Local Transport Bill [HL]

My Lords, I rise briefly to support the amendment. As the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, said, we discussed this in Committee and, like him, I was surprised that the amendment was rejected by the Government. ““Integrated transport”” may not be the wording that we use these days, but clearly any planning that involves road and rail should be done together and the amendment would fit in well. The noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, mentioned the railways route utilisation strategies, the forecasts that go with them and the Government’s plan and high-level output statements for the railways. They are totally dependent on where passengers and, to some extent, freight go at either end of a journey. If the rail services are to be cut back or increased, local and regional transport plans should reflect that, and vice versa. This is before we start looking at the possible changes to transport demand when the price of oil rockets, but I shall not go into that now. I hope that my noble friend will consider this issue seriously, because this is such a simple group of amendments that would emphasise the importance of considering land-based transport in the round.