Road Safety Bill [HL]

We are in danger of having a debate on amendments to a clause descend into a debate about the resources available. I merely reiterate to the noble Lord that the national demonstration projects have value. There is an openness about the reports on them, and that is the subject of the amendment to which I have sought to reply. Of course, if there is value in the information contained in the department’s annual report—in addition to what we already provide—I am prepared to accept that concept and to look at it further. I was merely seeking to indicate that in the evaluation of the projects and the dissemination of the information, an annual report would not suffice; it would not meet the requirements identified by noble Lords when speaking to the amendments. I recognise the validity of the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, that local authorities have schemes as long as anyone’s arm which they would like to implement on road safety. They would not be conscientious and intelligent local authorities if they did not have a multiplicity of schemes—not all of   which, it is true, can be funded overnight, not even through the munificence of the Department for Transport. However, the noble Lord will also recognise that there are areas in which it is extremely useful to have demonstration projects from which lessons can be learnt across the country. They may not involve huge amounts of expenditure, but they will give a clear illustration of what is best value for money with certain projects. That is what is envisaged for the process in Clause 1. I hope that, despite the strictures of the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, the House will recognise that the amendments do not advance the cause advocated and that the Government are fully cognisant of the valid points made in all speeches.