I am glad to be able to say on behalf of the Opposition that we welcome the Clause and the positive spirit in which the Government have responded to arguments put by myself and my hon. Friends at other times and on other occasions. We very much hope that there will be strong and explicit commitments in the Department's technical note to the effect that cycling is a means of transport which has the Government's strong support. I hope also that there will be a clear statement of policy by way of preface to that technical note, and not just a little bit of arid technical advice to local authorities. It is most important that the Government's position should be made clear in that document.

I wish to put a few queries to the Minister. Do the detailed implications of the clause mean that the Minister will seek to avoid couching this technical note in waffly terms when dealing with the specific references that have to be made? We hope that it will include plenty of back-up information and advice for local authorities.

There is some evidence—and we have heard information to this effect—that local authorities are in some doubt about exactly what would be the preferred methods of putting up racks of this kind. It would be helpful if the Minister could include in that note a comment, and say something to the House today, about the kinds of stand and rack that the Department has in mind. In what densities does the Minister foresee these racks being erected? At what sort of locations will they appear, because clearly it would not be satisfactory if a local authority decided to put the racks in a place that was not necessarily convenient to the bulk of cyclists or was not related to the other modes of transport? That is the sort of detailed guidance we believe should be included in the note.

I have a few other queries that I raised in Committee and to which I should like to return. The first concerns road humps—sometimes known as "sleeping policemen". We felt that in Committee the Minister failed to produce a serious response to our arguments. He said that there was only one set of sleeping policemen, and that they were at Lytham St. Annes. However, it is precisely because of the 12 months' time limit on the emplacement of these sleeping policemen that only one set is left in the country. The Minister said that he was awaiting the final report of the Transport and Road Research Laboratory before taking final action. Is it not true, however, that the TRRL has a continuing programme of research in this and other areas? Will there ever be the final report to which the Minister referred? I suspect that that will be just an excuse for delay.

The question of cycle tracks was dealt with at some length in Committee. We hope that in the technical note there will be a clear statement about these tracks and their desirability. If not, there is the danger that local authorities will be left in doubt about what they are supposed to do in law in order to establish that they have removed the footways, which is the technical word, and have constructed cycle tracks in their place. There will be the need for clarity about what such terms mean in law and about how much local authorities will be expected to do in order to satisfy what might be called the legal niceties of the situation. For example, would the painting of a white line be enough to establish the transformation from a footway to a cycle path, or would the construction in concrete or stone of some form of kerb separation between the areas reserved for cyclists and pedestrians be entailed?

In these various ways we very much hope that this will be only the beginning of a positive and continuing response from the Government towards these various measures to improve the safety and health of cyclists.

Having briefly pedalled my way to power and influence on the front bench, I now intend to freewheel back again.