HL Deb 29 November 1967 vol 287 cc93-4
LORD SEGAL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what further action can be taken by an area transport users' consultative committee after its recommendations have been rejected by the Central Transport Users' Consultative Committee.]

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, if in the circumstances envisaged by my noble friend the Central Committee decide to make no recommendation to the Minister, the area committee are at liberty to give further consideration to the matter. They might decide to pursue it directly with the Transport Board concerned, but such a decision would be exceptional. Any further formal action which they might take would again be reported to the Central Committee.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that reply, may I ask whether it is not a denial of ordinary democratic procedures if the recommendations of an area committee are flouted by the Central Committee? And what is the object of appointing all these committees if the views of the railway travelling public are so persistently disregarded?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, whether it is democratic or not, these procedures are laid down in the 1962 Transport Act. The area committees are what they are: they are closely connected with the particular problems. The Central Committee of course, includes the chairmen of various area bodies, plus other persons whom the Minister may appoint. The committees look into the matter, and the Central Committee can, if it sees fit, make recommendations to the Minister.

LORD SEGAL

My Lords, has not the Central Committee over and over again proved itself to be merely the rubber stamp for decisions already taken by the Railway Executive?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, the noble Lord must get his information right. My information is that there are but rare cases of such procedures.