Local Transport Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 5: 5: Clause 13, page 14, line 24, at end insert— ““( ) In subsection (4) (meaning of ““relevant local authorities”” for purposes of consultation) for paragraph (b) substitute— ““(b) district councils in England,””.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the amendment picks up a point that was touched on in Committee, although not directly addressed. The noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, moved amendments aiming to ensure that neighbouring authorities would always be consulted about a quality partnership scheme or a quality contract scheme that might affect them. I advised the Committee that the amendments were unnecessary because the existing provisions in the Transport Act 2000 would ensure that any relevant authority whose area was affected would be consulted. I stand by that advice. However, having looked again at the existing consultation provisions, we noticed that the requirements that apply where an authority proposes to make a quality partnership scheme are not quite the same as those for quality contract schemes. For quality contract schemes, any district council can be a relevant local authority, one that must be consulted if its area is affected, but for quality partnership schemes only metropolitan district councils are relevant local authorities. There does not seem to be any reason for this slight inconsistency. It appears that a non-metropolitan district council could have just as legitimate an interest in a proposed quality partnership scheme as in a proposed quality contract scheme and should have the same consultation rights. The possible subject matter of a quality partnership scheme would be greatly expanded if the Bill was enacted. There will still be fundamental differences between the two types of scheme, but we do not see the case for any distinction as to who at district level should be consulted on them. This is a modest and uncontroversial amendment. I beg to move.