Mr Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

Perhaps the Minister could give us some information about the clause.

Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Harrow East, Labour)

I am not having this, David.

Mr. Wilshire indicated dissent.

Mr Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

I do not know whether the Minister is saying that it is unreasonable for us to ask him questions.

Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Harrow East, Labour)

I am not talking to you.

Mr Nigel Beard (Bexleyheath & Crayford, Labour)

Order.

Mr Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

The Minister is obviously not interested in the principle of reciprocity. I was going to try to heal any wounds by talking about a global partnership, but that may not be appropriate either.

The clause allows the street authority to increase a one-year embargo. There is concern about the length of notice given for that embargo, the maximum period of the embargo, the effect that such an embargo could have on ordinary residents and businesses whose circumstances have changed and who want access to utilities that are unavailable, and what will happen then. I understand that the existing embargo is limited to a period of one year, which the Government believe to be too short. If the period is to be longer, the Government should be prepared to tell us. After all, we are discussing important primary legislation.

Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Harrow East, Labour)

All this clause does is modify section 58 of the 1991 Act—the principal Act. We are not suggesting that a year is too long or too short: we are simply saying that in the interests of having as much flexibility as possible, we require the power to set a maximum period in regulation, and that regulations prescribe how disputes between authorities and undertakers over restrictions on work should be settled, which section 58 does not do. In both regards, the clause enhances and consolidates the 1991 Act. Yes, these are important matters, but they can and should be dealt with by regulation to reflect the flexibility and responsiveness between the local authority and the utilities that is greater than the rather rigid ''one year and that's your lot'' of the 1991 Act. In that regard, the clause is eminently reasonable.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 49 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 50 ordered to stand part of the Bill.