Tag: Lord Berkeley

  • Lord Berkeley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2015-11-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they decided that all grey speed cameras should be painted yellow, and what safety benefits they expect to result from that change.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Government has always been clear that speed cameras are for smoothing traffic flow, reducing congestion and enhancing safety rather than for revenue raising. All working grey speed cameras are being painted yellow within a year to make them more visible, so that motorists know the cameras are there.

    The purpose of this particular type of camera is to enforce variable speed limits on smart motorways which smooth traffic flow and help reduce congestion. The safety outcome of this change in colour will be monitored by Highways England.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-02-22.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the minimum number of bids for rail franchises they require to create the necessary competitive tension to ensure value for money for the travelling public, and in particular whether they consider that three bids is sufficient for that purpose.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Whilst the Department for Transport prefer to have three bids for each franchise competition, as was the established practice under the previous government, we are prepared to accept that on occasion, we may only have two genuine bidders.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-03-17.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why their devolution agreement with Bath and North East Somerset Council, Bristol City Council, North Somerset Council, South Gloucestershire Council and the West of England Local Enterprise Partnership is called the West of England devolution agreement, in the light of the fact that it does not include Cornwall Council or Devon County Council.

    Baroness Williams of Trafford

    The West of England is the recognised name used to describe the area covered by the four local authorities: Bristol, North Somerset, South Gloucestershire and Bath and North East Somerset. The West of England is used to describe organisations and functions that work across this geography, which include the West of England Local Enterprise Partnership and the West of England Nature Partnership. Cornwall is already covered by a devolution deal – it is called the Cornwall Devolution Deal.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-05-04.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 4 May (HL7877), why they have not specified as part of their sustainability policy for HS2 the use of sustainable aggregates in the design of structures.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The HS2 Sustainability Policy states that we will ‘source and make efficient use of sustainable materials.’ This includes the use of sustainable aggregates but is a purposely high-level statement intended to cover all types of sustainable materials. The detailed specifications for the sourcing and use of all materials, including aggregates, will be developed through the design process in line with the Sustainability Policy.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-07-20.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they plan to implement the recommendations made by the Law Commission in 2013 regarding level crossing legislation.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport is close to finalising its response to the Law Commission’s recommendations on the reform of level crossing legislation.

    This is a complex area and it has been necessary to explore all the available options in detail. Whilst this has taken time, I am confident that we will be able to come forward with proposals for a cohesive package of improvements shortly.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2015-12-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they intend to implement the original text of Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 about a European rail network for competitive freight, in the light of the recent decision by the European Court of Justice.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Department for Transport, as a member of the Executive Board, and Network Rail, as a member of the Management Board, for Rail Freight Corridor North Sea – Mediterranean, will work with their Corridor partners to implement the extension of the British element of this Corridor to Glasgow, Edinburgh, Felixstowe and Southampton by 2018. In accordance with the requirements of Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 as amended by Regulation (EU) 1316/2013, these extensions will be based on market studies and will take into consideration existing passenger and freight operations on those routes.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-02-29.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 10 February (HL5652), what (1) proportion, and (2) volume, of excavated spoil from each of the HS2 Phase 1 construction sites will be transported from them by (a) rail, (b) road, and (c) river.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Excavated material arising from the construction of Phase One of HS2 will be transported along the construction corridor (site haul) where it is reasonably practicable to do so. Where that is not possible, or for movement along longer distances, the material will be transported by public highway, along designated routes. Where reasonably practicable, rail has been considered for the transportation of large quantities of excavated material over long distances. There are currently no plans to move any of the excavated material by river.

    The approximate quantities and relative proportion of each of these transportation methods, allocated to broad sections of the proposed route is set out in the table below. These figures reflect the assumptions reported in the Environmental Statement deposited alongside the Phase One Bill and, as such, are a plausible worst case in terms of both total volume of excavated material and proportion transport by highway and rail. The project has made a commitment to maximise the amount of excavated material transported by rail and are working to increase the proportion transport by rail and decrease the proportion transported by highway wherever reasonably practicable.

    (All figures are in million tons and movements may include multiple handling)

    Site Haul

    Public Highway Haul

    Rail Haul

    Central London & Metropolitan area

    16.9 (56%)

    4 (13%)

    9.46 (31%)

    Buckinghamshire Northants & Warwickshire Country areas

    72.4 (80%)

    17.9 (20%)

    (0%)

    West Midlands Metropolitan area

    29.9 (61%)

    18.9 (39%)

    (0%)

    Total Phase One Routewide

    119.2 (70%)

    40.8 (24%)

    9.46 (6%)

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-04-11.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the current funding plans for dredging in Portland and Plymouth Harbours in order for them to accept larger cruise ships, and whether any state aids will be involved.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Funding plans for such developments are a matter for the ports concerned. It is also for the ports themselves, in the first instance, to ensure that their funding arrangements are compliant with State Aid rules and that any prospective Aid is notified to the European Commission as and when necessary through the appropriate channels.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-05-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of reports of collusion within the police forces and other agencies after the Hillsborough disaster, whether they will introduce legislation to prevent serving members of the police force and the judiciary from belonging to the freemasons.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    Any police officer must be able to discharge their duties within the law and is expected to abide by the oath of constable. The Standards of Professional Behaviour, set out in Schedule 2 to the Police (Conduct) Regulations (2012), require police officers to be ‘honest, act with integrity and . . . not compromise or abuse their position’. Police officers must be able to do so, irrespective of membership of any external membership organisations.

    The College of Policing introduced a Code of Ethics in July 2014 which applies to all police officers and staff in England and Wales and sets out clear principles and standards of behaviour expected of them. It is for individual forces to determine whether an individual officer’s behaviour or misconduct meets the standards that are set out and where they are not, to investigate and instigate disciplinary proceedings where appropriate.

    Following the Chapman Review in 2014, the Government is continuing its programme of reforms to improve police integrity and the police discipline system, including through the Policing and Crime Bill which is currently before parliament to improve the system and its ability to hold officers to account for their actions and behaviour.

    In the case of judges it is also essential to the rule of law that they are independent and impartial when exercising their judicial functions. All judicial office holders should recuse themselves in any case where bias or the appearance of bias arises and are counselled against engaging in any activity which might undermine or be reasonably thought to undermine their judicial independence or impartiality. These commitments are enshrined in the judicial oath.

  • Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Lord Berkeley – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Berkeley on 2016-09-05.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have given the rail industry an exemption that allows that industry a year longer than the aviation industry to comply with the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in respect of compensation for delays or cancellations to services; and whether they plan to extend that exemption to providers of bus and coach services.

    Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon

    The Government has decided that the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) should apply in full to all transport services, including mainline passenger rail services, from 1 October 2016.

    The 12 month exemption from one of the compensation provisions in the Consumer Rights Act was originally proposed to allow time for train operators to move to a consistent compensation scheme. However, the Government is now of the view that rail customers should not be denied any consumer rights or protections even for a temporary period while the rail industry works to put in place more consistent compensation arrangements between train operators. The Government has therefore withdrawn the draft statutory instrument which was to have been debated by Parliament and which, if approved, would have put this exemption in place.