Clause 19 - Power to require information relating to network management
Traffic Management Bill
3:00 pm
Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Harrow East, Labour)
While we are playing at macho toy soldiers in the battle between public and private, I assure the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) and the hon. Member for Spelthorne that I will be harsher than the two of them put together. The Bill does not specify an arbitrary three
months, two months or whatever the right hon. Gentleman suggested, but clearly says, ''within a specified period.'' That means that if the Secretary of State or the national authority deems that the information is required in a week, the period will be a week. If the information is required in two or three months because the work is substantial, the period will be two or three months. What he and the hon. Gentleman are trying to achieve is already in the Bill, which is far harsher than either of them would have it.
I am very pleased that the hon. Member for Spelthorne recognised that he was being utterly arbitrary in plucking the figure of three months from the sky. That is not good enough. If the relevant national authority requires information, and if there is a good reason why it is required—it will be not simply to employ someone at a local level, but the pursuance of the local authority achieving its national statutory duty as outlined—if it takes two days, four days, two weeks or two months to provide that information, that is what will the specified time will be. I will cling to that flexibility with every breath in my body, because it is utterly important to ensure that the information flow is right for the benefit of the centre and the local level, as well as for the achievement of the national duty. In that context, the Bill is twice as hard and firm as the right hon. Gentleman or the hon. Gentleman urge, so I ask them to withdraw the amendment.