Clause 29 - Traffic directors in London
Traffic Management Bill
4:15 pm
Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Harrow East, Labour)
I assure the hon. Gentleman that all traffic managers and traffic directors within all London boroughs will have to give due cognisance
to the strategies laid out by the Mayor. That is the norm that prevails and will prevail with regard to London boroughs seeking to do their network management duty. However, when we come to intervention we need at least the back stop—a very long back stop, as I have explained already—of the traffic director focusing on the recovery and remedy needed for that particular borough. That may conflict with some directions from the Mayor under some of that office's powers, although I suspect that in most instances it will not, because we do not want to compromise the effectiveness of the traffic director when they are imposed in the last instance. Transport for London are fully aware that, in the context of all these elements, boroughs are obliged to have regard to the Mayor's transport strategy, associated guidance, and direction. Intervention powers give the Secretary of State scope to override such guidance in directions that it considers appropriate. It prays those elements in aid in the letter that it sent to officials to say that it is fully behind the Bill. However, if those elements are to prevail—this harks back to the debate on clause 20 or 21, or whichever clause it was, where people tried to remove the references to the Mayor—it needs that information to be part and parcel of the overall operation.
This is not about unpicking the local government devolution settlement. It is about enhancing the roles at all three levels—centre, strategy, and local—so that the interaction between them that is envisaged in the Bill works. It is done with TFL's indulgence.