Clause 107 - Money

Railways and Transport Safety Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 10:15 am on 11th March 2003.

Alert me about debates like this

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Photo of Anne McIntosh Anne McIntosh Shadow Minister (Transport)

I am most grateful for this opportunity to seek clarification from the Minister. Paragraph 159 of the explanatory notes tells us:

''The railways in London measures will not require any additional public expenditure''.

However, part 7 is presumably general and refers to the whole of the Bill. When does the Minister expect the money resolution to come forward? I notice that there is a money resolution on the Marine Safety Bill on the Order Paper for Thursday this week. What will the timing be? Is the Minister able to give us an estimate of what the total cost will be for all parts of the Bill? Surely, at this stage he must be in a position to share that information with the Committee.

Photo of Mr David Jamieson Mr David Jamieson Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport

The clause confirms that any new expenditure incurred by the Government as a result of the Bill would be paid for out of money provided to the Department by Parliament. As we have seen on many occasions during our deliberations, the explanatory notes outline the relatively small costs that the Government expect will result from the Bill. The hon. Lady has consistently asked about extra expenditure. As we have said, it is difficult to assess the precise figures at this stage, but it is anticipated that the extra expenditure will be small.

During our deliberations last Thursday we said that it would be unlikely that large numbers of pilots would be suspected of being under the influence on aeroplanes. It is, therefore, unlikely that a large number of tests would take place; I anticipate that there would be very few. That also applies to many other parts of the Bill. To assess the costs at this stage is difficult, but we know that they will be small.

Photo of Don Foster Don Foster Shadow Secretary of State for Transport

I do not want to detain the Minister, but will he explain the Government's current thinking in relation to issues that we debated earlier in our proceedings? For example, we know that the Health and Safety Executive does not completely meet its costs from the current charging regime—there is a deficit. Do the Government anticipate that, under the new levy, all the costs will be covered and that there will no longer be a deficit to be made up by the Department? Is it anticipated that the total income from the police services agreement will meet the police budget in full? There are currently gaps in some areas and I wondered what was anticipated in relation to the overall costs of the Bill.

Photo of Mr David Jamieson Mr David Jamieson Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport

The anticipation is that the costs in both cases will nearly be matched by any levies, but we do not necessarily expect full cost recovery in the case of the HSE.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 107 ordered to stand part of the Bill.