| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Rooker: My Lords, I know of no problems in that respect. The London Emergency Services Liaison Panel—I shall not try to pronounce the acronym—includes the Metropolitan Police, the City of London Police, the British Transport Police, the fire brigade and the ambulance service. It has produced plans to deal with some potentially serious issues: chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear hazards. It has issued guidance to local authorities and emergency planning officers. A sub-committee of the Cabinet Civil Contingencies Committee also deals with the issue.
Resources will always be an issue because many organisations with their own budgets are involved, but they are working to a central aim and are co-ordinated from the centre. The Government are in charge of ensuring that co-ordination.
Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts: My Lords, did the Minister have a chance to see the recent television programme on transporting nuclear waste from Essex
power stations through north London for reprocessing elsewhere? The programme revealed that, although the train is monitored extremely carefully while in progress, it is subsequently parked at Willesden Green sidings for two to three hours—and sometimes overnight—completely unguarded. Is that state of affairs satisfactory?
Lord Rooker: No, my Lords, it is not. I did not see the programme, but I trust that the noble Lord will be in the Lobby next week, if need be, to vote for the minor technical change made to the UK Atomic Energy Authority Constabulary in the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill, to ensure that that issue is dealt with.
Lord Carr of Hadley: My Lords, as someone who was once Home Secretary, I should be interested to know who—if any—is the particular Minister responsible for overseeing the co-ordination to which the Minister referred a few moments ago.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, I pay tribute to the work that the noble Lord did as Home Secretary. The Minister responsible is the Home Secretary. David Blunkett chairs the Cabinet Civil Contingencies Committee, which plays the central co-ordinating role.
National Road Safety Strategy
3.12 p.m.
Lord Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest as the new president of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.
-
When Her Majesty's Government expect to make a statement on the implementation of the national road safety strategy.
Lord Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that on page 31 of the strategy document, it states:
- Xif we fail to persuade drivers not to use mobile phones while driving, we will review the case for taking specific legislation"?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I shall start by setting out the clear target that the Government have set themselves by 2010, which is to reduce road deaths by 1,500 lives a year and serious injuries as a result of road accidents by 15,000.
The Government are therefore making judgments about the best way to achieve those remarkably serious targets. The evidence so far—supported by the Association of Chief Police Officers—is that existing road traffic legislation is adequate and provides sufficient powers for the police to deal with offences in that respect. They have power to prosecute for improper control of a vehicle.
Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, I declare an interest as a former president of RoSPA, and welcome the noble Lord, Lord Faulkner of Worcester, to his new position. Will the Minister seriously rethink that judgment? Evidence from coroners' inquests and police investigations shows that the use of handheld mobile phones causes fatal accidents.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, the Government's position is quite clear: the use of mobile phones in cars should not take place. It is inadvisable and drivers would do much better to desist. The same goes for hands-free use: that potentially distracts the driver from the road traffic situation. However, enforcement of a ban would not be simple, especially as people could easily switch to hands-free devices, for which there is still evidence of risk. The police can prosecute if there is an accident or if they believe that there is danger to the control of a vehicle.
Baroness Hayman: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I recognise his Answer on the adequacy of existing powers, having given it myself some years ago? Is he comfortable with the present degree of enforcement? Many of us share the concerns that have been expressed about the dangers inherent in such practice, and the legislative cover does not seem to be stopping it.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, noble Lords will be deeply surprised to learn that the Home Office figures are not disaggregated in that respect, so we do not know exactly what are the figures for prosecutions, although the matter will be kept under review.
We must consider the matter in the context of my original Answer. Our commitment to reduce deaths and serious injuries is strong. There is a widespread programme of action to achieve that, which I shall not bore the House by describing now. People are clearly advised not to use mobile phones. They will be prosecuted if by doing so they appear to cause an accident. But there are many other actions that, on the evidence before the Government, will lead to significantly greater reductions in deaths and serious injuries.
Baroness Scott of Needham Market: My Lords, the Government's road safety strategy highlights the fact that single-carriageway rural roads are the most dangerous class of highway in the country. In the light of that, what progress are the Government making to implement the review of rural speed limits promised in the Transport Act 2000? It is now almost a year since that Act was passed, and people are dying in numbers that would simply not be tolerated from any other cause.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, the Transport Act 2000 committed the Government to consider the development of rural road hierarchies for speed management purposes. If I recollect correctly, the noble Baroness had some part in that Act.
Yesterday, the Secretary of State laid before both Houses the report of an independent working group established to consider the practicability of differential speed limits throughout rural areas. The Government will be considering the implications, practicability and cost of such a scheme during the coming months.
Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, may I encourage my noble friend to improve his background reading on the subject of hand-held telephones by reading the Private Member's Bill introduced by my noble friend Lord Davies? If he read the debate on that Bill, when an excellent case was made in this House that was warmly regarded, he might have some stronger words to encourage the Home Office to produce better briefing for Answers in future.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I am grateful for my noble friend's advice on this occasion—as I am sure I will be in future. There is a danger of my being boring by repeating what I said earlier.
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I was confident that the House would agree with me on that. The point about statistics for prosecutions is noted, but whatever the figure, we are still left with the challenge of whether a ban is the priority—whether it is effectively enforceable or whether we would just feel better by passing legislation. Legislation is usually relatively easy to pass—if not this week—but the Government must consider whether it will be efficacious.
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, is the odious habit conducted at present—certainly by Westminster City Council—of finding every side road, digging it up at great expense and putting a huge great hump in it, supposed to be helpful in reducing road accidents? If so, will the Minister consider that it is greatly to the detriment of those travelling in and driving cars?
Lord Filkin: My Lords, I must declare two interests as a resident of Westminster and having the privilege of being a neighbour of the noble Earl. At times, I share his frustrations, but I shall be careful what I say from the Dispatch Box.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Thames Valley Police Authority
recently introduced a scheme offering a reward of up to #500 to people who are prepared to inform on relatives, neighbours and friends who drink and drive? Is he in favour of that scheme and is it likely to be extended? How can confidentiality be assured in such circumstances, because if it is not I can see a great deal of fighting going on in streets and homes?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |