(5 days, 13 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy department supports innovation in the local highways sector by creating conditions that enable the safe, evidence-led adoption of new products and approaches, while leaving decisions on individual technologies to local highway authorities. This includes providing record long-term funding for highways maintenance, with a proportion of funding linked to the demonstration of best practice, including the adoption of innovative techniques. The Government require each local authority to publish annual transparency reports to help local people understand what action is being taken to improve their roads. Oxfordshire County Council is no exception: its recent report highlights that it works closely with its supply chain to trial new materials in highways maintenance, including graphene asphalt, which it claims has been successfully used to enhance the durability of road surfaces.
My Lords, I am a regular cyclist. I suggest that the wearing of helmets and high-vis jackets and, in urban areas, the provision of cycle-only tracks is the most effective way of reducing injuries.
The noble Viscount is certainly right that the segregation of cyclists, where it can occur, is a good thing. The Government recommend the use of helmets and high-visibility clothing. He is absolutely right to emphasise those things, but I think the noble Lord, Lord Krebs, was asking particularly about road surfacing, which is important. The Government take it as important to improve the surfaces of roads for both cycling and driving.
(1 year, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberI very much agree with my noble friend that a serviceable formula for the allocation of this money is a better thing to do, and to allocate some money to every local transport authority in England. The most damaging feature of all to bus services—which is a feature of the previous methodology of funding—is to have some money one year and no money the next. What happens in those circumstances is that supported services are withdrawn, the passengers disappear—either they cannot travel or they find some other method of travel—and it becomes much harder to re-establish those services. I will not bore the House with details, but I can find many examples across England of perfectly good services forced to be withdrawn because of the inadequate distribution of the previous funding. They are far more difficult to re-establish when funding turns up. The best thing you can have with a bus service is certainty of service over a long time.
My Lords, I go back to the question of increasing the cap to £3. In rural areas, such as I live, for a couple going shopping—for example, in Lincoln—several times a week, the cost would be quite challenging. Would the Minister reconsider limiting the uplift in the cap to, say, £2.50? It is a challenge for people in low-salary areas.
The raising of the cap from £2 to £3 was entirely necessary because of the fiscal position that this Government inherited. A cap of £3 is actually a pretty good cap in rural areas with long bus journeys compared with the previous fare structures. We know that many fares have gone down by 60%, 70% or 80% for passengers. Of course, there will be some who have to pay more under this system. The subject in question—the distribution of local bus funding for the next year—is designed to make sure that there are services to travel on. It is not just bus fares that matter. What matters equally is that there are buses to travel on. This distribution will ensure that there are buses across the whole of England, in local transport authority areas, to do so.
(2 years, 7 months ago)
Lords ChamberI am delighted to say that the Government are already conducting that research. The Department for Business and Trade is working with the Home Office and the Department for Transport in assessing exactly what the issue is. We are also developing guidance jointly with the industry which will advise on charging e-bikes and various other safety measures concerning their batteries.
My Lords, I am an owner and an enthusiastic user of e-bikes. They are great; I use them both in the country and in London. To the extent that there are problems with use, those arise in large part because of the difficulties of enforcing existing regulations. I hope the Government will be very slow to introduce new regulations which might make life difficult for responsible users.
I am incredibly grateful to my noble friend, because we know that e-bikes have huge environmental benefits. They can be used on more difficult journeys, and they can take those who may be less able—which, of course, I am not suggesting is the case here—further and slightly faster. If we were to change the regulations on e-bikes, which are very clear at the moment, we would do so with an abundance of caution.
(3 years, 11 months ago)
Lords ChamberWhen it comes to collective bargaining and negotiations with the unions, we need to get to the bottom of whether the existing law was disregarded in this case. Mr Hebblethwaite seemed to suggest that it might have been, which was unwise.
Does the inspection by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency extend to the competence of the agency workers who have been recruited or is it simply as to the quality of the ship itself?
I can reassure my noble friend that the port state control inspections being undertaken on all affected vessels include a normal PSC inspection. They also look at crew employment contracts, crew qualifications, crew familiarisation and emergency preparedness.
(9 years, 2 months ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The noble Lord makes an important point about enforcement. Laws are only as good as their enforcement. We have seen a rising tide in the use of mobile phones by drivers in vehicles; they have admitted it themselves through various reports. We will be working closely with the police and crime commissioners, as well as the police forces, to ensure much more effective enforcement.
My Lords, if the maximum sentence is increased to life imprisonment, will my noble friend remind people that it would be discretionary rather than mandatory? Given the fact that the courts presently impose sentences which fall far short of the maximum permitted, reflecting as they do culpability as well as consequences, it is unlikely that the overall sentences would increase to any great extent.