UK Parliament / Open data

Protection of Freedoms Bill

When the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, said that I was on to a hopeless cause, I thought of not pushing it to a Vote—but when the Minister starts to use a midwife as the example of why the amendment should not be accepted I felt that he was clutching at straws. Far more midwives will be inconvenienced if they cannot park near to a patient. I have three points. First, the Minister has not answered the question about the small places that are not making a charge. The noble Baroness, Lady Randerson, spoke of those—small, private areas with no charges are being made, where the problem is the deterrent, not trying to put a fee on afterwards. Secondly, where there has been a unanimous agreement in having some sort of independent appeals process. It is simply no good to say that it is only for BPA members; if a member is expelled, that member can carry on running a parking area and will be completely outside any code of conduct. Finally, Disabled Motoring UK is concerned that this Bill will not stop rogue clampers from becoming rogue ticketers. They see it as a real risk to disabled drivers, who are in the main vulnerable people. I do not think that the Minister has answered that point at all. He says that he will wait for problems to occur to see whether to do anything; I do not advise the Government to do that because they will get all the flack. But so be it. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 42 withdrawn. Amendments 43 to 45 not moved. Schedule 4 : Recovery of unpaid parking charges Amendment 46 Schedule 4 : Recovery of unpaid parking charges Amendment 46 Moved by

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

735 c67 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top