Tom Brake (Shadow Minister, Department for Communities and Local Government; Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move amendment No. 162, in clause 21, page 11, line 3, at end add

‘but excludes tramways, and guided transport as defined under subsections 81(2)(b) and 81(2)(c) of the Railways Act 1993’.

It is a pleasure to be under your chairmanship, Mr. Illsley, and I hope that you are able to remain in your seat for the rest of the deliberations. Clearly, there are some challenges there.

It is a great pleasure to speak in favour of the amendment. It touches on a number of points that have been raised throughout the Committee’s proceedings, particularly the question of overloading the commission, which the Minister said he was keen to avoid. He also said that he was keen not to remove from local authorities control over issues that are significant in their areas.

The amendment, which relates to tramways and guided transport, is favoured by the LGA, which has made it clear that the commission should look at a  small number of proposals each year, rather than the sort of figure that the Government have suggested. It has highlighted its concerns about the commission taking on responsibility for tramways and guided transport. The LGA does not deem those to be nationally significant infrastructure projects, and I agree. It should be down to local authorities to consider those.

I am fortunate to have the Croydon tram close to my constituency, and it is clear that the sort of deliberations that had to happen over the route, such as the impact on local people of much of the tram route running through local streets, clearly required the local authority to deal with them. Such deliberations should not be tackled by the commission.

Equally, there is a strong demand for, and many vocal advocates of, the tram to be extended to Sutton, my area. I mention in passing Abigail Lock, if only because she is the Liberal Democrat candidate for Sutton and Croydon for the Greater London authority, who is leading the campaign to bring the tram to Sutton. Should that happen, there would be challenges from residents who object to having the tram coming down their streets, and the local authority and the local councillors will have the best insight into what would be acceptable and what would be the preferable route. It should be within their hands to manage that application. There will be a huge concern if the responsibility for considering that ends up with a commission that, with the best will in the world, will not be able to acquire the local knowledge itself and will find it difficult to bring in others who have that knowledge, because it rests with local councillors and residents.

I also think that local authorities will not drag their feet in the case of trams. In recent years, the Government’s position on trams has changed slightly, as hon. Members will know. They were going to provide additional capacity and solve many of the congestion problems in our major cities, but the Government have gone a little cold on them. Many local authorities, however, have been bidding for, and are keen to have, tram schemes in their areas. Therefore, they would be unlikely to drag that process out unnecessarily, and that is similar to what the Minister wants to do, as he wants those decisions to be taken quickly. As a result of the important role that local authorities can play in reducing congestion through tram schemes, they will want to facilitate that process.

Jacqui Lait (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Beckenham, Conservative)

I share the hon. Gentleman’s proximity to the Croydon tram and one of the projected extensions is in my constituency. He is talking about local government making the decisions, but I suggest that those will now sadly be made by the Mayor. I hope he agrees that we should change that.

Tom Brake (Shadow Minister, Department for Communities and Local Government; Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

I thank the hon. Lady for her helpful intervention. She may well be right that the Mayor would have a major say, if not a total say, in the matter. Setting aside the current incumbent, in general terms the preference would still be for the Mayor, who has more democratic credibility—I remind her that I am talking in general terms, as I see that she is choking on her fizzy water.

In general terms, the Mayor has more democratic accountability than the commission will ever have. Therefore, it will be appropriate for him to take on that role in London. Indeed, I know that the hon. Lady’s and my own preferred candidate for Mayor have made it clear that they would seek to engage, at a very low level, with local authorities to ensure that there was a decent working relationship and that their views were taken fully into account.

I do not wish to prolong matters further, but simply to say that there is a strong case for the remit of trams and guided transport not to be taken up by the commission. We are not talking about nationally significant transport projects. We are talking about transport projects that are significant at a local or possibly regional level, but certainly not at a national level. I will listen with interest to the Minister’s explanation as to why he thinks that trams and guided transport should be included within the Bill’s scope.

Jim Fitzpatrick (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Poplar & Canning Town, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman raises concerns with regard to the scope of clause 21. Specifically, he wishes to exclude tramways and guided transport from the types of project that the IPC will consider. We are sympathetic to his points. Those types of development are often limited to a specific locality. That is why the Department for Transport is exploring the potential to devolve them to local authorities to determine. Guided transport, including trams, is currently considered by the Secretary of State using the Transport and Works Act 1992. We will be consulting on and devolving those powers to local authorities as part of the sub-national review consultation that I mentioned in our discussions on highways.

With regard to clause 21, however, the Government are currently considering the scope of the types of railway development that should be included in the Bill. In doing so, I am happy to take on board the hon. Gentleman’s concerns, and will come back to him and the Committee on Report, possibly to include a suitable Government amendment to address categories such as light rail, which would be separate. I hope that, with that assurance on both those areas being examined either on Report and/or through the sub-national review that we have mentioned, he will feel able to withdraw his amendment.

Tom Brake (Shadow Minister, Department for Communities and Local Government; Carshalton & Wallington, Liberal Democrat)

I thank the Minister for his response. He has provided some helpful clarification. On the basis that either on Report or as a result of the sub-national review the matter will be addressed and there will be clarity for local authorities, and possibly the Mayor, on where responsibility for those sort of projects will lie, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.