Clause 24
Crossrail Bill
3:00 pm
Tom Harris (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Glasgow South, Labour)
I will preface my remarks by pointing out, as I will repeat later on, that there is absolutely no prospect of the Government ignoring passenger groups’ views simply because that obligation is not in the Bill.
However, the clause that the amendment seeks to affect is linked to clause 23. It is an advanced planning measure that enables the Secretary of State, after consulting, to specify minimum operating levels to establish principal Crossrail passenger services from a specified date. Those services will make use, for at least part of their journey, of the new tunnel under central London. That direction, which must be published, sets the basis for the Office of Rail Regulation’s overriding duty under clause 23.
Before the Secretary of State specifies the minimum operating levels, she must consult Transport for London, the provider of any railway passenger service likely to be affected by the direction and any such other persons that she considers appropriate. The Secretary of State must give due consideration to who, if anyone in addition to those specified, needs to be consulted. If she did not do so, she would be open to challenge in the courts. It is likely that rail passenger groups would be included in the consultation.
The hon. Member for Wimbledon has not specified any particular organisation. However, the danger of the amendment is that other groups may start claiming that they, too, need to be specified or included in the long list of consultations and the list could become long and ill-defined.
The amendment is not necessary. The Secretary of State will act as she considers appropriate, taking account of her general policy and the Department for Transport’s general record in relation to passenger group consultations. This is not a bad amendment, but it does not add a great deal to the Bill. I therefore ask the hon. Gentleman to withdraw it.