Proceeding contribution from Clive Betts (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 26 March 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Transport Bill [Lords].
Local Transport Bill [Lords]
That point goes to the heart of an important issue. I listened very carefully to what my right hon. Friend just said about the processes for quality contracts, but is it not true that judicial review is essentially a challenge to a process that has not been carried out properly? That option will still be open to operators if they do not like the quality contracts and want the free-for-all that we have now. My right hon. Friend has just set out the fact that the approvals board will have the power to consider issues such as value for money and the wider public interest. Could there not be simply a difference of view between an approvals board and an elected passenger transport authority? The view of the approvals board would triumph in such circumstances, overriding the democratically elected body. Is that really acceptable?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 474 c199
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Contracts Bus services Competition Devolution Buses Concessions Fares Finance Ferries Franchises Local government Pensioners Older people Public transport National Assembly for Wales Passengers Standards Wales Rural areas Regulation Tolls
- Legislation
- Local Transport Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-02-25 15:29:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458433
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458433
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458433