Proceeding contribution from Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 March 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Supplementary Provisions) Bill.
Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Supplementary Provisions) Bill
Is this not just going back to the point that if the Rail Regulator was responsible, the infrastructure provider would come forward in a timely manner with the regulations? Is this not the point that we have been driving at all along? The Department for Transport is not an efficient regulator, and probably never will be, because it never sticks to the sort of timescale that the Office of Rail Regulation does. A quinquennial review does not mean later in the year or sometime next year; it means five years. We are driving at that preciseness on which business decisions have to be made, and which is being sought by the would-be purchasers of the rail link.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 699 c248GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Access Construction Channel tunnel Cooperation High Speed 1 line Finance Fees and charges Licensing EU law Infrastructure High speed trains Railway network Network Rail Regulation Subsidies Eurostar London and Continental Railways Office of Rail Regulation Waterloo Station
- Legislation
- Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Supplementary Provisions) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:28:12 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454342
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454342
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454342