HL Deb 14 October 2003 vol 653 cc763-5

3.1 p.m.

Lord Bradshaw

asked Her Majesty's Government: Following the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003, what progress is being made in promoting a traffic regulation order banning mechanically propelled vehicles from using national trails such as the Ridgeway.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the Government believe that a comprehensive and integrated management plan, jointly implemented by the local authorities, is the only way to solve the problems on the Ridgeway. My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Rural Affairs has met MPs, Peers and local authorities several times to try to gain support for that. Exercising the Secretary of State's power to make a traffic regulation order would be a last resort, should that local co-operation not succeed.

Lord Bradshaw

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply, but I must express extreme disappointment. When that Act was a Bill, this House voted for an amendment to it which I believe expressed our total frustration at the lack of progress by local authorities in passing traffic regulation orders, which the police, with so many other government priorities, are in no position to enforce. We asked the Government to consider bringing forward within a year a comprehensive traffic regulation order, which would be seen by some in the countryside as a measure of relief from some of the other rather oppressive measures which the Government have in mind.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the traffic regulation order pre-existed the Bill to which the noble Lord refers, and it is always to be used as a last resort when other elements have failed. The problem in relation to the Ridgeway—the specific focus of this Question—is that different parts of it have a different status. In some areas, it is a BOAT—a byway open to all traffic; in others, it consists of pathways; and, in a small part, it is also a metalled surface or a RUPP—a road used as a public path. Therefore, different rules apply to different parts of it and that means that local solutions are required in some areas. However, my right honourable friend Alun Michael is attempting to bring together all the enforcement authorities and, if that fails, will consider, as a result of the Bill to which the noble Lord refers, the possibility of intervening with a traffic regulation order.

Baroness Byford

My Lords, first, when will the Government do that? It is a year since we debated this very important matter. My noble friend Lord Astor, who cannot be here, particularly wished me to raise this issue because the House of Lords clearly voted for action and nothing has happened. Secondly, is the traffic regulation order time-limited? In other words, can it run only for a certain length of time? If that is the case, are the Government giving any thought to extending the time period?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the traffic regulation order would apply to a specific part of a right of way, or whatever, for a limited period, but it would be renewable. Therefore, I do not believe that we need to change the law in that respect. To touch on the wider issue to which the noble Baroness referred, further consultation is to take place on the total approach to motorised traffic in this area, and the use of traffic regulation orders by the Secretary of State from on high needs to be retained as an important power. However, it is also important that the local authorities, including the police authorities, regard this as an important area in which the law should be enforced.

Lord Berkeley

My Lords, given the assurance from Ministers in, I believe, June or July, that, if necessary, they would bring in these orders within a year—my noble friend has just said that they would be used as a last resort—how long a consultation period would be required before the orders were introduced? Can they be put in place concurrently with the wider consultation on the national ban that my noble friend has just mentioned or must one precede the other?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the consultation to which I referred related to the overall issue and not to the use of the traffic order. Therefore, in that sense, they could be carried out or put in place concurrently.

The Earl of Onslow

My Lords, would not Defra's time be far better taken up with ensuring that this problem, which is universally agreed to be a proper problem, is dealt with rather than banning fox hunting? The latter, which is a waste of the department's time, is considered by an awful lot of people to be very useful and beneficial to the countryside. However, I am absolutely certain that the noble Lord cannot get his mind round that question.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, there are also an awful lot of people who think the opposite to the noble Earl. The subject of the Question poses a problem for particular parts of the country and it is an issue on which the House and Parliament have legislated. Therefore, it is important that we take seriously the powers which the recent Act gives us to deal with what, I agree, is a very disturbing problem to many people who try to use our highways and byways.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, I welcome the close interest taken by the Minister, Alun Michael, in this problem. However, does the Minister agree that the lengthy discussions which he has held with local authorities, MPs and other interest groups demonstrate how hard it is to obtain an agreement piecemeal in the manner that he suggests? Meanwhile, is he aware, as I am sure he must be from the photographs sent to Ministers by Friends of the Ridgeway, of the enormous damage being done by the irresponsible users of four-by-fours? Will the Minister come forward with any alternative proposals or will he accept the amendment which my noble friend moved when the Act was a Bill?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, although it is true that obtaining co-operation between the various authorities has at times been difficult, in this respect 1 believe that some progress has been made in dealing with the Ridgeway. There are issues of damage to the fabric of the Ridgeway, some of which are being addressed by that group. But, of course, it is not always the case that motorised vehicles are illegal. In some parts of the Ridgeway, the presence of motorised vehicles is illegal, but most of the Ridgeway is open to some degree to motorised traffic. Therefore, it is people's behaviour and the way that those vehicles are used which may be anti-social or illegal. Therefore, it is not a straightforward issue.