HC Deb 15 November 2000 vol 356 cc1034-9

74B. Nothing shall be taken to prevent the imposition of charges by both regulations under sections 74 and regulations under section 74A in respect of the execution of the same works at the same time."

(2) The reference to the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 in Schedule 1 to the National Assembly for Wales (Transfer of Functions) Order 1999 is to be treated as referring to that Act as amended by this section and section (Charges where works unreasonably prolonged).")

Mr. Hill

I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.

Madam Deputy Speaker

With this it will be convenient to discuss Lords amendment No. 113.

Mr. Hill

The issue of disruption caused by street works is of increasing concern to the public and road users. Several measures are already in place, or are being introduced, which are aimed at minimising that disruption. In particular, we announced in April our intention to activate section 74 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, which allows highway authorities to charge utility companies for street works that are unreasonably prolonged.

We have recently finished consultation on draft regulations that set out the detailed arrangements for operating a scheme under section 74. However, we recognise that it may be necessary to introduce further measures if that does not result in a sufficient reduction in the present level of disruption. We will therefore review the situation to see whether further measures may be required on, for instance, powers for highway authorities to levy a charge on undertakers who carry out street works from the first day of works—so-called lane rental.

New clause 112 allows for regulations to implement such a scheme, but it does not try to set out every last detail in the Bill. Should we activate that power, we will consult extensively with relevant parties. The amendment sets out some issues that we want to cover in regulations, such as the level at which charges should be set and the way in which they would vary according to the location and timing of works. The regulations would be subject to affirmative resolution as I have already confirmed, so the House will be able to scrutinise the proposals in detail.

New clause 113 modifies the existing power in section 74 of the 1991 Act for the Secretary of State to issue regulations that require undertakers to pay a charge to the relevant highway authority where their works exceed the deadline that had previously been agreed with the authority. In preparing draft regulations, it became apparent that highway authorities would need clear evidence of when works began and ended in order to be able to charge undertakers.

Following discussion with the relevant parties, it was agreed that the best way of achieving that would be for the regulations to allow notice to be given by undertakers to the highway authorities stating the start and close of works. As the 1991 Act does not allow for such notices, the new clause provides for them to be given and for their content to be prescribed in regulations. As with lane rental, the amendment allows for several areas relating to the levying of charges to be dealt with in regulations, over and above those prescribed in the 1991 Act.

9.30 pm
Mr. Syms

The Conservative party agrees with the general thrust of policy. All of us have suffered; many of our constituents have suffered not only because roadworks have been carried out, but sometimes because they have not been finished—parts of roads have been dug up and left for some considerable time. That has caused difficulty.

There has always been a requirement for people to tell the highway authority before they dig up roads. If we move towards a charging regime, setting precisely when work starts and finishes will be important. I wonder whether it will be possible for local authorities to engage in more co-ordination so that when one utility digs up a road another can take advantage of the fact and the same piece of road is not dug up three times in a period. If we can give incentives to local authorities, if they have to dig up the road, to do it quickly, and allow all the utilities to take advantage of that, a great deal of grief could be avoided for the travelling public.

Mr. Don Foster

I endorse the comments made by the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) and I hope that the Minister will consider his suggestion seriously. All hon. Members present tonight, and hundreds who are not, could cite many examples of problems that have occurred in their constituencies. They may regret that they were not here tonight. This is one example where hon. Members on both sides of the House could obtain popular support back home by saying how desperately keen they are on the amendment.

While I accept the importance of, as the Minister puts it, consulting widely, does he accept that he should also consult quickly? What is his current estimate of when the regulations will be introduced—as I was delighted to hear, by affirmative decision by both Houses. This is the first occasion that I can recall in my nine years in Parliament that we have had two affirmatives to one negative resolution, and I welcome that.

Mr. David Drew (Stroud)

I welcome the change. We hear a lot of calls nowadays for deregulation. This is one of the wonderful examples of deregulation that has been an unmitigated disaster. Those of us who have served on councils can wax lyrical about the problems that deregulation has caused. I will not go on about that because the other place has done us proud and I hope that the amendment will be universally acclaimed. As the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) said, we will all be acclaiming it in our press releases.

One of the biggest problems is caused when statutory undertakers have already done the work and apply retrospectively to the local highway authority to complete it. I wonder whether that can be examined. There is certainly a call for some universality in compensation, especially where businesses are affected. I never cease to be amazed by the difference between what undertakers offer. The same people are often affected, and it causes nothing but disagreement when they go to the same undertaker at different times and the sums offered are very different.

Another reason that the state of the roads is so bad is the number of previously dug trenches. That is one of my greatest bugbears. I hope that inspections are not only carried out immediately, but that a regime of long-term inspection can be set up so that extremely poor work can be dealt with.

Mr. Don Foster

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, when roadworks such as he describes are carried out, not only is it important to carry out later inspection, but, as the initial covering of a hole or filling in of a trench will drop after a while, it is important that the contractors return to finish the job? That may be some time afterwards; that is why it is so important to carry out such checks.

Mr. Drew

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that helpful intervention. The matter relates to time; I entirely agree. I was considering the longer term, when the whole road surface decays because the trench has been dug inappropriately for the surface. It is important that there is a mechanism to check the state of the trenches months and years later, so as to ensure that the appropriate sums are spent. Then, we shall have a decent road surface on which we can ride our bikes.

Mr. Brake

This is real pavement politics—or at least roadway politics. The businesses in Beddington lane will be overjoyed at the Minister's news.

Mr. Stephen Pound (Ealing, North)

My hon. Friend the Minister is no stranger to the graceful, sweeping boulevards of Northolt, but those broad avenues that he last saw framed and shaded by noble London planes—and other strange suburban growths—have suffered grievously of late: the same section of road has been dug up not once, not twice, but thrice, in the name of cable television—whatever that may be.

I know not whether cable television is a utility, or whether it comes under telecommunications legislation, but, in order that I may transmit the information to my constituents—not, in the manner of the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake), in the form of a million "Focus" leaflets, but in a more intimate focus group, perhaps in licensed premises—could my hon. Friend, who has many admirers in the Northolt area and is known as a great friend of the suburban street scene, let me know whether there is any hope for those of us who have seen our roads thrice dug up in the name of cable?

Mr. Hill

Given the reputation of my Streatham constituency, my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound) should not tempt me on the matter of the street scene in our constituencies.

It is rather a relief that the House is so thinly attended this evening, as clearly we all have our stories about street works. Had more Members been present, this part of the debate would have continued for much longer. The issue evokes enormous passions and interest. I am delighted that we are beginning to take action on the matter.

Mr. Don Foster

Will the Minister help me? I cannot recall whether I mentioned the problems in the London road in Bath.

Mr. Hill

The hon. Gentleman did not mention them, but he has done so now. I am willing to take further constituency references before I continue my remarks.

Several important issues have been raised in this brief but lively debate. The hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) referred to co-ordination. Co-ordination has two aspects: co-operation between the utilities and the co-ordination of traffic movements when street works are being carried out.

Regrettably, it seems that in practice the latter is more achievable than the former. It certainly seems to be achievable to ensure that, where street works occur, traffic is not prevented from taking easy diversions around that route. Here in the centre of London, the so-called Central London Partnership, which brings together the central London boroughs and several utilities, has devised such a programme for next year, which will come into effect from the beginning of January. Obviously, traffic movement will be considerably eased as a result of such traffic co-ordination.

A more intractable problem is the issue—oh so obvious but oh so difficult to resolve—of utilities co-operating. My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North mentioned cable television companies. I am told that competition between cable companies is so intense that when local authorities, with the best will in the world, broach with the utilities the issue of co-operation, they are met with sneers of derision at the thought that commercial secrets could be divulged in that fashion.

We, as Members of Parliament, are very fortunately placed. Hon. Members will recall that, a few months ago, Parliament square was subject to considerable disruption as a result of street works, and there one did have an example of several utilities working together, actually carrying out work at the same time. I suspect that in that case there were special considerations because of the location. We were—although we should not have been—very privileged.

I reassure the House that in various ways we are bearing down on this issue, and that we shall be looking for a more effective effort at co-ordination by utilities.

Mr. Syms

Perhaps when the pricing regime is considered, there might be a beneficial pricing regime for utilities that co-operate. That might be a positive way of encouraging co-ordination. I am not sure whether it could be done, but the option should be investigated. If utilities did co-operate, there might be a financial benefit for them in doing so, or even an award of best practice so that we could all know which people were the best at co-operating.

Mr. Hill

I welcome those two suggestions, which are now on the Hansard record. I hope very much that when we carry out our consultation on these matters, the hon. Gentleman will respond. We shall then carefully consider what I dare say will be his more detailed proposals on these matters.

The hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) asked for my current estimate of the implementation of the lane rental regulations. We have emphasised that we do not expect the immediate implementation of lane rental. Indeed, we have clearly said that we are taking reserve powers with regard to lane rental, and obviously we shall be working and consulting on regulations.

However, let me issue a fairly clear warning to the utilities: as from now, the writing is on the wall. We certainly propose to implement, at an early opportunity, the section 74 penalties for overstaying conditions. We will review the effect of those powers and the use of those powers by local authorities, but if it remains the case that they are unsatisfactory, we will certainly consider, very seriously, moving rapidly to the introduction of lane rental.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) paid tribute to the other place for having brought in this measure. I am actually willing to go further and pay particular tribute to Lord Peyton. In the same breath, I should pay tribute to Lord Macdonald of Tradeston, who responded so positively to Lord Peyton's proposals. My hon. Friend mentioned three problems. He spoke about the issue of the retrospective application by utilities for street works. I agree that that is a scandal. We hope that the effective development of software to ensure better co-ordination of notification will enable local authorities to be more insistent that they get proper notification on these matters.

9.45 pm

My hon. Friend asked about compensation for those discommoded by street works. I can make no offers on that subject, but we need to think about it in a broader context. He also referred to the phenomenon of the inadequate repair of previous trenches, and I remind the House that a two-year liability was established by a recent court case.

I very much hope that the writing on the wall that we have provided in the reserve powers for lane rental and our activation in the near future of the overstaying provisions in section 74 of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 will stimulate local authorities to be more proactive on the issue of street works. I think that there has been a certain amount of demoralisation historically, but we want local authorities to be proactive and to provide resources at a local level, so that they can scrutinise developments more carefully.

It is worth bearing in mind the fact that the returns from the penalties will be able to go to local authorities. Central Government have taken several positive moves and we are looking for a constructive, positive and effective response from local authorities.

Lords amendment agreed to.

Lords amendment No. 113 agreed to.

Lords amendments Nos. 114 to 120 agreed to.