§ Mr. SpearingI beg to move amendment No. 42, in page 55, line 46, leave out 'this part' and insert 'sections 54–65'.
We now move from the controversial subject of red routes to the equally—if not more—controversial subject of parking. Clauses 54 to 65 are labelled "Parking in London" and contain yet another series of guidelines on parking for local authorities, which are to be issued by the Secretary of State. The authorities will have to draw up a series of proposals, and the guidelines cover almost seven pages of the Bill. I am sure that they were discussed at great length in Committee. Following your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will not venture into that, although I am sure that a fascinating description of the guidelines would be in order, as they are about to descend on unsuspecting Londoners.
The guidelines on parking tell local authorities what to do. I doubt that they relate only to red routes, but perhaps the Minister will clarify that. As I understand them, they apply to parking in general and therefore subsume parking in or around red routes or areas affected by red routes.
It is curious that the guidelines involve appeals, new bodies and a vast amount of bureaucracy, which is extraordinary coming from a party that does not believe in that sort of thing.
Clause 63 states that a joint committee of London authorities shall, be set up to appoint parking adjudicators. Paragraph 3(a) relates to the amendment. It states that the London authorities shall,
with the consent of the Lord Chancellor, appoint persons to act as parking adjudicators for the purposes of this Part of this Act".923 Having carried out a great deal of traffic management through the red routes, the Secretary of State seeks to take complete control of parking guidance. That puts in the shade something that he said earlier today about the local authority authorities taking control of parking. If they have to deal with parking under his guidance, it may differ from what some of us were led to believe earlier.Not content with that, the Bill states that the local authorities will name the persons who, with the Lord Chancellor's consent, will be the adjudicators. Their duties will include responsibility for parking matters, including the costs. The rules that they will have to follow will be rather complicated.
I can imagine what will happen. When there is a hassle, someone will ask who appointed the adjudicators. The Minister will be able to say that the local authorities appointed them. As has happened in so many other spheres, the Government's responsibilities will be loaded on to local authorities.
I suggest that it would be more appropriate if the proposals were not in the clauses that deal with red routes, but in clauses 54 to 65, because they deal with matters refer to parking in general. It seems that the proposals refer back to the earlier clauses which relate to red routes. That suggests that the adjudicators may also have a great deal of power over the red routes.
I hope that the Minister will clarify the matter. Have the adjudicators any functions in respect of the red routes in clauses before clause 54, or are they concerned only in duties and obligations in clause 54 onwards? If the answer is the latter, I suggest that the Bill should say so. If the former, can the Minister tell us what role the adjudicators will have in respect of red routes? They are yet another group of persons amid a plethora of local authorities, directors, Ministers and guidance with which we shall have to grapple.
§ Mr. ChopeThe adjudicators will be concerned with the latter of the two categories referred to by the hon. Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing). However, it is fair to say that, if there is a permitted parking area on a red route, it will come under the local authority parking regime to which the Bill refers. The adjudicators will be able to adjudicate on grievances in relation to the penalty for overstaying on that parking area.
I understand that the hon. Member for Newham, South is trying to be helpful and is suggesting a drafting improvement. I am advised that the intention is set out clearly in the Bill as drafted. However, in the light of what the hon. Gentleman has said, I will look to see whether any benefit could be gained from further clarification.
§ Mr. SpearingBy leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am grateful for the clarification, but it makes my worries even greater. The Minister has confirmed that, where parking is allowed on red routes—perhaps where the roads widen or where there is a facility for parking that does not interfere with the traffic flow—and there are disputes, grievances or matters coming within their jurisdiction, the adjudicators will have statutory powers. That is the present position.
Yet again, therefore, we confirm the all-to-frequent position—dare I mention the poll tax—in which authoritarian legislation from the centre has to be 924 administered. In this case, it will be administered by semi-judicial fiat adjudicators who are appointed by the hapless local authorities. In an earlier debate, it was said that the local authorities cannot even take into account the proper—in my interpretation—interests of frontages, both residential and otherwise.
Although I understand why the Minister has clarified the matter, it shows only that the scheme will cause a great deal of trouble in London and to the Government. I cannot push the amendment, so I thank the Minister for his clarification and tell him that it will cause him and everyone else an awful lot of trouble.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.