I appreciate that I spoke at some length and it was not easy to follow. It is Thursday afternoon and noble Lords have been hard at it as legislators all week, so concentration can lapse, eyes can close, and so on. I moved through the arguments carefully, but the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, has got it right when he says that he will read what I said very carefully. That is very wise—not because I said it, but clearly because we had to give a lot of detailed explanation, which is not always easy to follow.
The noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, made points that I expected him to make, and I understand the argument that Crossrail should not unduly disrupt the running and development of the rest of the network. The noble Lord has his special position of protecting all interests relating to Essex—for which I have a lot of affection, as the noble Lord knows—so I expected him to argue in those terms. He made some important points, and I reassure him that there should be no cost to other operators for the new objective. The ORR will have to balance its objectives carefully. There is no overriding priority given to the new objective; it is simply there. That should ensure that the ORR does not try to meet its objective at any cost. That is not our intention.
My noble friend Lord Berkeley, as ever, is a supportive sceptic. That is his role, which he is very good at, and I congratulate him on it. When he takes the time to read carefully what is on the record about the replacement of clauses, he will see that we have set out a careful story, and I am sure that he will appreciate and understand better how we see this working. My noble friend questioned the duty of the ORR, the nub of which was what would be in the reports. It is what it says on the tin. It is in the proposed new clause, which states: "““The Office of Rail Regulation shall from time to time””—"
which means when the timing is right and proper and there is something valid to report— "““publish a report on … what it has done, or proposes to do, to further the objective given to it under section (Objective of ORR ""in relation to Crossrail) … how it has exercised or proposes to exercise its functions in connection with the operation of Crossrail passenger services””."
That is pretty clear in its intent. It is a clear statement.
Crossrail Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 26 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Crossrail Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c689-90GC Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-19 11:26:52 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487425
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487425
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487425