I beg to move Amendment No. 5, in Clause 5, page 3, line 23, leave out subsection (5).

This amendment will not cause too much trouble, because it is a simple probing measure. I am sure that the Government meant to accomplish some sort of accountability in the clause, but the wording is so obtuse that, even after reading it carefully several times, I am still unclear about what it is designed to achieve. I would welcome clarification on the exact purpose of subsection (5), although I do not intend to press genuinely for its removal. Its drafting ought to be crystal clear, but it clearly is not. The Minister should tell us what on earth he is trying to achieve.

I have to agree that the wording is somewhat complex, but I am assured that that is required by parliamentary counsel, and who am I to criticise the wording of a Bill?

You are the Minister; the Minister can do that—criticise.

No. Amendment No. 5 would remove the requirement that local authority members form the Majority on any joint transport authority. Having had a similar exchange on Second Reading, I accept that that is not the hon. Gentleman’s intention, although it is what the amendment would achieve. Clause 5(5) was added to the Bill following the pre-legislative scrutiny to recognise explicitly the clear need to retain democratic accountability if a JTA is set up. We discussed that point on Second Reading. Without subsection (5), the Assembly would be able to use the power in subsection (4)(a) to provide for the Assembly to appoint all the members of a JTA if it so wished. Subsection (5), however, requires that where there is provision for appointment of members by someone other than a local authority, there must be a majority of local authority members. The purpose is to ensure that at all times on a JTA there will be a majority of local authority members. Of course, representatives of business, voluntary organisations and pensioner groups may be represented on the JTA.

Subsection (5) would not be applicable only when the subsection (4)(a) power was used to provide for all the members of a JTA to be appointed by the local authority. There is a guarantee that either more than half or all the members of a JTA are local authority members. Bearing in mind the comments made by members of the Committee about ensuring that there is good involvement from the business sector, transport providers and the voluntary sector, I hope that JTAs will be set up with a majority of local   authority members, but with representatives of other organisations that have a clear involvement in transport policy.

I would not normally intervene, but I have a concern that I hope the Minister will think about. If there is a shortage of local authority members, other people may not be eligible to attend as consultees on the joint transport authority. By withdrawing the number of councillors, the size of the committee can be shrunk by statute, which is not necessarily what the provision is designed to achieve.

I have listened carefully to the hon. Gentleman. He referred to consultees, but the people whom we are discussing are not consultees but members of the authority who will have been appointed to the authority. He is talking about what would happen under the standing orders of the authority if a Majority of local authority members were not present during a meeting of the authority. I should think that the standing orders would ensure that it would not be quorate in such circumstances. I imagine that authorities set up their standing orders so that if JTAs have non-authority members, the local authority members remain in the majority at all times. Therefore, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw his Amendment.

I think that I have fortunately stumbled on something helpful. The Minister’s point about JTAs being quorate is critical. He will forgive me if I used the word “consultee”—he properly understood what I meant. He will also be aware that I never intended to withdraw the section, because we recognise the vital importance of local accountability through local authorities. My problem is simply with the wording. I suggest that the Minister has done rather a better job than parliamentary counsel, and that this may be one of the little areas in which the Government would be wise to reconsider the wording, and to ensure that the Minister’s sensible suggestion that the definition of quorate as meaning “with a Majority of local authority elected members” should stand part of the Bill.

Although this is the place to insist on such an Amendment, as my amendment is not written in that way—and heaven forbid that I should challenge parliamentary counsel—I hope that the Minister will consider such an amendment to be a constructive and helpful way to improve the Bill, taking on board the important measures that he mentioned. With that, if the Minister nods, I shall withdraw my amendment. The Minister is nodding, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I beg to move Amendment No. 6, in Clause 5, page 3, line 39, at end insert—

‘(c)the Secretary of State for Wales, the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and the Deputy prime minister.’.

The aim of the amendment is to create provision for further consultation with relevant Ministers in Westminster before the Assembly can establish JTAs. We must be certain that bodies set up to deliver transport functions are fair to all participants— especially when cross-border authorities are created—and that relevant Ministers who represent the UK, not just Wales, are consulted.

It is not clear whether the Assembly will have the power to direct JTAs to work together to provide services across each other’s boundaries. Clearly, that is a must for the delivery of integrated transport, especially in areas such as national parks where public transportation is often specialised and where no one body is responsible. The power is also especially important for cross-border transport services. If English and Welsh local authorities can form JTAs, there must at least be provision for the relevant Secretary of State to be consulted.

The Amendment would mean that having established a JTA by making an order in plenary session, the Assembly would have to consult three Cabinet members if it wanted to change or revoke the order. The fundamental problem with the amendment is that JTAs will be created by the Assembly through secondary legislation, and it would be completely inconsistent with the devolution settlement to say that, having used its devolved powers to create a body, the Assembly must consult the Government about even minor changes.

The hon. Gentleman asked whether there will be cross-border consultation between JTAs. They will work within the overall Wales transport strategy, which will be their guiding light in developing policies, so there will be a huge amount of consultation and discussion between JTAs. As we discussed in our debates on Clause 1, if JTAs are established they will not build borders and barriers, because that would defeat the purpose of the Bill and the development of the Wales transport strategy, and the idea is to integrate transport and make it coherent throughout Wales. I am informed that the Assembly can direct joint transport authorities and Welsh local authorities to work together using the powers in clause 4.

Let me give an example. Let us say that only one JTA has been set up in Wales, but other local authorities work together, perhaps with voluntary arrangements. If a problem develops, perhaps involving an area that includes a national park, the Assembly can use the powers in clause 4 to direct both the JTA and the local authorities, working in a voluntary consortium, to work together to address it. The amendment says that in circumstances in which a problem arises or consultation is required, up to three Cabinet Ministers might have to be involved in developing or changing a policy. Not only would that cut across the devolution settlement, but the powers under clause 4 mean that the strategy can be properly developed by local authorities working together either as voluntary consortia or as JTAs. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is satisfied that he has probed me and has received reassurance.

I am content with regard to the number of Ministers. One of the questions contained in the Amendment was whether a JTA could cross the border. I think from what the Minister said that it cannot. Therefore, there is no need for the amendment, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.