DESIGNATION OF TRIALS AREAS (Hansard, 25 March 1980)

§ Mr. Fowler
I beg to move amendment No. 14, in page 12, line 33 at end insert— (3A) Subject to subsection (4), the Minister may by order vary or revoke a designation order but shall not do so except on an application made to him by the local authority concerned; and the Minister—

(a) on an application for an order varying a designation order, may at his discretion refuse the application or make the order applied for either with or without modifications; and

(b) on an application for an order revoking a designation order may at his discretion refuse the application or make the order applied for.".

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this amendment it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 15, in page 12, line 33 at end insert— (3A) No designation order shall be made for the whole or part of the area of a local authority which contains a district council operating a bus service unless that district council has signified its agreement in writing to the Minister. 1300 Government amendment No. 16.
No. 17, in page 12, line 37, at end insert: unless the local authority concerned applies to the Minister to revoke the order in which case the Minister shall revoke the order not later than 30 days after receiving the application. Government amendments Nos. 18 and 59 to 61.

§ Mr. Fowler
This is an important group of amendments and they cover an area that we discussed at some length yesterday, when we considered the work of the traffic commissioners.
Amendment No. 17 deals with trial areas and is the result of concern expressed in Committee about the revocation of trial areas. We agree that the original Bill was inflexible and that some county councils may have been discouraged from beginning an experiment for fear of the cost of reinstatement after as long as three years of an unsuccessful trial.
We are, therefore, moving a group of amendments that will give flexibility in the minimum period in a trial area. Instead of the period being three years for all, it will be whatever period between two and five years is specified in the original designation order. That is a matter for discussion between the Government and the county council.
The balance may be struck differently in different cases. In the other amendments with which we are dealing local authorities are more involved in the revocation procedure than they were under the original Bill. This follows concern expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Meriden (Mr. Mills) in Committee. It is logical that if the initiative to start experiments comes from local authorities so should the initiative to bring them to an end.
A further change is designed to encourage new providers of transport to engage in the investment in vehicles necessary for new stage carriage services. Such investors might be put off by the fear that there could be revocation before they had recouped their investment and that after revocation the licensing procedure would be exploited by their competitors to deprive them of their routes.
There will, therefore, be an automatic right to a road service licence for anyone 1301 who has been providing an established service while the area was a trial area. This issue was thoroughly debated yesterday and I think that the House will be well aware of the input of these proposals.

§ Mr. Prescott
We spent some considerable time discussing trial areas yesterday, as we did in Committee. Our concern is with the designation orders. We give a general welcome to the Government amendments that have been spelt out by the Minister. They are largely concerned with consultation rights, which we argued should be extended. The Government have gone some way to meet our wishes, particularly in regard to revocation and the variation of designation orders and to the period of application.
9.45 pm
We are anxious about what will happen if a designation order is shown not to be working. I welcome the reduction of the three-year period, although if an area is found to be in difficulties in less than three years action should be taken. The Minister argued that three years was the minimum that could be allowed for sufficient return on investment by the operators providing the service. The Minister's guarantees are welcome. If an operator finds that he cannot maintain a service and the trial area runs into difficulties the Minister will be prepared to give a road service licence to that operator. One does not need to worry too much about compensation for a bankrupt company, because no further help can be given to such a company.
If the relevant local authorities believe that a trial area is not working they can make an application to the Minister. However, I understand that the Minister will not contemplate a period under two years. Only after between two and five years will any variation or revocation be considered by the Minister after an application from local authority. The proposition is an improvement and because of the time of night I shall not argue the two-year question.
In amendment No. 15 we tried to give a veto to district bus authorities, of which there are 40 or 50. We felt that political difficulties could be caused in the designation of trial areas because many district councils are Labour-controlled in Conservative-controlled county areas. All 1302 bus authorities, whether Tory- or Labour-controlled, resent the possible imposition.
The Government amendment gives district bus authorities further consultation rights. That is welcome. Another amendment provided for the revocation of an order within 30 days. That is an absolute way of saying that the Minister should act within 30 days. In view of the lateness of the hour we shall accept the Government's amendments and not press ours to a Division.

§ Mr. Iain Mills
I thank the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary for their swift and comprehensive reaction to the amendment tabled by my right hon. and hon. Friends in Committee. We withdrew the amendment as a result of assurances. The Minister has done an excellent job, particularly on the two-year issue. We were worried about possible problems and the need for flexibility. I thank the Minister for considering the needs of district councils, many of which have a need for more detailed consultation.