I beg to move amendment No. 15, in schedule 1, page 9, line 9, after ‘Strategy’, insert

‘with regard to existing undertakings and agreements with transport providers’.

With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 16, in schedule 1, page 11, line 11, at end insert

‘and not solely on their website’.

Amendment No. 15 is intended to ensure that the Wales transport strategy cannot threaten current arrangements with transport providers both in Wales and England.

We must be certain that the Assembly’s actions in directing authorities on how to conduct their functions in relation to transport plans cannot affect projects that are already being developed. Any funding or agreements already decided on must be given due consideration when creating new schemes. There must be no opportunity for waste or unnecessary disturbance in joint schemes that already exist between transport operators and infrastructure providers. The amendment would ensure a smooth transfer as the new strategies come into force.

Amendment No. 16 is designed to ensure that local transport authorities make their transport plans available elsewhere rather than exclusively on their websites. Many people who might want to view the transport plans might not have access to the internet. Although it is generally assumed that groups such as schoolchildren have access to web-based plans, not everyone has access to a computer. The elderly, who   might be totally reliant on public transport and who therefore might be the most interested in these developments, will often not have computers.

It should be the duty of the authority to provide copies of its transport plan for inspection not only where it sees fit to do so, but where all members of the public equally can obtain a copy. The plans must be provided in all formats possible to help the public to obtain as much information as they want as easily as possible.

Amendment No. 15 would require local authorities to take their existing commitments into consideration when preparing their local transport plans, which is a perfectly reasonable suggestion. However, I cannot envisage a situation in which local authorities would develop policies without being aware of their existing commitments, although that should not be the main driver when developing local authority transport strategies.

The plans will evolve over time to take account of external factors and the changing needs of Welsh communities and businesses. They should not be restricted by current commitments, which will also develop and evolve in line with the strategy. There is no need for the statutory provision to include them, and it would send the wrong message to local authorities.

Amendment No. 16 is intended to ensure that local authorities cannot simply publish their local transport plans on the internet, but must make hard copies available for inspection. I totally agree with the thrust of the hon. Gentleman’s argument. In the past, hon. Members on both sides of the Committee have expressed reservations about the development in certain areas of the mentality that says, “Oh, it’s on the website,” rather than producing hard copies that are widely available.

Although I support the intention behind the amendment, the amendment is not needed. The clause has been drafted using standard legal phraseology similar to that used in the legislation for traffic orders and development plans. The requirement in the Bill makes copies available for inspection at certain places, and that precludes publication only on the internet. If that situation arose, the local authority would be in breach of its duty.

I hope that, in light of my comments, the hon. Gentleman will withdraw his amendment.

The Minister is coming on in leaps and bounds: he is agreeing with me more and more, and I congratulate him on that. His answers satisfy my concerns to some extent, and I am grateful that he shares those concerns. He is right that it is inconceivable that a local authority should fail to understand what its existing plans are. However, later in Committee we will talk about subsidising transport. I do not want to be out of order, but one of my concerns is that subsidy cannot be given until a business has failed. The nature of the Bill does not necessarily take into account what is existing.

I have a genuine concern about that, but I am not sure that we could meet it with a properly worded amendment. If the Government were to consider my   point and perhaps look at ensuring that local authorities and the Assembly take into consideration their existing commitments, I shall be satisfied and will have done my job in ensuring that the existing network is maintained as well as possible. I have no difficulty in accepting what the Minister said, so I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I beg to move amendment No. 24, in schedule 1, page 10, line 40, leave out from ‘authority’ to end and insert

‘will be subject to fines set out under (Local Transport authority: Wales - penalties).’.

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 1—Local transport authority: Wales—Penalties—

‘(1)The Assembly shall require any local transport authority whose area is in Wales, to pay £100,000 to the Assembly when the following conditions have been met—

(a)the authority has failed to submit a replacement local transport plan; and

(b)the period for replacing the plan has expired.’.

The amendment would provide for the new clause to ensure that time was not wasted in the development of local transport plans. It is designed to increase the accountability of local authorities by setting a definite time for the development of plans and a penalty if they do not provide them within that time.

The Bill currently makes no mention of the time by which it is reasonable for authorities to provide a plan if they have not done so within five years. We are told simply that they must do so “as soon as practicable”, and no mention is made of what action local authorities can expect if they fail to provide a plan in that undefined time. The situation is similarly woolly, as the Bill says that if local transport plans are altered, they should be published only “as soon as practicable”.

Although I am happy to accept that the penalty and wording of the amendment may be inappropriate, it is imperative that the Bill does more than simply tell local authorities that they must provide a plan as soon as practicable and publish it as soon as practicable after it has been altered. The Government must accept the importance of drafting legislation that delivers proper enforcement and provisions for failure.

There is a delicate balance to be struck in the powers of, and relationship between, the Assembly and local authorities. It is entirely inappropriate for a sum of £100,000, as proposed in the amendment, to be offered to the Assembly as a club with which to beat local authorities. In that respect, I think that the proposal is inappropriate, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw it.

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that there is currently no limit to the time by which the exercise must take place. If he is unhappy with the suggested fine, how much does he think would be appropriate?

I do not think that such fines are appropriate at all. There should be a spirit of co-operation between authorities and the Assembly, and the proposals would be an inappropriate intrusion into that. We will see what the Minister has to say about the amendment and new clause, but my party’s standpoint is that the delicate balance should not be disturbed. I end on a lighter note, by referring the Committee to proposed new section 109B(6) of the 2000 Act, which says

“If an authority fail to comply”,

but which should say—this is my bid for immortality by actually changing the Bill—“If an authority fails”. If I can force through that massive change, I will go home a satisfied man.

I will look at that later. Perhaps I can help the hon. Member for Leominster again. The provisions would impose a penalty of up to £100,000 on a local transport authority in the event of its failing to submit a replacement plan in the requisite period, which is not later than five years after the date on which the plan is approved.

The amendment would be completely inconsistent with the Assembly’s policy of working in partnership with local transport authorities. A good relationship has been built up between local transport authorities and the Assembly, but there might be a problem in future. If there were such a problem, it would not be necessary to impose financial penalties to ensure the timely production of replacement local transport plans. Proposed new section 113B of the 2000 Act would give the Assembly the power to issue a direction to a local transport authority in relation to the timetable for the preparation of plans. There is no appeal against a direction; a local authority must carry out what it says, so there is no need to impose a financial penalty.

With that explanation, I hope that the hon. Gentleman is reassured that the powers will exist to direct a local authority if it is being dilatory in preparing and implementing its local transport plan.

The Minister could have hit on the fact that I do not like imposing financial penalties ever. Under the circumstances, I felt that it was important that after 10 years a local authority could not still be pretending that it was going to produce a local transport plan, yet failing to do so. If the direction is mandatory, after that five-year period the Assembly will presumably say—I hope that the Minister will correct me if I am wrong—“You will produce your transport plan within the next 12 months”. An authority will then have to do so, or it will face some other penalty, of which I am still unaware. If the Assembly has the right to issue a compulsory direction, anybody who fails to act on it will presumably face another penalty.

I am keeping talking, because I hope that the Minister will get divine intervention to answer. The question is what that penalty will be. What will happen to an authority that ignores—heaven forbid—a direction from the Assembly? That is the best that I can do.

Nice try. My understanding is that local authorities always abide by a direction. Our system of local government would start to collapse if they did not. I hope that those words reassure the hon. Gentleman.

I am grateful for that response. I accept that, by and large, because local authorities receive their funding from the Assembly in Wales, there is a possibility of an obvious penalty. I also feel that a £100,000 fine might be either too little or too much. It is an arbitrary figure, which was chosen to probe the Government to find out how they would ensure that the integrated transport nirvana that we are seeking will be delivered.

I am grateful to the Minister for his response, and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 1 agreed to.