| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington): I support the amendments. It is entirely right not only for local authorities and other bodies but for the Secretary of State, who is responsible for royal parks, to have regard to the mayor's transport strategy.
There are a number of main arteries in London that pass through the royal parks, the opening and closing of which can have a major impact on roads in their vicinity. I hope that, for that reason alone, the House will support the amendments.
Mr. Brooke:
I, too, appreciate the moves that the Government have made. In Committee on 16 February, at column 599, in response to a mischievous and provocative speech by the hon. Member for Brent, East (Mr. Livingstone)--I say that in friendly terms--I made paving reference to a point that I came back to on clause 179. In columns 963 and 964, I raised the problem of the lack of connection in traffic control between the royal parks and the rest of Greater London, including the adjacent local authorities. The then Minister for Transport in London, the hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Ms Jackson) explained that there were no powers to enable the bridging of that gap.
The matter was debated twice in Committee in the Lords. On 19 October, Lord Whitty moved these amendments, which are an excellent development. It is a vindication of the parliamentary process that we have come to such a good solution--one that people surrounding the royal parks have been crying out for for ages. I salute the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions for being such a pleasure to do business with, in marked contrast with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which has cut funding to the royal parks, insisted that they must have a series of concerts, interrupting their quietude, and allowed a series of Albanian hot dog vendors to run riot in a manner that is liable to turn the royal parks into a version of Coney island. I unreservedly commend the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
Mr. Hill:
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) for his kind words. I also pay tribute to the outstanding contribution made by the right hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Brooke) on the issue. The Bill and the whole of London have benefited from it and we are very grateful to him.
Lords amendment agreed to.
Mr. Hill:
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendments Nos. 174 to 193.
Mr. Hill:
When the clauses relating to local implementation plans were discussed in this House, we were pressed on why we had not included any provisions for review of the plans. We were also asked why the mayor could claim for the boroughs only reasonable
The amendments were added to the Bill in another place. I am sorry that so many amendments were required, but it is necessary to ensure that the same process is followed for a revised plan as for the original.
Lords amendment agreed to.
Lords amendments Nos. 174 to 193 agreed to.
Mr. Hill:
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendments Nos. 195 to 212, 703 and amendments (a) to (e) thereto, 214, 215, 223 and amendment (a) thereto and motion to disagree, 224, 225, 228, 232 to 234, 235 and amendment (a) thereto, 236 to 238, 334, 336, 338, 346, 423, 565, 566, 572, 577, 582, 657, 659 to 696, 698 to 702, 712, 714, 715, 717 and 799 to 801.
Mr. Hill:
The House is enormously grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. If I may say so, that was beautifully enunciated.
The amendments in this group are largely technical improvements to the detailed transport functions of the mayor and Transport for London. Some are reproductions of current statutory functions of London Transport--functions conferred on London Transport under legislation introduced by a Conservative Government. Some of them represent a positive reaction to points which have been raised in the other place.
Some concern new powers and duties to reflect the wider responsibilities of Transport for London and the integrated approach which it will be able to take to transport in the capital. The amendments are intended to be helpful, and do not alter the basic structure of the Bill.
I hope that it will assist the House--as I describe the general effect of these amendments--if I distinguish between those which give Transport for London its powers, those which impose duties and those which are editorial or technical in nature. It may also help if I give some illustrative examples of each type of amendment. I should mention that this group also includes a power for the Secretary of State to make regulations to enable the current tax status of Transport for London's predecessor bodies to be maintained once those bodies have transferred to Transport for London.
Let me deal first with the powers which this group of amendments gives to Transport for London. TfL will, of course, be a new organisation, but it will need to have many of the same powers as its predecessors. These amendments ensure that the relevant powers of London
Transport are passed to Transport for London. For example, the amendments give it the power to make railway byelaws.
The amendments also allow Transport for London to run a transport museum and to pay grants to bodies such as the dial-a-ride companies. Those activities are of course already undertaken by London Transport, and will be continued by Transport for London. However, Transport for London will need not only to inherit the relevant powers of its predecessor bodies, but to have powers to discharge its wider statutory duties and to reflect the changing nature of transport provision. The amendments allow for that.
For example, the amendments give Transport for London the power to form joint venture companies and to provide transport facilities without itself having to run services to and from those facilities. The amendments recognise that Transport for London's responsibilities will not be limited to passenger transport. It will thus have the power to provide intermodal freight facilities--a point suggested by my noble Friend Lord Berkeley in the other place.
The duties imposed on Transport for London by the amendments relate primarily to the provision of information. Amendment No. 236 requires Transport for London annually to inform local authorities and the London Transport Users Committee of its plans for fares and services, and to publish details of its fares. Again, this is a reproduction of a current duty of London Transport. However, we have also given Transport for London a new duty--I ought to mention that we were prompted to do so by Conservative peers--to provide information to the public about the Transport for London public transport services. This duty builds upon the present travel information service provided by London Transport to its customers, and will assist in the delivery of the passenger transport information 2000 initiative to provide a national public transport information service during the course of next year.
We have made a number of editorial and technical changes. For example, we have included provisions allowing Transport for London to fulfil the contractual obligations of predecessor bodies so that there is no disruption to services. We have provided for Transport for London to make transfer schemes for the distribution of property among its subsidiaries, so that the mayor can structure Transport for London and its transport functions as he or she wishes.
Government amendments (a) to (e) to Lords amendment No. 703 make technical and consequential changes relating to the operation and the interpretation of the new schedule on Transport for London transfer schemes.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, these amendments complete the toolkit which Transport for London will need to deliver the mayor's vision for transport in the capital. I am conscious that, in the time available to us today, it might be inappropriate for me to describe the amendments in exhaustive detail, but I will try to answer any queries that hon. Members may have, either now or in writing.
Mr. Brake:
I should like to speak specifically to Lords amendment No. 223, which Liberal Democrat Members oppose and on which we shall seek to divide the House.
Lords amendment: No. 173, in page 69, line 36, leave out from ("refuses") to ("unless") in line 39, and insert
("to approve under subsection (2) of section 128 above a local implementation plan, the London borough council which submitted the plan shall prepare a new local implementation plan and submit it to the Mayor under subsection (1) of that section")
Lords amendment: No. 194, in page 72, line 36, at end insert
("or in pursuance of a transport subsidiary's agreement")
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |