Clause 2 - Meaning of ''railway accident'' and
Railways and Transport Safety Bill
9:15 am

Mr Don Foster (Bath, Liberal Democrat)
I thank the hon. Lady for her introduction to her amendments. We, too, were impressed by the compelling arguments made by the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby on Second Reading. However, it is not enough to leave the issue to clause 6 on the assumption that it somehow resolves the problem. Clause 6 is clear about what the RAIB may or may not do. It states:
''The Rail Accident Investigation Branch—
(a) shall investigate any serious railway accident,
(b) may investigate a non-serious railway accident or a railway incident, and
(c) shall investigate a non-serious railway accident or incident if required to do so by or in accordance with regulations made by the Secretary of State.''
In other words, the distinction between a serious railway accident, which the RAIB is required to investigate, and a non-serious railway accident or incident, which it might or might not investigate, is clearly important. I am delighted that the Secretary of State told us on Second Reading that the RAIB will be given a fair degree of latitude in what it investigates. Nevertheless, unless we have clear definitions of what the terms mean, it will be difficult for us to know exactly what is in the Government's mind on clause 6.
The Minister will rightly tell us that the air accident investigation branch and the marine accident investigation branch do not have detailed definitions in their legislation, and that definitions of this sort in relation to their work are covered by regulations. However, we are again in some difficulty because we do not yet have even draft regulations to give us some idea of what is in the Minister's mind. The probing amendments are important in helping to tease out from the Government exactly what definitions they have in mind.
In a spirit of openness and honesty that might surprise hon. Members, I must say that I am now rather more taken with the hon. Lady's second amendment than I am with my own. She is right to refer to properties adjoining the railway, as we can all imagine several accidents or incidents that might result from, for example, an electricity power line near a railway. Nevertheless, as the hon. Lady has said, these are probing amendments intended to give us a more detailed insight into the Government's thinking. We hope that the Minister will at least tell us when we will see draft regulations.
Either now or during the debate on clause 6, it would be helpful to hear a little more about the Government's thinking on the degree of latitude that is to be offered to the RAIB. As I pointed out on Second Reading, the air accident investigation branch quite rightly believes that it is important to investigate potential incidents, such as near misses. We can learn a great deal from those. Similarly, on the railways there could be investigations into the sort of incidents referred to by the hon. Lady, who mentioned that the Royal National Institute of the Blind has provided information.
The hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby was on to an important point when he said that we need some clear indications about definitions. I am not too concerned whether that happens in regulations or the Bill, so long as we are given an early opportunity to know what will be in the regulations, if that is the route that is followed.
