharers is not held centrally and can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Job sharing forms just one strand of a range of possible alternative and flexible working arrangements. Other options include home working and flexitime. Under DTLR central posting arrangements, all posts are open to part-time workers or job sharers. The central Department supports a part-time workers network and operates a job share register to assist staff in identifying job share partners.

The DTLR agencies, in almost all cases, also operate a policy of advertising all posts as open to part-time workers or job sharers. All operate a range of flexible working options. Several also support part-time working or carers networks.

Cross-channel Freight

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the decision by EWS to reduce its cross- channel freight business. [41146]

Mr. Jamieson: EWS has made no such decision. The current reductions in cross-channel rail freight result from decisions taken by SNCF since November 2001 in the light of attacks on their staff at Fréthun.

11 Mar 2002 : Column 743W

The Government are pressing the French Government at the highest levels to provide adequate policing resources at Fréthun to support the anti-intrusion measures already being installed by SNCF in order to address the disruption to channel tunnel services caused by would-be illegal immigrants.

Rail Services (South-west)

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the Strategic Rail Authority's funding approach to the south-west. [41145]

11 Mar 2002 : Column 744W

Mr. Jamieson: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Robertson) on 24 January 2002, Official Report, column 1052W.

Local Government Finance

Mrs. Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how much (a) capital and (b) revenue funding has been made available for local government services in Liverpool in each year since 1997. [41122]

Dr Whitehead: Liverpool city council have reported the following funding from central Government:

Revenue and capital grants paid to Liverpool city council

Outturn Budget
Revenue funding
Specific and special grants inside AEF(29)18,19220,48820,13242,62671,010
Revenue support grant263,399284,715296,909298,271311,827
Redistributed non-domestic rates102,791106,533114,392128,468124,481
Revenue grants paid into GFRA(30)384,382411,736431,433469,365507,318
Capital funding
Credit approvals17,99527,82330,56540,08225,010
Central Government grants(31)18,25922,19019,12517,95811,266
Total funding420,636461,749481,123527,405543,594

(29) Aggregate external finance (AEF) is central Government support towards total standard spending. It comprises RSG, NNDR, and certain specific, supplementary and special grants. Within specific grants inside AEF, reported standards fund grant increased from about £2 million in 1999–2000 to about £20 million in 2000–01, and Neighbourhood Renewal Fund was budgeted to be £10.006 million in 2001–02.

(30) This includes all revenue grants paid into the General Fund Revenue Account (GFRA), but may exclude certain public funding, for example from some non-departmental public bodies, which is recorded as income and is not separately identifiable.

(31) Includes capital grants from all central Government Departments (including specified capital grants) but excludes capital grants from the European Union, non-departmental public bodies, and the National Lottery.


Revenue Summary and GFRA Budget Estimates return. Capital Outturn returns and Capital Estimate return.

Departmental Underspend

Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 27 February 2002, Official Report, column 1367W, on departmental underspend, if he will list (a) the relevant editions of the Public Expenditure Provisional Outturn Paper to which he refers and (b) the written answers to which he refers; for what reason it is not possible to provide separate figures in respect of rail expenditure; and if he will place copies related documentation in the Library. [41245]

Dr. Whitehead: Provisional outturn against cash limits, and departmental expenditure limits which replaced cash limits in 1999–2000, for the financial years 1997–98 to 2000–01 is published in the following editions of the Public Expenditure Provisional Outturn White Paper:

Written answers announcing amounts taken up under end year flexibility (EYF) arrangements, in respect of unspent provision in 1997–98 and later years, are:

The calculation of departmental EYF entitlement is undertaken at a high level of aggregation across departmental expenditure limits. Underspends on specific programmes may be partially offset by overspends elsewhere. Each Department draws down its EYF entitlement for specific purposes in accordance with need. It is therefore not possible to identify the areas to which EYF generated by a particular programme has been

11 Mar 2002 : Column 745W

re-allocated. For that reason, DTLR does not keep central records of EYF entitlement generated by, and re-allocated to, railways.

Copies of command papers and the Official Report, are available in the Libraries of the House.

Next Section Index Home Page