Clause 2 - Designation of Traffic Officers
Traffic Management Bill
11:00 am
Viscount John Thurso (Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland (And Transport), Scotland; Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, Liberal Democrat)
I shall speak to amendments Nos. 89, 3 and 91, which are all designed to do the same thing. As I was not certain quite how to go about achieving the end I had in mind, I browned a covey and had a shot at anything in sight. All three amendments are concerned with powers in relation to traffic officers under the clause. It is my understanding that the things that I want to change are provisions that enable the role of traffic officer to be undertaken by contractors at a later date.
If I have understood correctly, the Government intend at present that traffic officers should come not from private companies but from the Highways Authority. I have no problem with that, in that they would be Government employees, like community support officers. I have no doubt that under that arrangement they will receive proper training, management and guidance and that much of what we have been discussing will happen in the proper way.
If, however, the Government, or any future Government, intended to privatise the relevant powers and move the officers from local or national government employment to being private contractors, that would be to cross an important rubicon. It is important that appropriate legislation should be passed at the time in question, rather than the powers being slipped in now through the Bill.
The amendments are designed to get the Government to speak on that point, and to find out their intentions as to the privatisation of traffic officers. If they do not intend it, as I have been led to believe they do not, why are they taking the powers?