Tag: Earl Attlee

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Earl Attlee on 2016-06-15.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether draft regulations will be made available under Clause 5 of the Bus Services Bill [HL] relating to the provision of relevant information that a franchising authority may obtain from local bus operators, and if so, when.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

The Government will work closely with both local authority stakeholders and bus operators to develop sensible proposals that both meet the needs of franchising authorities and do not place unnecessary burdens on local bus operators.

Policy discussions with key stakeholders were started in May, and policy scoping notes, setting out the policy intent of each of the regulations, were circulated to Noble Peers on 15th June. Our intention is to continue to engage with bus operators and local authorities to produce draft regulations for consultation in the autumn.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Earl Attlee on 2016-09-12.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether it is their policy that the Secretary of State for Transport shall decline to grant a Vehicle Special Order under section 44 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, for the purpose of carrying crane ballast weights, to an operator which does not have a green Operator Compliance Risk Score from the DVSA; and if not, whether they will review that policy.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

The DVSA’s Operator Compliance Risk Score (OCRS) is a scheme that supports DVSA’s compliance monitoring for operators. In contrast Vehicle Special Orders in relation to the Special Types General Order (STGO) for abnormal loads are granted by the Secretary of State for Transport through Highways England.

These two schemes are not connected or interdependent. The Compliance Risk Score does not form any part of the process for granting an application for a Vehicle Special Order. Both schemes are designed with specific requirements. We have no plans to change the process to make either scheme conditional on the other.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Earl Attlee on 2015-10-23.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 22 October (HL2256), why 150 Recovery Company, part of 103 Battalion Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, relocated from the Army Reserve Centre at Redhill to the one at Croydon, in the light of the fact that the related infrastructure developments had not progressed past the initial assessment phase.

Earl Howe

The relocation of 150 Company from Redhill to Croydon was part of the redesign of the Army Reserve as part of Future Reserves 2020 and Army 2020. In this case the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers were realigned to better integrate the Reserve component with their Regular Army partners. It also sought to maximise the potential for future recruitment, which in some cases necessitated the relocation of smaller units and sub-units.

While it was recognised that the infrastructure of the Croydon Army Reserve Centre required some improvement, it was deemed no worse than that at Redhill Army Reserve Centre. Therefore, an early move was agreed to realise the wider benefit of an increased recruiting footprint, thus ensuring that 103 Battalion REME could grow in strength and maintain the critical mass necessary for effective training and therefore operational capability

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Earl Attlee on 2015-10-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much expenditure this financial year has been saved or postponed by not implementing enhancements originally planned in order to accommodate heavy recovery vehicles for the Army Reserve Centre at Mitcham Road, Croydon.

Earl Howe

Infrastructure developments related to the relocation of 150 Recovery Company, part of 103 Battalion Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, to the Army Reserve Centre in Croydon have not progressed past the initial assessment phase. Therefore, no detailed plans have been developed nor funds allocated. The unit continues to deliver its required outputs including training with heavy recovery vehicles.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Earl Attlee on 2015-10-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, of the enhancements originally planned in order to accommodate heavy recovery vehicles for the Army Reserve Centre at Mitcham Road, Croydon, which have been implemented, and which have been deferred, cancelled, postponed, or otherwise not implemented.

Earl Howe

Infrastructure developments related to the relocation of 150 Recovery Company, part of 103 Battalion Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, to the Army Reserve Centre in Croydon have not progressed past the initial assessment phase. Therefore, no detailed plans have been developed nor funds allocated. The unit continues to deliver its required outputs including training with heavy recovery vehicles.