Local Transport Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 72: 72: Clause 70, page 60, line 26, leave out ““one”” and insert ““two”” The noble Lord said: Clause 70 states that any one or more of the authorities in subsection (2) may undertake a review of one or more of the matters mentioned in subsection (3). Those matters could include constitutional arrangements and whether the body should be dissolved. Likewise, Clause 71 gives the Secretary of State the power to direct one or more of the authorities falling within subsection (2) to undertake a review of one or more of the matters mentioned in subsection (3). As I said, they could be matters of considerable import. The outcome of the review could allow the Secretary of State by order to make provisions about the constitutional arrangements of an integrated transport authority. The amendments to Clause 70 would ensure that no single authority on its own could undertake a review, and if a review was undertaken that the integrated transport authority had to be invited to be part of that review. One can contrast the provisions of Clauses 70 and 71 with those of Clause 68, which provides that two or more authorities are needed to carry out a review of an area that does not have an ITA; so it is not a single authority. Where there is an integrated transport authority, surely it is only appropriate that at least two authorities should be required to commence a review and that the integrated transport authority should be invited to be part of that review, which does not appear to be provided for in the Bill. Clause 71 will give the Secretary of State has the power to direct a review of the arrangements. Again, it would seem appropriate that a review should be carried out by more than one single authority and that, once again, the integrated transport authority should be invited to be part of the review. That is what the amendments seek to achieve. I beg to move.