Local Transport Bill [HL]

I thank the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, for allowing us the opportunity again to discuss bus passenger representation and its relationship with the Secretary of State, the senior traffic commissioner and local authorities. It might be helpful if I start by saying that many of the issues that have been raised are ones on which we are seeking views through our consultation, to which I referred earlier. The legislation we are seeking to achieve is one that will give us sufficient flexibility to create a body which will have a strong and influential public role; one which will be taken seriously and have real effect. It will be necessary to bring forward appropriate secondary legislation whether, following that consultation, the Government decide either to set up the Public Transport Users Committee, or to add functions to Passenger Focus, the rail watchdog. But we need to ensure we have the necessary provisions in primary legislation now to ensure that the Secretary of State can provide the representative body with sufficient power and influence. For those reasons I am grateful to the noble Lord for probing these issues in the amendment. Specifically in relation to this amendment, the Bill would confer on the Public Transport Users Committee the function of making recommendations to the Secretary of State about prescribed public passenger transport and facilities in England. I accept there may be others that the committee, or Passenger Focus if we extend its remit, would want to make recommendations to. However, the Secretary of State also has powers to confer, in secondary legislation, additional functions on the committee, and this might include the functions of making recommendations to traffic commissioners, local authorities or indeed, I suggest, the bus industry. I therefore suggest to noble Lords that the first part of this amendment is unnecessary. Following our consultation, I hope it will become clear how these relationships might work in detail. Any order made to set up a public transport users committee would also need to be laid before and approved by a resolution of this House and another place. We need to ensure both that any statutory bus champion can make its voice heard and that those on the receiving end are actively listening and responding where appropriate. I therefore agree that requiring other parties to have regard to the recommendations of the bus champion has merits. My noble friend’s amendment names the Secretary of State, senior traffic commissioner and local authorities as the bodies who should be taking regard of any recommendations of the bus champion. We do not think it would be sensible to include detailed provision such as this in the Bill as it might limit our options later. However, we agree that we should make sure we have the necessary powers to specify requirements in this area in future secondary legislation. If my noble friend is content with that approach, I should like to consider further whether the current powers are wide enough and, if necessary, bring forward an appropriate amendment at Report to ensure that the principle to which he seeks to give effect will be covered. Therefore, I hope that my noble friend will kindly withdraw the amendment.