Sections 80-86
3 NOVEMBER 2005
80. MR CLARKSON: And the bond would be lesser
than the full outstanding sums, would it?
(Mr Troy) Yes,
it would. We are thinking in the region of £200 or £250.
81. And it would be recoverable in circumstances
where there was an innocent explanation, would it?
(Mr Troy) That
is correct, yes.
82. It would set up a system, would it not,
of stopping any further removal to the pound because that car
still had these things outstanding against them?
(Mr Troy) Yes.
The clause proposes that the keeper then displays that surety
or bond on their dashboard to ensure that that is not repeated.
We should have the technical means of ensuring that does not happen,
but that is another way of making sure it cannot be repeated.
83. CHAIRMAN: I think we are fairly
clear now about the problem, the aim and the mechanism. The only
objection we had from the Government said that they propose to
use Section 79 of the Traffic Management Act to achieve the same
measure or bring about a similar measure. What are your comments
on that?
(Mr Troy) My understanding
is that section 79 does not provide this particular provision
on three counts. Firstly, the proposal in this clause includes
within the definition of persistent evader those who fall under
the road user regulations in London. A persistent evader can be
someone who has a number of road traffic penalty charge notices
and Congestion charging penalties as well. The second area and
probably the most fundamental is that I do not think Section 79
deals with situations where the vehicle is parked lawfully. Thirdly,
and this is quite crucial to London, Mr Clarkson introduced the
concept of our Enforcement Task Force, where we work very closely
with all the enforcement agents in London and have done for some
years and this legislation provides the opportunity for each one
to work on each other's behalf. So if there is a persistent evader
in Camden and they have identified that individual as a persistent
evader and then they go and park in Islington, Islington will
be able to remove that vehicle knowing that that person is a problem,
and that provision is not in the Traffic Management Act as I understand
it.
84. May I just say in respect of 25(4) and
the definitions there, we take the view that there are fine tunings
that could be achieved and we would need a little time to settle
amendments. We can either do this after these proceedings are
completed and before the Chairman signs off the Bill or, if it
is going to take longer, we thought we could deal with it in another
place. I declare that because I think for formality reasons that
should be on the record. Thank you very much, Mr Troy.
The witness withdrew
85. MR CLARKSON:
I have no more witnesses. Those are all the matters that we
lay before the Committee. Thank you very much.
86. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much indeed.
In that case, the Committee will withdraw to discuss in private
and hopefully recall you before too long to complete the proceedings
by 11 o'clock. Thank you very much.
Counsel and Parties are directed to withdraw and, after a short while, are again called in
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Can I first of all thank the Petitioners and indeed the Promoters. The Committee has now considered the Petitioners, the evidence and the Government's report in detail and we have decided to delete Clause 13 and to delete Part 4. We have accepted the Promoters' detailed amendments. We will produce a special report with our observations on the remaining clauses and our recommendations for further consultation and discussion. That will be produced as soon as possible and published hopefully this week. It only therefore remains for me to invite Mr Clarkson to approve the Preamble.
MR CLARKSON: Thank you, Sir. I will call the two officers, Mr Blackwell and Ms Dowdye. Are you Gary Blackwell, Head of Litigation at Westminster City Council and joint Promoters of the Bill.
MR BLACKWELL: I am.
MR CLARKSON: Are you Mary Dowdye, Enforcement Partnerships Manager at Transport for London, the other joint Promoter in the Bill.
MS DOWDYE: I am.
MR CLARKSON: Have you both read the Preamble to the Bill?
MS DOWDYE: I have.
MR BLACKWELL: I have.
MR CLARKSON: Is it true?
MS DOWDYE: It is.
MR BLACKWELL: It is.
MR CLARKSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.
| 
