Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

London Underground: Penalty Fares

The Earl of Clancarty asked Her Majesty's Government:

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty): The list below sets out the total number of individual penalty fares issued, both by revenue control inspectors and station staff per annum from 1994-95 through to 1998-99.

    1995-96: 145,410

    1996-97: 203,650

    1997-98: 333,207

    1998-99: 455,004

The Earl of Clancarty asked Her Majesty's Government:

    How many people have been issued with penalty fares per annum on the London Underground since the introduction of penalty fares.[HL3532]

Lord Whitty: London Transport's figures are not compiled on this basis. My previous answer (HL3531) shows the number of penalty fares issued since the scheme was introduced.

Railway Land

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What advice they have given to the British Railways Board regarding retention of ex-British Rail land; and[HL3573]

    What criteria they advise the British Railways Board to use when deciding whether land should be retained; and[HL3574]

    Whether they regard forecasts of passenger and freight growth as one of the criteria that should be

14 Jul 1999 : Column WA52

    taken into account when deciding whether or not to retain railway land.[HL3575]

Lord Whitty: Last July's White Paper on the future of transport announced that, in view of the importance of ensuring that sites which are of potential value to the passenger or freight railway were identified, BRB would suspend land sales while it conducted an audit of its remaining sites and reported to the Government on any which had a realistic prospect of use for transport purposes in the foreseeable future.

The Government are considering the BRB's report of its review and, before taking a decision on the future process for disposal of BR land holdings, intend to take into account the views of Sir Alastair Morton who was appointed as the new BRB/shadow SRA chairman on 1 April.

M.4 Bus Lane

Lord Stoddart asked Her Majesty's Government:

    In connection with the installation of a bus, coach and taxi lane on the eastbound carriageway of the M.4 between junctions 3 and 2 and associated works:

    (a) whether users of the motorway were informed of the project and by what means;

    (b) what opportunities were given to them to object, if any, and how many objections were received;

    (c) which motoring organisations, if any, were consulted and what were their responses;

    (d) which organisations, if any, representing road hauliers were consulted and what were their responses; and

    (e) whether the Prime Minister has made any representations concerning the operation of the bus, coach and taxi lane and delays to other traffic.[HL3249]

Lord Whitty: The Minister for Transport announced on 25 September 1997 in opening the bus lane on the M.4 Heathrow spur that a bus lane on the eastbound M.4 between junctions 3 and 2 was being investigated.

Public notices about the bus lane proposals were advertised in the London Evening Standard, Brentford and Chiswick Times and London Gazette on 24 July 1998. These also gave the opportunity for objections. Nine objections were received within the four-week objection period.

The Road Haulage Association and Freight Transport Association were also consulted. The Freight Transport Association objected to the proposals on safety and policy grounds. These concerns were fully discussed with the association.

The Deputy Prime Minister has received no representations from the Prime Minister on the matter. There are of course regular contacts at official level. The actual outcome of the experiment so far has been favourable on traffic flows.

14 Jul 1999 : Column WA53

Public Bills: Rules of Relevance and Scope

Lord Denham asked the Leader of the House:

    In what respects the rules of relevance and scope (in relation to public Bills and amendments thereto) differ between this House and the House of Commons; and what are the different criteria on the admissibility of amendments which are used in each House.[HL3434]

The Leader of the House (Baroness Jay of Paddington): In the House of Commons decisions on the admissibility of amendments are a matter for the Chair. In the House of Lords decisions on the admissibility of amendments are ultimately for the House itself to determine, though the Public Bill Office advises on the relevance of amendments when they are

14 Jul 1999 : Column WA54

handed in. The rules on relevance of amendments in each House are in generally similar terms and are set out in Erskine May, 22nd Edition, at pages 471 (Lords) and 525-7 (Commons). The major difference is that in the House of Commons amendments which would create public charges not authorised by a money or ways and means resolution are ruled out of order. There is no restriction in the House of Lords.

Summer Recess

Lord Palmer asked Her Majesty's Government:

    When they intend to announce the dates of the Summer Parliamentary Recess.[HL3374]

Lord Carter: I expect to be in a position to make an announcement shortly.

14 Jul 1999 : Column WA53

   Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page