Category: Transportation

  • Robert Courts – 2022 Statement on the Portishead Branch Line

    Robert Courts – 2022 Statement on the Portishead Branch Line

    The statement made by Robert Courts, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 19 April 2022.

    I have been asked by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State (Grant Shapps) to make this written ministerial statement. This statement concerns the application made by North Somerset District Council under the Planning Act 2008 for the construction of a new railway on the track-bed on the former branch line from Bristol to Portishead.

    Under section 107(1) of the Planning Act 2008, the Secretary of State must make his decision within three months of receipt of the Examining Authority’s report unless exercising the power under section 107(3) to extend the deadline and make a statement to the House of Parliament announcing the new deadline.

    The Secretary of State received the Examining Authority’s report on the Portishead branch line-MetroWest phase 1 development consent order application on 19 July 2021 and, following an earlier extension of four months to allow further consideration of environmental matters, the current deadline for a decision is 19 April 2022.

    The deadline for the decision is now to be extended to 19 February 2023—an extension of seven months—to allow North Somerset District Council further time to demonstrate that funding for the entire scheme has been secured.

    The decision to set the new deadline is without prejudice to the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent for the above application.

  • Trudy Harrison – 2022 Statement on Local Transport Funding

    Trudy Harrison – 2022 Statement on Local Transport Funding

    The statement made by Trudy Harrison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 19 April 2022.

    My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Baroness Vere of Norbiton) made the following ministerial statement on 4 April.

    Today I can update the House on three major transport investments we are making across England over the coming months, marking a significant milestone in our mission to deliver cheaper and better transport services across the country.

    In our national bus strategy “Bus Back Better” published last year, we set out our plan to delivery better and cheaper bus services for passengers. The strategy acknowledged that while there are pockets of good bus performance outside London, far too many places still do not get the same service levels seen in the capital.

    Today’s announcements, along with the funding of zero emission buses, and the bus elements of the increased city region sustainable transport settlements, form part of the £3 billion for bus transformation announced in 2020. £2 billion has also been paid to bus operators to support services during the pandemic.

    We have now chosen a total of 31 counties, city regions and unitary authorities to receive this funding to level up their local bus services.

    Our investment will reduce fares, support the cost of living, and create new jobs for people by enhancing bus services and lowering the cost of travel. It will make a significant contribution to our levelling-up mission to bring local public transport connectivity across the country significantly closer to the standards of London.

    Including earlier awards, this new funding means that just under two-thirds of England’s population outside London will be benefiting from new investment in their bus services.

    The successful areas have been chosen because of their ambition to repeat the success achieved in London—which drove up bus usage and made the bus a natural choice for everyone, not just those without cars. As the Government stated in “Bus Back Better” areas not showing sufficient ambition, including for improvements to bus priority, would not be funded.

    We will be writing to all local transport authorities to advise them of the outcome of their proposals and will be offering practical support to those authorities that are not receiving funding on this occasion, as there is still a lot that can be done to level up local bus services and grow bus usage.

    As confirmed at the 2021 spending review and Budget, we are investing a total of £5.7 billion to improve local rail networks, tram services, and buses in city regions across England.

    The city region sustainable transport settlements are multi-year capital funding settlements to improve the local transport networks of eight city regions across England through five-year settlements from 2022-23. This combines new and existing funds, including highways maintenance, integrated transport block and final year transforming cities fund.

    Following the assessment of their business cases, the Government have now confirmed their final settlements. Further work to finalise the full range of schemes to be delivered through these settlements will now take place over the coming months.

    This unprecedented investment provides areas with long-term funding certainty to design and deliver transformational programmes.

    The money will help deliver, among other things, a new mass transit network in West Yorkshire, major improvements to rail services in the Tees Valley, next generation Metrolink tram-train vehicles in Greater Manchester, the renewal of Supertram in South Yorkshire and bus rapid transit corridors in the West Midlands. Letters have been sent to the metro Mayors outlining the funding.

    City regions benefiting from confirmation of the multibillion-pound transport investment are Greater Manchester (£1.07 billion), West Yorkshire (£830 million), South Yorkshire (£570 million), West Midlands (£1.05 billion), Tees Valley (£310 million), West of England (£540 million) and Liverpool City Region (£710 million). The North East will be eligible to access its share of the funding once appropriate governance is in place but will continue to receive funding in 2022-23 for highways maintenance, integrated transport block and final year of transforming cities fund.

    Finally, as I previously updated the House on 1 March, the Government can now announce that light rail services in the midlands and north will receive over £37 million to support their continued operation and provide local areas time to adapt their systems to new post-pandemic travel patterns. This funding will support the Nottingham, Tyne and Wear, Manchester, Sheffield and West Midlands tram and light rail systems, and this brings the total amount provided to the bus and light rail sector over the next six months to £183.9 million.

  • Grant Shapps – 2022 Comments on Rail Ticket Pricing

    Grant Shapps – 2022 Comments on Rail Ticket Pricing

    The comments made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Transport, on 19 April 2022.

    For the first time ever, operators across the rail industry are coming together to help passengers facing rising costs of living by offering up to 50% off more than a million tickets on journeys across Britain.

    There’s no better time to visit friends, family or just explore our great country, so book your tickets today.

  • Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on BOAC Pilots Strike

    Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on BOAC Pilots Strike

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity, in the House of Commons on 31 March 1969.

    As hon. Members will recall, following the dispute last year between B.A.L.P.A. and B.O.A.C., I appointed Professor Wood as independent chairman to assist the parties in their negotiations over pay and related matters. Agreement was reached in August on the principle of an hourly rated system to replace the existing annual salary structure, thus relating pay directly to work-load. Discussions on the details of pay and conditions have continued under Professor Wood’s chairmanship since then, but last Friday Professor Wood reported to me that the parties had failed to reach agreement on the detailed application of the principles agreed.

    Further discussions between the parties took place on Saturday but no solution was reached. I therefore asked both the Corporation and B.A.L.P.A. to meet me yesterday to discuss the position. In view of the parties’ inability to agree on the salaries which the new structure would produce and the productivity which could flow from it, I urged on the parties the need for an independent assessment. The constitution of the National Joint Council for Civil Air Transport provides for arbitration, and in my talks yesterday the possibility of arbitration was considered by both sides. The Corporation was prepared to agree to arbitration but B.A.L.P.A. insisted on interim increases in pay, rising on 1st April, 1969, to £7,000 per annum for senior captains from the present rate of £5,880 as a prior condition of arbitration. This condition was not acceptable to the Corporation. I regret to say therefore that it was not possible to find a basis for calling off the strike, which began at midnight last night.

    The National Joint Council is meeting today to consider the matter, and I understand that its deliberations were still proceeding a short time ago. I am, of course, ready to give whatever further help I can. As discussions on the N.J.C. are still continuing, it would, however, be inappropriate for me to say anything further at this stage.

  • Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Ford Motor Company Strike Resolution

    Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Ford Motor Company Strike Resolution

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the then Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity, in the House of Commons on 19 March 1969.

    With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the Ford dispute.

    I am glad to be able to tell the House that the Ford strike is now over.

    When I last reported to the House, on 12th March, talks had broken down at my Department following the rejection by the trade union side of the Ford N.J.N.C. of the company’s proposals for a resumption of work and their insistence on a prior commitment by the company that the pay increases in the package deal would be improved. In an effort to resolve this deadlock, I invited company representatives, Mr. Jones of the Transport and General Workers Union and Mr. Scanlon of the A.E.F.—the two major unions in dispute with the company—and Mr. Cannon of the E.E.T.U., one of the unions which had supported the February package deal, to discuss the situation with me last weekend.

    As a result of these discussions, joint talks were resumed on 15th March, and on Saturday night the following formula was agreed for recommendation to the full trade union side of the N.J.N.C. the following day:

    1. Normal working will be resumed on the basis of the increased rates in the agreement which commenced on 1st March, 1969.
    2. Additional holiday benefit and lay-off benefit and their qualifying clauses shall be held in abeyance pending re-negotiation but alternatives have been agreed in principle which will ensure continuity of production and payments not less than those proposed in the agreement referred to above.
    3. The company has agreed that it withdraws its requirement of 21 days’ strike notice.

    At the outset of the discussions on Sunday, 16th March, however, a difference arose between the company on the one side and Mr. Scanlon and Mr. Jones on the other on a central point in the alternative arrangements for financing the layoff benefit and holiday bonus which it was believed had been agreed in principle: the unions insisting that the holiday bonus of £25 which the firm had offered should be paid in full to all employees irrespective of whether they had engaged in unconstitutional industrial action or whether the payments by the company into the fund, which were themselves dependent on freedom from unconstitutional action, were sufficient for the purpose.

    After two days of intensive discussions on this and related points, an outline holiday bonus and lay-off benefit scheme to replace the corresponding provisions of the February package deal was agreed. The scheme is in two parts: first, the company has undertaken to set up a fund on a company-wide basis into which it will pay 4s. per employee per week in order to finance lay-off benefit. In any week in which unconstitutional action takes place in any plant, no payment will be made into the fund in respect of any employee in that plant. This sum of 4s. per employee per week should in all normal circumstances be more than sufficient to meet the outgoings and the surplus will be available to improve the benefits in the second part of the scheme.

    Under this, a second fund will be created on a plant basis for the payment of a holiday bonus. This will be financed by weekly contributions by the company of 10s. per employee, which, in the same way, will not be payable in the event of any unconstitutional action in the plant. Subject to a guaranteed minimum of £15, the size of the holiday bonus payable to employees will, therefore, vary according to the extent to which plants have been affected by, and individual employees have taken part in, unconstitutional industrial action.

    This outline scheme and the basis for a resumption of work agreed on 15th March were accepted yesterday by the executive of the A.E.F., the trade union side of the N.J.N.C. and by a Transport and General Workers Union delegate conference. The unions agreed to recommend a return to work today, with the exception of the Transport and General Workers Union, which, by resolution of the union’s delegate conference, recommended a full return tomorrow in order to allow union officials to explain the settlement at meetings of strikers today.

    I understand that production in Ford plants has restarted this morning. The House will be relieved that this protracted and damaging dispute, which has resulted in a loss of between £30 and £40 million of production, half of it for export, and nearly £3½ million loss of wages for Ford employees, is at an end, and I hope that there will be a speedy and complete return to work.

  • Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Ford Motor Company Strike

    Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Ford Motor Company Strike

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity, in the House of Commons on 10 March 1969.

    With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the strike at Ford Motor Company plants.

    Following an application from the unions for a pay increase and growing pressure for the provision of a guaranteed week to insulate its workers against layoffs resulting from strike action elsewhere, the company, in November last, entered into negotiations with the trade union side of the National Joint Negotiating Committee through a working party consisting of representatives of the company and the six unions covering the great majority of their employees.

    After a series of meetings and an interim report to the N.J.N.C., the company put forward on 10th February an improved “package deal” offer which the trade union representatives agreed to recommend unanimously to the full trade union side of the Ford N.J.N.C. On 11th February the trade union side accepted the offer by majority decision.

    The following are the main features of the package deal: increases in rates averaging about 8 per cent.; measures to facilitate productivity improvements; lay-off and short-time payments on condition that the employee has not engaged during the previous six months in action in breach of the procedure agreed by the National Joint Negotiating Committee; a £20 holiday bonus, provided that the same condition is fulfilled during the previous 12 months; improvements in the disputes procedure, and an accelerated joint procedure for dealing with appeals against disqualification from lay-off payment and holiday bonus; equal pay for women employees, subject to acceptance of the same conditions as for male employees.

    These terms, subject to certain reservations in respect of equal pay, were to come into operation on 1st March.

    On 18th February, the A.E.U. Executive Council rejected the deal and demanded renegotiation. A few days later, the full trade union side of the N.J.N.C. decided to request the company to suspend the package deal pending reexamination. Nevertheless, when the company and the unions met in the N.J.N.C. on 25th February, the trade union side, by majority decision, confirmed their acceptance of the deal and requested the company to implement it from 1st March.

    The company therefore asked my Department for an urgent reply to the request that it had already made for Government approval under the prices and incomes policy for implementation of the deal. This was granted on an assessment of the productivity savings flowing from the deal as a whole and subject to review after six months.

    On 25th February, however, the A.E.U. had called an official strike of their members in Ford plants, a number of which were already affected by unofficial strikes. Similar decisions followed from the T. & G.W.U., the Patternmakers and the National Union of Vehicle Builders. Although about 7,000 employees have remained at work, vehicle production in the company’s plants is virtually at a standstill, with serious loss of exports.

    On 27th February, the company obtained an interim injunction against the A.E.F. and the T.G.W.U. restraining them from taking further action in pursuance of the strike.

    On the same day, a meeting of representatives of the unions on the N.J.N.C. took place at Croydon, under the chairmanship of Lord Cooper, immediately following the T.U.C. conference of union executives. Following this meeting, an approach was made to the company requesting withdrawal of legal action, renegotiation on the basis of dropping conditional lay-off benefit and holiday bonus and consideration of alternative productivity proposals, in return for all of which, the unions in dispute with the company would instruct their members to return to work.

    The company replied by offering to withdraw legal action, provided that there was a return to work on the following Monday, and the package deal was recognised as being in operation until replaced by an agreement negotiated in accordance with the N.J.N.C. procedure. There was no response from the union side. On 6th March the interim injunction was discharged by the High Court.

    On the following day, last Friday, at the T.U.C.’s invitation, representatives of the unions on the N.J.N.C. were called together, and this was followed immediately by a joint meeting of the two sides of the N.J.N.C. As, however, no basis for a resumption of work was found at this meeting, officers of my Department held exploratory talks with the two sides on Saturday, and further talks are taking place this afternoon.

  • Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Vauxhall Motors Strike

    Barbara Castle – 1969 Statement on Vauxhall Motors Strike

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity, in the House of Commons on 7 March 1969.

    Production at the Vauxhall plants at Ellesmere Port and Luton has been seriously affected by shortage of components caused by a strike of 10 platers employed at the Ellesmere Port factory. The strike, which began on 26th February, has resulted in 11,000 employees being laid off, 6,000 at the Ellesmere Port plant and 5,000 at Luton and further lay-offs are threatened.

    The men are claiming an additional payment because of the conditions in which their work is done. The company maintains that it has an understanding with the union side of the joint negotiating committee that claims of this nature will be considered only in the general review of the company’s whole pay structure for manual workers, at present under discussion in that committee, and that, therefore, it is unable to deal with this particular claim in isolation. The company has, however, expressed its willingness to consider this matter at a meeting of the joint negotiating committee on Tuesday next.

    Officials of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering and Foundry Workers, to which the strikers belong, have made several attempts to secure a return to work, but these have so far been unsuccessful. I understand that after the failure of the latest of these attempts yesterday, the company has stated that it now considers the men on strike as having terminated their employment with the company.

    I am deeply disturbed that a stoppage this nature should have resulted in such widespread stoppage of production and loss of employment. Officers of my Department have already been in touch with the union and the company and they are seeking urgent consultations with both sides to see what further steps can be taken.

  • Barbara Castle – 1968 Statement on London Transport Fare Rises

    Barbara Castle – 1968 Statement on London Transport Fare Rises

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the then Minister for Transport, in the House of Commons on 7 March 1968.

    The Board submitted their Report to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs and to me on Thursday last, 29th February. It is being laid before the House today.

    The National Board confirm the proposals by London Transport for fares increases, for reasons which are set out at length in the Report. They have deferred consideration of British Rail’s proposals until they report upon the wider question of passenger and freight charges outside London, which has also been referred to them. In the light of this, the Government have decided that there are no grounds for continuing to force their requests to the London Transport Board to withhold their proposed application to the Transport Tribunal, and to defer introducing the changes authorised by the Transport Tribunal in July, 1966, in concessionary fares for employed juveniles. The corresponding proposals by British Rail cannot, however, go forward at present. I have told the Chairmen of the two Boards of these decisions.

    The London Transport proposals must now go through the full statutory procedures of the Transport Tribunal, including a public inquiry.

    The National Board have also made recommendations relating to the operation, costs and staff of the London Transport Board, to the future organisation of London Transport in relation to the Greater London Council, and to studies by my Department of social costs. I am already having wide-ranging discussions with London Transport and the Greater London Council on various matters. They include in particular those about the proposed transfer to the G.L.C. of responsibility for London Transport, to which I referred in the Answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy) on 15th December last. In further discussions on these matters, I will take fully into account the National Board’s recommendations.—[Vol. 756, c. 250.]

  • Barbara Castle – 1968 Statement on New Road Signs

    Barbara Castle – 1968 Statement on New Road Signs

    The statement made by Barbara Castle, the then Minister for Transport, in the House of Commons on 7 February 1968.

    I am aware of a recent survey which shews that many road users do not yet recognise the new road signs, though the situation is on the whole improving gradually.

    A large-scale publicity campaign to familiarise the public with the new road signs and their meaning has been in progress for the past three years and will continue. Every medium of publicity available has been used. More than nine million copies of a special booklet in colour have been issued, half of them sold through booksellers and newsagents, the remainder issued free to learner-drivers, trainee cyclists and foreign visitors. Every L-driver gets a free copy with his first provisional licence. This free issue is continuing at the rate of about 1¾ millions a year. The new traffic signs will be illustrated in the revised Highway Code now in preparation. So far, more than six million free leaflets illustrating a selection of the signs have been issued through the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. About 135,000 wall-charts have been issued to schools, garages, libraries etc. for continuous display, and some 2½million other visual aids for all ages. A successful mobile exhibition featuring the signs has been on tour since 1964. It has so far visited 130 towns and been seen by about 600,000 people. The tour continues this year. In addition to generous editorial space given by Press, television and radio, 27 specially produced short films on the subject have been given more than 1,200 showings on B.B.C. and I.T.V., and seven more films are still to come.

    I have given careful consideration to the hon. Member’s suggestion but apart from the fact that it would be surprisingly expensive to carry out I do not believe that it would add much to the campaigns I have already put in hand and which are continuing. I believe that the Ministry’s campaigns do give road users the means to educate themselves in the meaning of the new signs. It is for road users themselves to make the necessary effort to learn.

  • Barbara Castle – 1968 Comments on Thomas Cook and Son

    Barbara Castle – 1968 Comments on Thomas Cook and Son

    The comments made by Barbara Castle, the then Minister for Transport, in the House of Commons on 24 January 1968.

    Thomas Cook and Son Ltd. are a valuable national asset which must continue to be maintained and vigorously developed. I have every confidence in the ability and determination of the Company’s Chairman, his Board and staff to do this. The transfer of most of the Transport Holding Company’s other existing assets to the new bodies to be set up as a consequence of the proposals in the Transport Bill now before the House may, however, later make it desirable to make new arrangements for the continued control in the public sector of the Holding Company’s holdings in Thomas Cook. This is under consideration.