moved Amendment No. 19:
19: Clause 37, page 26, line 46, at end insert ““provided that 6 months notice is given for closures that last for periods greater than 4 days (including Bank Holiday weekends)””
The noble Lord said: In moving this amendment, we can reflect on the debates in this House and another place. It is clear that we are all aware that the construction of such a great project cannot come without some disruption. However, the great British philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead, once said: "““The art of progress is to preserve order amid change””,"
and that is something that I will try to secure with this amendment.
The amendment would ensure that adequate notice is given to passengers and operators before services, stations or lines are closed for a significant period of time. This will allow operators to plan for alternative travel solutions to be put in place and will allow passengers to be aware well in advance of disruptions to rail services. Clause 37 removes the statutory consultation and notice period required by Sections 22 to 31 and 37 of the Railways Act 2005. Those sections require a consultation period of 12 weeks and a notice period of six months before any closure relating to passenger services and networks, operational stations and experimental passenger services comes into effect. Clause 37 theoretically allows the closure of entire passenger services, stations and networks with no prior consultation or notice. That would provide no protection to passengers and operators if closures were to be unilaterally announced at short notice and has the potential to cause chaos for commuters and businesses. Noble Lords may joke that I always refer to Essex, but in the past few weeks we have experienced such disruption because of incidents on the Great Eastern main line that runs through Essex. Hundreds of people have been stranded in small towns.
I do not believe it is the intention of the Government to cause havoc on our railways, and I also accept that all reasonable measures need to be taken to facilitate the speedy construction of Crossrail. However, it is not unreasonable to expect a six-month notice period for long-term closures of lines or stations for major construction works so that train operating companies and franchises can make appropriate alternative travel plans. I accept that it may be necessary to close services, lines or stations for shorter periods, such as four days over bank holidays or for two or three days for emergency works, where a lengthy notice period cannot be given. This amendment would not prevent that, but it would ensure clear and transparent project planning for major construction works and would facilitate vital communications with operators and passengers to allow them to plan their alternative transport arrangements in advance. Can the Minister tell us under what circumstances Clause 37 will be used and advise us of how the Government plan to ensure that disruption is kept a minimum without giving sufficient notice to affected parties? I beg to move.
Crossrail Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hanningfield
(Conservative)
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 c697-8GC Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-19 11:26:56 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487437
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487437
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_487437