1-20 of 411 results for primarymember:"Lord Snape"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.35 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- primarymember:"Lord Snape"
- We searched for
- primaryMember_ses:303668
Type
House
Session
More
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Does my noble friend acknowledge that the spokesperson for the Conservative Party has a pretty thick skin to ask this Question? After all, the last Conservative Government renationalised no fewer than four train operating companies during their period of office because of the incompetence of the operators at that time. Can the Minister assure the House that we will not return to those days and that the improvement we have seen in punctuality and service, so far as the nationalised companies are concerned, will continue in future?
Does my noble friend acknowledge that the spokesperson for the Conservative Party has a pretty thick skin to ask this Question? After all, the last Conservative Government renationalised no fewer than four train operating companies during their period of office because of the incompetence of the operators at that time. Can the Minister assure the House that we will not return to those days and that the improvement we have seen in punctuality and service, so far as the nationalised companies are concerned, will continue in future?
My noble friend is right. LNER, in particular, has demonstrated all the excellent characteristics that a public service train company can deliver. The previous Government did not attempt to put back into the private sector any of the other train companies that came into public ownership during their term of office. All those companies are now doing better under this Government’s supervision than they were.
My Lords, will the Minister join me in congratulating Sarah Coombes, the Member of Parliament for West Bromwich, on pursuing this matter in the way that she has? Does he agree that the fact that anyone can apply to be a number plate issuer on a payment of £40 to his department, and that 36,000 people or companies have already done so, is an open incentive for fraud so far as motoring is concerned? As the penalty for non-compliance with number plate regulations is £100, does he further agree that it is a better bet to take a chance with a false number plate than it is to properly insure your own vehicle?
My Lords, will the Minister join me in congratulating Sarah Coombes, the Member of Parliament for West Bromwich, on pursuing this matter in the way that she has? Does he agree that the fact that anyone can apply to be a number plate issuer on a payment of £40 to his department, and that 36,000 people or companies have already done so, is an open incentive for fraud so far as motoring is concerned? As the penalty for non-compliance with number plate regulations is £100, does he further agree that it is a better bet to take a chance with a false number plate than it is to properly insure your own vehicle?
I second my noble friend’s congratulations to Sarah Coombes on raising this important subject. The DVLA is already on the case to strengthen the application process to become a registered number plate supplier and to make it more robust. Options being considered include, as my noble friend remarked, the fee level, the structure, eligibility criteria, and much greater enforcement.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to prevent the manufacture, sale and use of number plates intended to defeat enforcement cameras, including automatic number plate recognition systems; and whether they plan to strengthen regulation or enforcement in this area.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to prevent the manufacture, sale and use of number plates intended to defeat enforcement cameras, including automatic number plate recognition systems; and whether they plan to strengthen regulation or enforcement in this area.
The Government recognise the urgency and importance of tackling the use of illegal number plates designed to evade enforcement cameras. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is working hard with the police, other enforcement agencies and the industry to address the manufacture and misuse of such plates. This includes tightening application, inspection and audit processes for number plate suppliers. In the recently published Road Safety Strategy, the Government have set out proposals for reviewing standards, tougher enforcement, tougher penalties and the potential use of AI to help stamp out illegal plates.
My Lords, I assure my noble friend the Minister that there is nothing wrong with the speed cameras on the M5 motorway in the West Midlands, as those of us who have recently completed a speed awareness course will testify.
My Lords, I assure my noble friend the Minister that there is nothing wrong with the speed cameras on the M5 motorway in the West Midlands, as those of us who have recently completed a speed awareness course will testify.
If that was a question, all I can say is that the noble Lord has given his own answer.
I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Am I correct in thinking that, when these occurrences happen in and around the Channel Tunnel, it seems to take twice as long to restore services on that part of the line which is the responsibility of HS1 or Getlink as it does on the other side of the channel, where the infrastructure is the responsibility of the French and Belgian railways? Does he agree with me that the latest outage ruined the new year holiday for thousands of people? Could he assure the House that the Government will do what they can to ensure that proper compensation is paid to them for having their holiday ruined? Finally, could he assure me and those of us who are interested in these matters that companies such as Eurostar and Getlink have proper resources, not only to own the infrastructure for which they are responsible but to repair it when things go wrong—something that obviously did not occur promptly on this occasion?
I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Am I correct in thinking that, when these occurrences happen in and around the Channel Tunnel, it seems to take twice as long to restore services on that part of the line which is the responsibility of HS1 or Getlink as it does on the other side of the channel, where the infrastructure is the responsibility of the French and Belgian railways? Does he agree with me that the latest outage ruined the new year holiday for thousands of people? Could he assure the House that the Government will do what they can to ensure that proper compensation is paid to them for having their holiday ruined? Finally, could he assure me and those of us who are interested in these matters that companies such as Eurostar and Getlink have proper resources, not only to own the infrastructure for which they are responsible but to repair it when things go wrong—something that obviously did not occur promptly on this occasion?
I share my noble friend’s concern about the disruption caused to travellers, in particular those whose holidays were spoiled or at least delayed. There is appropriate compensation made by Eurostar and Getlink, which are private companies, for that.
I take a particular interest in the noble Lord’s last point about ownership and proper maintenance, because there have previously been similar incidents and they do seem to take a long time. I am not sure that I can distinguish between incidents that take five hours on our side of the tunnel and, for instance, one last summer that took seven hours on the French side—but all that time is too long. My concern in this review, which is why I specifically mentioned the review of previous recommendations, is that it is not currently clear to me that all the previous recommendations for better maintenance, fewer incidents and for dealing with incidents when they occur have been followed through to completion by any of the parties that the noble Lord mentioned.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with Getlink about the reliability of the Channel Tunnel infrastructure given the recent failure of the electrical supply and the subsequent cancellation of train services between London, Paris and Brussels.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with Getlink about the reliability of the Channel Tunnel infrastructure given the recent failure of the electrical supply and the subsequent cancellation of train services between London, Paris and Brussels.
My Lords, it is important that there is a full investigation into the three separate incidents which disrupted tens of thousands of passengers’ journeys on 30 and 31 December last and saw some passengers stranded throughout the night, which is clearly unacceptable. I am therefore commissioning the relevant authorities—the binational Intergovernmental Commission, the IGC, which oversees the Channel Tunnel, and the Office of Rail and Road—to review last week’s incidents and also the implementation of recommendations from previous reviews of similar incidents, to ensure that urgent lessons are learned for good.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is the impact on rail capacity of open access rail services.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is the impact on rail capacity of open access rail services.
My Lords, in the right circumstances, open access operations can provide benefits such as improved connectivity and choice for passengers, but they can also increase costs to taxpayers and create additional performance pressures on an already constrained network. Large areas of the network are already operating at full capacity, and additional open access services can exacerbate constraints along the busiest corridors of the network and impact operators’ abilities to operate revenue-generative services that would reduce taxpayer subsidy.
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Can he assure me that any further applications for open access trains will not
prejudice the existing train paths, particularly on the east and west coast main lines, and particularly train paths reserved for freight trains, if the Government are to meet their target of increasing rail freight by 75% over the next few years? Further, does he believe that the fact that open access trains enjoy a different charging regime from the companies that run the majority of services, including the state-owned companies, leads to a more profitable situation for open access trains, and will he do anything about it?
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Can he assure me that any further applications for open access trains will not
prejudice the existing train paths, particularly on the east and west coast main lines, and particularly train paths reserved for freight trains, if the Government are to meet their target of increasing rail freight by 75% over the next few years? Further, does he believe that the fact that open access trains enjoy a different charging regime from the companies that run the majority of services, including the state-owned companies, leads to a more profitable situation for open access trains, and will he do anything about it?
My noble friend is correct. Both the east coast and west coast main lines are now heavily constrained, and under the current arrangements the regulator, the Office of Rail and Road, has recently declined most of the additional applications for train paths simply because there is no room. He is also right to suggest that we need to leave room for increased freight operations. There is a general consensus that more railway freight is good for the economy and the environment, and it would be right to leave paths for freight expansion.
In respect of his question about profitability, it was recently reported that FirstGroup’s open access business achieved a 32% operating profit in the 2024-25 financial year. These profits arise because open access operators do not pay the full cost of accessing the track, and nor do they have to meet public service obligations to operate the services that most people need. This allows them to offer reduced fares and provide journeys only between the most profitable locations. Currently, Lumo is the only open access operator that contributes towards fixed costs via an infrastructure cost charge, which leaves taxpayers to fill the shortfalls. The railways Bill will propose to change the arrangements for access and will consider what needs to be done further in respect of charging.
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have put in place to deliver a smooth transition of retail functions from train operating companies to Great British Railways.
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have put in place to deliver a smooth transition of retail functions from train operating companies to Great British Railways.
Once Great British Railways (GBR) is established, it will retail online by consolidating individual train operators’ ticket websites. This will take place alongside a thriving private sector retail market, which will continue to play a key role in driving innovation and investment and encouraging more people to choose rail.
The Railways Bill consultation took place in the spring. As part of this process, the Government consulted closely with industry, the private sector, and wider stakeholders including in relation to the future of the rail retail market. A formal update will be provided in due course, and we will work closely with stakeholders to ensure transition plans are as smooth as possible.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether rail ticketing software providers will be invited to tender to manage Great British Railways’ retail ticket sales.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether rail ticketing software providers will be invited to tender to manage Great British Railways’ retail ticket sales.
Once Great British Railways (GBR) is established, it will retail online by consolidating individual train operators’ ticket websites. This will take place alongside a thriving private sector retail market, which will continue to play a key role in driving innovation and investment and encouraging more people to choose rail.
The Railways Bill consultation took place in the spring. As part of this process, the Government consulted closely with industry, the private sector, and wider stakeholders including in relation to the future of the rail retail market. A formal update will be provided in due course, and we will work closely with stakeholders to ensure transition plans are as smooth as possible.
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the benefit-cost ratio of the railway investment schemes for which funding has not been confirmed including (1) the York Area Capacity and Performance, (2) South West Rail Resilience Programme phase 5, (3) Midland Mainline Electrification phase 3, and (4) Peckham Rye Station Congestion.
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the benefit-cost ratio of the railway investment schemes for which funding has not been confirmed including (1) the York Area Capacity and Performance, (2) South West Rail Resilience Programme phase 5, (3) Midland Mainline Electrification phase 3, and (4) Peckham Rye Station Congestion.
Benefit Cost Ratios (BCRs) within the economic case are only one element of decision-making on schemes and should be considered alongside the other cases in the five case business model used in Government (strategic, economic, financial, commercial and management cases). BCRs evolve as a project is developed through different levels of maturity as well as with changing scope, costs and benefits profiles. Definitive BCRs are not available for these schemes as they are either at an early stage of development or for which existing analysis is not up to date and therefore not representative of current scheme assumptions.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 14 July 2025 (HL Deb cols 1678–1681), whether they will publish for each of the road schemes for which funding was confirmed (1) the benefit-cost ration, (2) the latest cost estimate with the date of...
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 14 July 2025 (HL Deb cols 1678–1681), whether they will publish for each of the road schemes for which funding was confirmed (1) the benefit-cost ration, (2) the latest cost estimate with the date of...
(1) Detailed information on Strategic Road Network (SRN) schemes is available in the applications for planning consent, available on the Planning Inspectorate’s website. Benefit-cost ratio information for Major Road Network/Large Local Majors (MRN/LLM) schemes is part of the business case evidence and analysis which is provided by Local Authorities. This information is therefore available directly from them, once a scheme is approved at the Full Business Case (FBC) stage.
(2) Scheme costs for the SRN schemes will be confirmed as part of the setting of the third Road Investment Strategy, planned to be published by the end of March 2026. For MRN/LLM schemes, individual financial details cannot be provided ahead of assessing the Full Business Case, as doing so would jeopardise procurement exercises and contract negotiations.
(3) The Capital Review provided strategic advice to the Secretary of State. It did not appraise any specific projects, programmes or portfolios.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether there will be an interim digital rail retail solution available before train operating company retail websites are turned off and before the Great British Railways online rail ticket retailing goes live.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether there will be an interim digital rail retail solution available before train operating company retail websites are turned off and before the Great British Railways online rail ticket retailing goes live.
Once Great British Railways (GBR) is established, it will retail online by consolidating individual train operators’ ticket websites. This will take place alongside a thriving private sector retail market, which will continue to play a key role in driving innovation and investment and encouraging more people to choose rail.
The Railways Bill consultation took place in the Spring. As part of this process, the Government consulted closely with the industry, the private sector, and wider stakeholders, including in relation to the future of the rail retail market. A formal update will be provided in due course.
To ask His Majesty's Government when they plan to publish a clear transition plan for the transfer of retail responsibilities from train operating company retail websites to Great British Railways; and whether they will also publish a timetable for formal market consultation and tendering for the Great British Railways online...
To ask His Majesty's Government when they plan to publish a clear transition plan for the transfer of retail responsibilities from train operating company retail websites to Great British Railways; and whether they will also publish a timetable for formal market consultation and tendering for the Great British Railways online...
Once Great British Railways (GBR) is established, it will retail online by consolidating individual train operators’ ticket websites. This will take place alongside a thriving private sector retail market, which will continue to play a key role in driving innovation and investment and encouraging more people to choose rail.
The Railways Bill consultation took place in the Spring. As part of this process, the Government consulted closely with the industry, the private sector, and wider stakeholders, including in relation to the future of the rail retail market. A formal update will be provided in due course.
To ask His Majesty's Government what are the consequentials under the Barnett Formula for each of the devolved administrations resulting from approval of the Lower Thames Crossing.
To ask His Majesty's Government what are the consequentials under the Barnett Formula for each of the devolved administrations resulting from approval of the Lower Thames Crossing.
The Block Grant Transparency publication breaks down all changes in the devolved governments’ block grant funding from the 2015 Spending Review up to and including Main Estimates 2023-24. Where funding for the Lower Thames Crossing has been allocated at a fiscal event or Estimates, the publication will confirm the total Barnett consequentials received by the devolved governments. The most recent report was published in July 2023 [1]. An updated report will be published in due course.
At spending reviews, the Barnett formula is applied to the overall change in a department’s settlement using the department’s comparability factor. This means Barnett consequentials generated at spending reviews in relation to the Lower Thames Crossing specifically cannot be determined.
For any future spending on the Lower Thames Crossing, Barnett consequentials will be confirmed when UK Government departmental budgets change.
[1] You can access this report via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/block-grant-transparency-july-2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the advantages to rail freight and passenger services of the proposed Ely Area Capacity Enhancement and associated improvements to Haughley junction; and what is the benefit-cost ratio for these schemes; and what are their current cost estimates.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the advantages to rail freight and passenger services of the proposed Ely Area Capacity Enhancement and associated improvements to Haughley junction; and what is the benefit-cost ratio for these schemes; and what are their current cost estimates.
The Ely Area Capacity Enhancement was assessed as having a Benefit Cost Ratio of 4.89 against a cost estimate of £489m at Outline Business Case stage, at the point the programme was paused in 2022.
We are focused on prioritising the schemes that will make the greatest difference for passengers and support economic growth as quickly as possible. The previous government had committed to a number of projects that were unfunded, including the EACE scheme.
Will my noble friend bear in mind that cities as diverse as New York, Paris and Berlin have tourist taxes and that there is no noticeable lack of tourists in any of them? Would this not provide
a valuable source of income, particularly for elected mayors, for example? Dynamic pricing—I understand that is what it is called—means that the price of a hotel room can vary by up to £100 a night, depending on the number of potential customers; a fiver or so will not make much difference in those circumstances.
Will my noble friend bear in mind that cities as diverse as New York, Paris and Berlin have tourist taxes and that there is no noticeable lack of tourists in any of them? Would this not provide
a valuable source of income, particularly for elected mayors, for example? Dynamic pricing—I understand that is what it is called—means that the price of a hotel room can vary by up to £100 a night, depending on the number of potential customers; a fiver or so will not make much difference in those circumstances.
My noble friend rightly points to different cities that have different systems in place. I think I said that different places in different countries choose to raise revenue from overnight visitors in different ways, depending on whether they are seeking to attract them, to accommodate the results of their visits or to deter them from coming. As I have said a number of times, we have no present plans to introduce visitor levy powers in England.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to meet the target of increasing rail freight by 75 per cent by 2050.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to meet the target of increasing rail freight by 75 per cent by 2050.
My Lords, the Government are committed to supporting rail freight growth, recognising its significant economic and environmental potential and its critical role in the UK’s resilience. In the last year, rail freight volumes have increased by 5%. We will support further growth through a statutory duty on Great British Railways to promote the use of rail freight, and the Secretary of State will set a rail freight growth target. My officials are working through the details of the design of that target.
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that response, but, while welcoming the 5% increase in rail freight over the past year, we are still a long way from the 70% which was promised in the Labour Party’s last election manifesto and which is still, as far as I am aware, party policy. Does he think the move towards that happy situation will be enhanced by the current financial regime, which means that rail freight pays every year in access charges a basic rate plus RPI, while the road haulage industry has benefited enormously from the near 14-year freeze on the fuel tax regulator? If we are subsidising any mode of transport, have we not got it the wrong way round?
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that response, but, while welcoming the 5% increase in rail freight over the past year, we are still a long way from the 70% which was promised in the Labour Party’s last election manifesto and which is still, as far as I am aware, party policy. Does he think the move towards that happy situation will be enhanced by the current financial regime, which means that rail freight pays every year in access charges a basic rate plus RPI, while the road haulage industry has benefited enormously from the near 14-year freeze on the fuel tax regulator? If we are subsidising any mode of transport, have we not got it the wrong way round?
Taxation, as my noble friend well knows, is a matter for His Majesty’s Treasury, so I will not comment further on that. Access charges paid by freight for utilising the network do not currently cover the full fixed cost of operations, maintenance and renewal required. The capping arrangements which will be in place until March 2029 will save freight operators an estimated £33 million over this five-year control period. There are already schemes to discount access charges for new traffic, such as the mode shift revenue support scheme and Network Rail’s access charge discount policy. In the future, GBR will have greater flexibility to offer discounted charges.
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that it is more than 40 years since Sir Peter Parker, the then chairman of British Rail, recommended a rolling programme of railway electrification in this country? It would have had, as he said at the time, the twin merits of keeping together the expertise of those carrying out electrification and reducing long-term cost. Does the Minister agree with me that Sir Peter Parker was right then and he would be right now?
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that it is more than 40 years since Sir Peter Parker, the then chairman of British Rail, recommended a rolling programme of railway electrification in this country? It would have had, as he said at the time, the twin merits of keeping together the expertise of those carrying out electrification and reducing long-term cost. Does the Minister agree with me that Sir Peter Parker was right then and he would be right now?
I absolutely agree with my noble friend that electrification is an important part of the mix in decarbonising our transport network and achieving our net-zero goals. Electrification is indeed the most widespread method of decarbonising the railway. Some 39% of the railway network is electrified but 74% of passenger vehicle kilometres travelled are electric, so we are making progress. I cannot give my noble friend any further commitments, but we are looking beyond the trans-Pennine route upgrade to identify further opportunities for electrification across the network as part of the spending review.