Railways

My Lords, I will not go along the same churlish road. For the party that has caused all the problems on our railways to deliver that sort of lecture was quite awful. I will address a few pertinent questions to the Minister. The governance of Network Rail needs close examination. The company is responsible for our infrastructure but is not held to account under the present governance arrangements. I urge the noble Lord and the ministry to turn their attention to that. The question of safety on the railways, referred to in the Statement, is perhaps overstated. The railways are extremely safe. I should like to know, in writing, how much it will cost to get a further 3 per cent reduction in the risk of death or injury. Very few people are hurt now, and to get 3 per cent better will be incredibly expensive. When will the orders for the new carriages be placed? Is the current review of the roscos by the competition authorities likely to hold them up? Will the Thameslink promise in the White Paper extend all the way along the present scheme, or will it stop short? Many people will have hoped to see some reference to the doubling of the track on certain lines. The noble Lord, Lord Borrie, will be familiar with one that is in desperate need of investment, the Oxford to Worcester line, but there are many more examples. We are disappointed that there is no more definite announcement on Crossrail, and we hope that we can look forward to getting more definite news when the Crossrail Bill comes back to this House. It is essential, in my opinion, that the scheme is extended to Heathrow and Reading to get proper east-west balance. Where the White Paper addresses travel plans it fails to mention the question of increasing car parking. There are a huge number of people who want to use the railway but who cannot park at the stations. The doubling of car parking space at stations, which is very much needed, would not be expensive. I should like to know how much £200 million will buy in the extension of the freight railway, particularly the clearance of the railway for containers heading inland from the ports. I am glad to hear that Rail Focus will be given some teeth. I hope they will really bite on the question of that body’s input into the new franchising rounds. I ask the Government to consider reviewing the railways franchising procedure. I am confident that if it were handled more skilfully it could lever in far more investment, not from the taxpayer but from the prospective franchise customers. I am sure that tens of millions of pounds could be levered in that way. The InterCity Express that was referred to is, I am afraid, an example of the old question of committees designing camels, or whatever it is. The process should be much more focused than it is. The West Anglia line should have been mentioned, and I caution the Government about rushing into the European rail traffic management system beyond 2014 to 2024, simply because no one has made it work on a proper mixed-traffic railway. We should not invest money in speculation. My last comment is reserved for the words in the White Paper about the north-south rail link. The reason for not proceeding with any studies is that it needs to be ““rigorously assessed””. I think that is civil-service-speak for ““endlessly delayed””.