---

Road Safety [HL]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his comments and the Government for their rethink on this issue. As everyone knows, I am very much a localist. One of the reasons I was very keen to promote this provision is that money raised locally from speed cameras should be spent locally and not go into other pots and be distributed in other ways. I agree totally that there must not be anything in the clause or the regulations which encourages speed cameras merely to raise money, which is what many people claim they are there for. We have agreed during our debates on the Bill that speed cameras have been a very effective way of saving lives and reducing speed. We want to see more money reinvested in road safety, sometimes through fairly minor measures. The highway engineers to whom I have spoken will be very pleased to see this part of the legislation come into operation. It will provide transparency and in many parts of the country they will be able to see money raised locally spent on measures that will save lives. I thank the Government again; I am pleased they have had a rethink. Although there are still some defective parts of the Bill, which we shall talk about later, this is a good addition and I thank the Government for bringing it forward. We shall obviously support it as it was our amendment initially. On Question, Motion agreed to. 5 Clause 16, leave out Clause 16 5A The Lords disagree with Commons Amendment 5, and propose Amendments 5A and 5B in lieu- Page 21, line 18, at end insert- ““(2)The Secretary of State must make regulations under this section no later than 31st December 2007.”””” 5B Page 59, line 6, after ““1,”” insert- ““(aa) section 16,”” 5C The Commons insist on Amendment No. 5 and disagree to Amendments 5A and 5B for the following Reason - Because it is undesirable to make regulations about retro-reflective tape when European and international legislation about it is being prepared