I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, on his ingenuity. I would not have thought that the clause could have sustained the arguments he has put forward. However, one has only to say ““clause stand part””, without giving any indication of the basis, and almost any issue can be shoehorned in.
This is a serious problem. We tried to include similar provisions under the Road Safety Bill last year but were told that it was not appropriate there. If you cannot get these provisions into a Road Safety Bill, goodness knows where they can go. After all, pedicabs transport people from one place to another.
Westminster City Council is greatly exercised about this; there are a great number of pedicabs in central London and around the theatres. If we cannot get such a provision into this Bill—and I can see that there may be reasons why not—I urge the Minister to consider where primary legislation can be used to include these measures. If we are to try in every Bill that comes before us to find a loophole, it will be trying, apart from everything else, and will leave the potential problem, raised by the noble Lord, that pedicabs are not properly insured or licensed. They are a tourist attraction, and somebody will get hurt at some stage. That is an open question.
Greater London Authority Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hanham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Greater London Authority Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
691 c95GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:48:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394179
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394179
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394179