Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Bradshaw moved Amendment No. 46A:
"(aa) in subsection (2), after paragraph (d) insert
"(e) security, cleaning and maintenance facilities","
The noble Lord said: My Lords, we return to the issue of trunk road picnic areas. The Government have a good idea here. They tell us that tiredness kills and they want people to pull off special roads and trunk roads and take a break. But their thinking rather comes to an end there. They say, "Here is a space", but then the issue of who is going to look after that space, keep it clean, provide lavatory facilities, refreshmentsif there are to be anyand security have all been left rather in the air. There is then the prospect that local authorities will be left with a not inconsiderable bill for looking after these places, which could become unsanitary, crime-ridden, fly-tipping sites if we are not careful.
An opportunity arises in that, shortly, the Highways Agency is due to consult on the regulations that govern motorway service areas. That would provide an excellent opportunity for the provision of these additional facilities to be reviewed alongside the present outdated framework for motorway service
29 Nov 2005 : Column 133
areas. The Highways Agency could carry out a review of existing sitesmotorway service areasand new sitesthe picnic areasand, I hope, come up with a system that provides proper management at both kinds of site. Contractors could be engaged under the competitive tendering process, which is now used for motorway sites, to encompass new picnic areas so that they can be managed properly and offer people somewhere pleasant, comfortable and attractive to stop rather than somewhere that is very unpleasant and that few people would use. We hope that the Minister will say, in response to the amendments moved by me, the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, and the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, that there is more work to do on this. Clause 40 is not the end of the story but almost the beginning. I would like to hear whether the Minister intends to put some flesh on the bones. I beg to move.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, my amendmentAmendment No. 47is in this group. It more or less replicates what the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, proposes but is more concerned with the security of such areas. In Committee we said that, on the face of it, this appears to be a very good idea. However, when one considers the problems associated with having drop-off areas on motorways, more attention is required than has so far been given to the subject. As the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, said, who will look after the sites and who will be responsible for them? If the Highways Agency can be pinned with the responsibility, then it must be pinned with it in a way in which it funds the careful maintenance and security of such areas. One can create an area like this wherever one likes on a trunk road, but if it is not secure, clean and there are no toilet facilities, no one will use it legitimately. We are all concerned that the sites will end up being used for illegitimate uses which will stop normal road users using them.
I hope that the Minister will be able to give us some information on the questions that we have asked on both the previous occasion and now. How will the sites be managed? Who will manage them? What security will there be? Will there be management personnel on the sites to ensure that they are properly looked after or will that be done through a remote CCTV system which might or might not contain a film? Will they be open day and night or will someone see that they are secured at night? It is extremely important that we have satisfactory answers to these matters so that we feel able to approve this new clause with this new proposal.
Earl Attlee: My Lords, my amendment is Amendment No. 49. I remind the House of my interest as president of the HTA and patron of the Road Rescue Recovery Association. I am also close to other trade associations. My amendment covers slightly wider issues. At Second Reading, I described the poor state of facilities, particularly for HGV drivers at overnight spots and especially for female drivers. Can the Minister point to any other group of industrial workers that is treated so badly, especially in terms of
29 Nov 2005 : Column 134
WC facilities in the morning? It is not surprising that there are so few lady truck drivers. Does the Minister agree that grossly inadequate facilities are resulting in problems in recruiting HGV drivers in general, and females in particular? What will he do about it? Can he offer the industry anything better than a burger bar with inadequate hygiene facilities or a large bush for early morning nature calls? Is that the best we can offer a key sector of industrial workers who have onerous responsibilities, which we discussed earlier on Report?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken in this debate. As has been recognised, the picnic areas provided for by the Bill are additional facilities and will be recognised as an advance. I take the anxieties of the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, on board. We need to improve facilities for truck drivers and others. That is part of the concept of the facilities, but he will recognise that our major concern is road safety. Drivers should have a decent place with limited facilities in which to pull off the road in safety and security while taking a necessary rest. These are picnic sites, not highway services. They are not a replica of facilities on the motorways but are very limited.
Security is an important consideration and I recognise the point the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, makes in that respect, but we believe that it can be covered by closed-circuit television and by people from the Highways Agency dropping in on sites as a regular part of their duties. The concept of these picnic areas is an advance on what we have at present and meets some of the points that the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, made.
If these are probing amendments, I hope that I am being sufficiently probed that I give answers that reassure noble Lords. The problem with the amendments is that we do not think that the Secretary of State needs additional facilities. What is being sought here is picnic areas that will provide limited opportunities for rest. They will be an improvement on the very limited facilities that we have at the present time, to which the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, drew attention. We do not see these picnic areas having substantial facilities. They may have a snack bar provided by a private operator, the sort of thing that operates on truck stops up and down the country, but we are not seeking to create anything that looks remotely like a motorway service area. They will be a safe place for rest and recuperation and a break from driving a vehicle. Therefore, on security considerations, regular patrols by the Highways Agency will make sure that road traffic is moving smoothly. I recognise the anxiety about fly-tipping and the illicit transfer of goods and drugs, but we think that the closed circuit television that we will put on sites where we have anxieties will guard against them.
On that basis I hope that noble Lords will recognise that we have thought through this issue of picnic areas. I do not think that a single voice has dissented from the
29 Nov 2005 : Column 135
concept. I hope that noble Lords will feel, therefore, that we have thought through the policy and that the amendment can safely be withdrawn.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, before the Minister sits down, perhaps I may ask two questions, which I do not think have been raised. Who is going to provide these sites? No money, or extremely limited money, will be made out of them. So, they will not be a money-spinner for a private company buying the land and setting up a picnic area. Is the expectation that this will be done by the Highways Agency on land which is publicly owned, or will these sites have to be purchased, and therefore the money will not necessarily come back, or will they be purchased by local authorities, which are not going to make any money out of them either? I know that there is allowance for such sites on other roads and that this is just an extension of that. Perhaps the Minister would tell me what happens elsewhere as to who, if anybody, will put up the money to run these sites without any return?
Earl Attlee: My Lords, before the Minister sits down
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I shall reply to the noble Baroness and then the noble Earl can ask me his question before I sit down again. The point really is whether we can envisage any profit-making aspect to this. We can see perhaps the provision of a limited snack bar, which may be licensed out on that basis. That happens in many of our existing lay-bys where an enterprising individual, who often indicates his presence by the waving of an extremely patriotic flag, provides this facility. We do not anticipate anything more grandiose than that. But, regarding supervision of the site, we believe that the Secretary of State has sufficient powers. We recognise the anxieties that have been expressed, but many of these lay-bys with small facilities exist. We will improve on that. We will have extra dimensions of security, cleanliness and insurance that they are used for proper purposes. In addition, they may have a small snack bar.
Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |