Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 8 January 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Concessionary Bus Travel Bill [HL].


Concessionary Bus Travel Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 24: 24: Clause 5, leave out Clause 5 and insert the following new Clause— ““London concessionary travel (1) After section 240 of the 1999 Act (travel concessions on journeys in and around Greater London) insert— ““240A London concessionary travel If immediately before 1st January in any financial year it appears to Transport for London that there are not for the time being in force arrangements under section 240(1) in relation to bus travel for the next financial year, the arrangements for the current financial year will be carried forward with such adjustment to take account of inflation as the Secretary of State may in writing specify.”” (2) Section 241 of the 1999 Act (reserve free travel schemes for London residents) is amended as follows. (3) In subsection (1) after the words ““London residents”” insert ““other than for bus travel.”””” The noble Lord said: The amendments, which are supported by London Councils—by the way, that is the body that represents all councils in London, not some of them—are intended to remove the London reserve free travel scheme in Section 241 of and Schedule 16 to the Greater London Authority Act 1999, following the introduction of the mandatory national bus concession. The free reserve scheme applies only to London and, in negotiating travel concessions, London Councils has to reach agreement with Transport for London for a scheme on its services by 31 December before the financial year of the scheme comes into effect. If agreement is not reached, the statutory reserve scheme comes into effect at a cost determined by Transport for London. This puts London Councils at a disadvantage when negotiating with Transport for London, because Transport for London can determine the costs of the reserve scheme. Uniquely in London, the costs of the concessionary fares scheme are in effect determined by the operators who benefit, whereas elsewhere they are determined subject to appeal to the Secretary of State by the local authorities. We shall come to that matter later. With the introduction of a national free fare concession on buses, there is no real need for elaborate special legislation to ensure a concessionary fares scheme in London. London Councils would like the Bill to be amended to remove the application of the reserve scheme for buses, and for the Government to undertake to remove the other elements of the reserve scheme when a parliamentary opportunity arises. This, I grant, is an extremely complicated amendment which the Minister and officials may need to consider carefully, but it does appear that the free reserve scheme in London is redundant. It needs removing, and perhaps the Minister might like to consider this before we return to the Bill at a later stage. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c29GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disability Appeals Disadvantaged Bus services Buses Concessions Fares Finance Expenditure Greater London Ferries Local government Local government finance Older people Public transport Transport Underground railways Rural areas Timetables Trams
Legislation
Concessionary Bus Travel Bill (HL) 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk