Briefly, I like these three amendments, for these reasons. First, they make some attempt to equalise the duty of care expected of road managers and move some way towards the duty of care we expect of railway managers. That is good.
Secondly, I understand that there was an example in Dingwall where a supermarket was to be erected beside a couple of level crossings and Network Rail found that it was not a statutory consultee in the planning process. I certainly think that that ought to change.
Thirdly, I live beside the works associated with the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements (Scotland) Act. In part of that Act great efforts have gone into eliminating level crossings. However, the land take required for an elevated roundabout at six metres higher than the current road level and the new bridge, which has eliminated a couple of level crossings, will involve the delivery on site of about 450,000 tonnes of fill, which will not be a very green moment in Alloa although the return of the railway is a very green moment.
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl of Mar and Kellie
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 26 October 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c1245 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:00:54 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270522
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270522
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270522