Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hanham (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill [HL].

Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reply. I am slightly disappointed because I thought that in Committee we were probably opening a little door to what seems to be a perfectly sensible proposal for road safety. I understand that local authorities may have their own views on this but, equally, I understand that there is consistency in most road usage. However, there is no consistency about buses using bus lanes. While it is not a matter for this amendment, noble Lords will be aware of many occasions when buses have been not in the bus lane, which takes at least half the width of the road, but in the motorists’ part of the road. So some even-handedness is required. Again, I thank the Minister for her reply, although I am not particularly happy about it. As I said, I think that there is room here for a road safety initiative but, having heard what she said, for today’s purposes I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 40 [Trunk road picnic areas]:

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c132 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Applications Costs Closures Accidents Countryside Bureaucracy Bus lanes Cars Cycling Fraud Identity cards Injuries Level crossings Large goods vehicles International cooperation Helmets Electric vehicles Police Passengers Motorcycles Proof of identity Motorway service areas Photography Taxis Registration Young people Safety Roads Road traffic offences Theft Driving licences Picnic sites
Legislation
Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk