moved Amendment No. 5:"Page 1, line 18, after ““1(1)(a)”” insert ““, including their estimated costs””"
The noble Lord said: The Bill gives no consideration to the question of the costs of any strategy decided by the Assembly or the committee. This amendment would ensure that future costs are considered right at the beginning of the process so that the strategy produced will be achievable and suitably resourced. Obviously it is of the greatest importance that the costs of the strategy be made clear from the start in order to judge the efficiency and appropriateness of the measures laid out. So far as I can see, the Bill leaves these matters completely unconsidered, and steps should be taken to address this.
Amendment No. 11, also included in this group, addresses the worrying lack of specificity in the Bill regarding where the money for the transport strategy will come from—in particular, the money for the additional costs arising from the joint discharge of functions by local authorities. I know that the local authorities themselves are worried about that. The amendment would ensure that the resources were drawn from the proper place, the Assembly, as the instigator of the joint activity and, we hope, not from other sources such as local rates and council taxes, which have suffered substantial increases in recent months.
We have also added Amendment No. 11A, which is a probing amendment to enquire about the levying powers of the joint transport authorities. As I understand it, the joint authority would have the power to raise a levy on its constituent councils, but not directly on the public. Of course, in effect, there is very little difference between raising funds one way or the other; the money will still be raised through local taxes and rates. But if the money is to be raised in the same way as for local councils, arguably the public should have a similar right to elect members of the joint authority. That is clearly not the Government’s intention, because, as we understand it, membership of the authority may include non-elected appointees. I beg to move.
Transport (Wales) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Roberts of Conwy
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 24 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Transport (Wales) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c440GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:47:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280142
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280142
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_280142