Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Rosser (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Transport Bill [HL].


Local Transport Bill [HL]

My Lords, given that my noble friend indicated—in my view rightly—that an offence under this amendment could be very serious indeed, how was the decision reached that the penalty set out in the amendment was appropriate? As my noble friend said, the provision of false or misleading information could lead to other operators deciding not to bid or to put in a higher bid than necessary to the advantage of the incumbent operator providing the false or misleading information, who might also be a bidder. Should not the maximum fine that could be imposed, if justified, reflect the financial advantage or gain that could have been secured by the operator providing the false or misleading information? It is surely not much of a deterrent if the maximum fine is way below the financial advantage that might be secured from deliberately or negligently supplying false or misleading data. I should be grateful if my noble friend could indicate why the level of fine indicated in the amendment was deemed appropriate because I do not regard the matters to which he referred as the justification for it as necessarily being commensurate with the potential severity of the offence.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c624 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Disclosure of information Contracts Devolved matters Bus services Finance Large goods vehicles Public transport Taxis Transport Road traffic Wales Roads Wheelchairs
Legislation
Local Transport Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk