Clause 43 - Directions as to placing of apparatus
Traffic Management Bill
4:00 pm
Mr John Mann (Bassetlaw, Labour)
Wood street has been closed for 20 years. It is in a major renovation area that has received significant funding from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister for neighbourhood renewal, and the local population would like it to be opened. The money is available to open Wood street, much to the local population's delight, but only after the intervention of my good self, because of the problems in the intervening 20 years of the utilities digging holes and putting their apparatus in the middle of what was, is and will be Wood street.
Some of them—for example, BT—were more than helpful in reducing their rather high price to a much lower and more appropriate price to remove their apparatus. The electricity supply companies were more than happy to remove their apparatus, taking it off Wood street and putting it on to adjoining land, so that there will be no further complications when Wood street, which forms a major junction with the A60, is reopened.
However, NTL was less helpful. Indeed, it was reticent to admit that it had apparatus in Wood street. It could not identify exactly where it was, although it
was clear to anyone walking across Wood street where it was—indeed, its initials were imprinted on the apparatus—nor could it give a price for removing the apparatus that it claimed was not there, in spite of the fact that everyone else knew that it was, because the town hall is on the corner of Wood street and uses the NTL facility for its internet access. It is a prima facie case and a good example of a street where the powers exist to enable coherent planning, for which the operator should pay the cost.
I seek my hon. Friend's confirmation of the relevance of my comments to the clause.