Proceeding contribution from Baroness Gardner of Parkes (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Localism Bill.
Localism Bill
I thank the noble Earl and the noble Lords who have contributed to the debate. It has been much wider and more interesting than I had expected. However it is an issue, and I would like to respond on a couple of points. The noble Lord, Lord Berkeley said that it should apply to the whole of London. I draw attention to the fact that traffic varies tremendously in London. For example, on the subject of disabled parking, the blue badge scheme does not apply in any of the three central London boroughs. You have to have a blue badge and a local badge as well to take full advantage of disabled parking. If you have a blue badge, there are blue-badge places you can use, but you cannot use any other parking places. Each of the three central London boroughs said it would make it impossible for them, because they would be flooded by people coming from outside the boroughs. So this is a long-standing arrangement just for central London. I do not agree with the noble Lord that you need to have licensing for pedicabs out in Havering, for example, which I represented at one time. I do not believe there are any pedicabs running around Havering. I think they are a fun thing in central London. However my concern is not the fun element, which I agree with my noble friend Lord Jenkin, is absolutely wonderful. In Bangkok it was great fun to travel around in them. However it is not a fun element if you are at risk of being injured due to their ignoring road behaviour. That is what worries me. This is an issue that needs to be tackled. I accept that it might be better tackled somewhere else and in some other way. Perhaps LRT could deal with it selectively, but it has to be done selectively, because many boroughs will have no problem at all. If—as the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley has said—Oxford already has pedicabs then there are other places which need this issue to be addressed now. But again, the areas will need be limited. I have listened to the debate and I think it is valuable to have it on record for when this issue comes up again as it surely will in some other capacity. Meanwhile I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 194 withdrawn. Amendment 195 Moved by
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 730 c1361-2
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Devolved matters Assets Council tax Contracts for services Casinos Housing Land Freedom of information Licensing Liability Greater London Gambling EU law Fines Empty property Increases European communities Local government Motor vehicles Northern Ireland Local government finance Litter Property Business rates Referendums Procurement Local government services Ombudsman Parish and town councils Scotland Voluntary organisations Young people Wales Repairs and maintenance Smoking Local Government Ombudsman Pedicabs Petitions
- Legislation
- Localism Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-22 18:39:47 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771221
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771221
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771221