Local Transport Bill [HL]

I do not think that anyone could undermine the principle of quality contracts quite as well as my noble friend just did in proposing these amendments, which would be another raft of public expenditure writ large if QCs are accepted or become commonplace as a result of the passage of this Bill. I should like to ask a number of questions to the mover of these amendments, in particular Amendment No. 66A. Could my noble friend envisage such an amendment being necessary if quality contracts were not part of this Bill? Has there been any example of quality partnerships up and down the country failing in the way he just outlined that they might? My noble friend talked about operators defaulting. Under the 2000 Act, has there been any example of an operator defaulting so far as quality partnerships are concerned and the fairly expensive measures outlined in this group being necessary under existing legislation? My noble friend referred to the comments made by the chief executive of Stagecoach. I have never been involved in the Stagecoach operation, but it is perfectly legitimate for the chief executive of that or any other company to say that they will dispose of their facilities and premises in any area up and down the country in any way they want if they are no longer necessary because of this legislation and the implementation of quality contracts. I wish that those who advocate quality contracts with such passion—I know that the brief to which my noble friend referred was prepared by the aptly named Mr Jeremy Bray on behalf of the Passenger Transport Executive Group—would acknowledge that their proposals will be extremely expensive. It is not just a question of switching from one operator to another. The problems outlined so ably by my noble friend will happen from one end of the country to the other. After the Minister has replied, I should be grateful if my noble friend would outline an idea of the amount of public expenditure that will be necessary to meet the cost of the amendments .