03/02/2017

:29:14. > :29:22.So, again, in this situation such as that, yes that might happen, but not

:29:23. > :29:28.actually driven by the people in the locality who want the item, that you

:29:29. > :29:35.are asking for, if you see what I mean. What you have got is somebody

:29:36. > :29:41.else setting the rules. Bringing local accountability, giving people

:29:42. > :29:44.within councils into the authority is the ability to set those rates

:29:45. > :29:49.then click that revenue is really something that I would welcome. At

:29:50. > :29:54.the moment, the ability to do that is a long winded process of two

:29:55. > :30:00.years for you how to apply for various changes in legislation and

:30:01. > :30:08.so on. Take Bury St Edmunds. I had 550 long-stay car park uses last

:30:09. > :30:14.year and 1.38 7 million short stay. This is a town of 40,000. We have

:30:15. > :30:18.problems in the medieval grade. I was really pleased to see the master

:30:19. > :30:29.plan come out this week in which it was spoken that we would have a

:30:30. > :30:33.policy whereby we took varying procedures into account in order to

:30:34. > :30:38.stop the off-street parking that blight so many people's lives,

:30:39. > :30:43.particularly in the medieval quarter of the time. It must be that we

:30:44. > :30:50.provide solutions in this place and we give local councils the ability

:30:51. > :30:55.to set the right solution. This report encourages a blend of

:30:56. > :31:00.pedestrian first recommendations in order to restore and keep the

:31:01. > :31:04.medieval grade for pedestrians, tourists, shoppers and residents.

:31:05. > :31:09.The small size of our grid, which is not only beautiful but historic,

:31:10. > :31:15.needs attention in order to make sure that parking does not blight

:31:16. > :31:20.it. I agree with you, we have a vibrant economic environment, people

:31:21. > :31:26.need to park and work, and we have, luckily, a wonderful tourist

:31:27. > :31:30.attraction in the town and that draws people to it. That is

:31:31. > :31:37.juxtaposed against the market towns that very much need the flexibility

:31:38. > :31:46.of doing it. What concerns with this amendment is that we are using our

:31:47. > :31:54.sledgehammer to crack a nut -- crack a nut. My honourable friend pointed

:31:55. > :32:02.out, it does seem to be an amendment that does what it does within the

:32:03. > :32:09.body of the bill. I think the honourable lady for giving away.

:32:10. > :32:22.There are provisions for local authorities to increase parking

:32:23. > :32:27.charges. What all this does is to restrict this bill to be reducing

:32:28. > :32:35.prices, there would still be powerless to increase car park

:32:36. > :32:39.charges, that would still be there. Fine, but that still pictures back

:32:40. > :32:43.to the point made earlier that isn't that already contained within the

:32:44. > :32:46.body of the bill, so aren't we adding a little bit of jam to what

:32:47. > :33:01.is already in the cake. Mr Speaker, I am grateful for you

:33:02. > :33:08.calling me at what has been a debate. I congratulate my honourable

:33:09. > :33:17.friend for bringing this to the house. I hope that I can convince

:33:18. > :33:26.him and my honourable friends that he will not be... I do hope that I

:33:27. > :33:31.can do that. I have to tell the house and the honourable member for

:33:32. > :33:40.Torbay that when the committee met on Wednesday, there were no

:33:41. > :33:47.amendments. The bill was reported to the house unamended, so this is a

:33:48. > :33:52.somewhat late entry in the race. And was not a member of the bill

:33:53. > :33:56.committee so could not move the bill to committee stage so the

:33:57. > :34:03.opportunity to raise this ad report stage, just to clarify that. I feel

:34:04. > :34:08.I am in error because I should have clearly as my honourable friend to

:34:09. > :34:14.join the committee. I think he would have made it a major contribution.

:34:15. > :34:20.One of the privileges of having a private member's bill is that one

:34:21. > :34:25.does have some influence on the membership of the committee and it

:34:26. > :34:32.is good to see my honourable friend who served on the committee and say

:34:33. > :34:37.that the committee examined with some care the bill. Mr Speaker, when

:34:38. > :34:43.I spoke at the end of the second reading debate in November, I said

:34:44. > :34:48.that I could not in all honestly say that this modest to clause bill

:34:49. > :34:54.would improve the quality of life in every city and town in this country.

:34:55. > :34:59.I also said that I am grateful for the government supports and I am

:35:00. > :35:12.pleased to see my honourable friend, the member for Nuneaton in his place

:35:13. > :35:16.today. I also see the opposition spokesman in his place on the front

:35:17. > :35:22.bench and as he will know his party were supportive of this measure in

:35:23. > :35:34.committee. I hope that we can continue to have his support today.

:35:35. > :35:39.This bill is very simple. My honourable friend the member for

:35:40. > :35:46.Christchurch, who is not known as a great friend of private member's

:35:47. > :35:50.legislation, whispered in my year one day, being a very educated man

:35:51. > :35:57.and a classical scholar perhaps, said it was her day minimus spill

:35:58. > :36:07.that I interpreted had very little in it. That was the point of this. I

:36:08. > :36:12.was number five on the list. Having decided to run with this issue, it

:36:13. > :36:16.had to be as simple bill that appeals to all sides of the house.

:36:17. > :36:23.And not something that was going to attract controversy and encourage

:36:24. > :36:35.colleagues to speak for perhaps a long time on the bill and impede

:36:36. > :36:42.progress. . I described this as a Santa Claus bill as we were in the

:36:43. > :36:47.run-up to Christmas, because the first and perhaps most important

:36:48. > :36:51.provision of this bill is that it allows councils to reduce parking

:36:52. > :36:57.charges about giving a 21 day notice in the local newspaper or in the

:36:58. > :37:05.media. As I will develop this point in my speech, I think this is

:37:06. > :37:07.increasingly a really important for local councils to have flexibility

:37:08. > :37:39.and I will explain why in a moment. It doesn't actually affect the

:37:40. > :37:47.charges themselves. I was somewhat stunned when I went into the shop in

:37:48. > :37:53.the house to see Santa Christmas holding the Santa act as a Christmas

:37:54. > :38:00.decoration for the tree. Clearly, I have been able to inspire somebody

:38:01. > :38:06.to produce this Christmas decoration. I can issued you Mr

:38:07. > :38:10.Speaker, being a slightly superstitious member, I would not

:38:11. > :38:15.conceive of putting that on the tree until it had been passed as an

:38:16. > :38:23.actor. Whether and to what extent the honourable gentleman indulges in

:38:24. > :38:29.retail therapy, and what assessment he has made of the aesthetic

:38:30. > :38:35.measures in the shopper window as a matter I think of consuming almost

:38:36. > :38:39.intoxicating interest to members of the house. I question if it is

:38:40. > :38:44.altogether relevant to the subject matter which is supposed to be under

:38:45. > :38:51.discussion. I feel sure he will have a response.

:38:52. > :38:56.I am flattered that you should bring me back to this point and asked me

:38:57. > :39:00.to explain myself. I crave your indulgence because they did in error

:39:01. > :39:05.produce the Christmas decoration and was rightly called to order because

:39:06. > :39:14.we cannot use devices enable speeches. I am wary of your own

:39:15. > :39:20.determination to maintain procedures so I did not venture to do that

:39:21. > :39:28.today. The point I'm trying to make, Mr Speaker, is that this bill came

:39:29. > :39:33.about as the Santa Claus bill, is something that brings about a lot of

:39:34. > :39:39.and can be used particularly in the run-up to run-up to Christmas to

:39:40. > :39:43.help people in the shopping, whereas previously the councils would be not

:39:44. > :39:48.able to act quickly to respond to situations. I will deliver that

:39:49. > :39:57.point any more. I will move on to say that my own local council, in

:39:58. > :40:05.Hinckley, just across the board from my honourable friend, has many car

:40:06. > :40:08.parks. It will certainly have an impact on the way that Hinckley and

:40:09. > :40:19.Bosworth Borough Council implements parking in the future. Hinckley has

:40:20. > :40:22.been very successful as a town centre, most recently being a

:40:23. > :40:32.finalist in the Great British High Street competition. And

:40:33. > :40:40.cost-effective parking for a time they can achieve that success. He is

:40:41. > :40:44.right to talk about the success of times. Would he agree that is why it

:40:45. > :40:50.is so important that we are clear that this bill is about varying

:40:51. > :40:57.charges down, not by varying the map? I am glad my honourable friend

:40:58. > :41:04.has intervened. He represents a beautiful seaside town, Torbay. In

:41:05. > :41:08.fact, I knew his Conservative predecessor years ago who was also

:41:09. > :41:16.passionately concerned about the Tyne. He was known as spy 13 because

:41:17. > :41:24.of his other job, which was writing spy novels and I wish him well if he

:41:25. > :41:28.is tuning into this debate. He is doing the right thing for his

:41:29. > :41:30.constituency, may I say to my honourable friend, in Torbay where

:41:31. > :41:38.parking is clearly going to be critical. I can assure him that B

:41:39. > :41:41.looks a clause this bill is about enabling councils to reduced

:41:42. > :41:47.charges. In the future they would have to go to the expense of

:41:48. > :41:56.reducing the charges by publishing the notice in local newspapers. With

:41:57. > :42:07.the honourable friend give way? Thank you. Isn't that come in a

:42:08. > :42:11.nutshell, we really don't need to press this moment because it is that

:42:12. > :42:15.flexibility, the fact that in the market they can charge a pine for

:42:16. > :42:20.two hours, in Bury St Edmunds the produce the fees on a Tuesday

:42:21. > :42:30.afternoon. Local solutions to local issues to stimulate the High Street.

:42:31. > :42:44.I am grateful to my honourable friend. But I think for comparison,

:42:45. > :42:46.I would just make clear what these two clauses do. The first clause

:42:47. > :42:50.provides for a path of government to provides for a path of government to

:42:51. > :42:53.make regulations that simplify the procedure to be followed for

:42:54. > :42:59.lowering parking charges. At present, councils must give 24 days

:43:00. > :43:03.per litigation and put signage in the car park if they want to lower

:43:04. > :43:06.their charges. The private sector, on the other hand, can take a

:43:07. > :43:12.business decision to lower without going through this process. To give

:43:13. > :43:18.councils flexibility to reduce their charges, this clause would allow my

:43:19. > :43:20.honourable friend to simplify this requirement putting local

:43:21. > :43:24.authorities on an even footing with the private sector. So my honourable

:43:25. > :43:30.friend for Torbay has not picked up on this point, but he might like to,

:43:31. > :43:34.which is the fact that this gives councils flexibility to reduce their

:43:35. > :43:38.charges and puts them on an even footing with the private sector. I

:43:39. > :43:42.am sure my honourable friend may have spoken about this, had he

:43:43. > :43:47.thought about it. He might want to come back to it on the fact that

:43:48. > :43:58.this will put things on an even footing with the private sector.

:43:59. > :44:01.Accept the valid points he makes. A private sector operator can change

:44:02. > :44:04.the signs overnight if they wish to change the prices in a car park,

:44:05. > :44:09.where as a council has to go through a very long procedure. But would he

:44:10. > :44:12.agree with me that councils are meant to be bodies charged with

:44:13. > :44:16.delivering the public good in an area rather than just a company that

:44:17. > :44:24.is looking to make as much money as it can offer the asset it owns? I

:44:25. > :44:27.honourable friend is hopefully leading me to an area I am going to

:44:28. > :44:33.talk about, which is the impact of pricing on car parking charges

:44:34. > :44:36.generally. But I would make this further point. It is equally

:44:37. > :44:40.important that councils should consider the effect of increased

:44:41. > :44:43.parking charges on the high street. To that end, the clause makes

:44:44. > :44:47.provision for a consultation requirements of the councils take on

:44:48. > :44:50.the views of local businesses and residents when they are looking to

:44:51. > :44:55.increase parking charges on an existing traffic order. They must

:44:56. > :44:59.already consult on a traffic order. However, it is proportionate to

:45:00. > :45:04.expect them to consult if they are raising charges during the life of

:45:05. > :45:14.the traffic order. So my honourable friend, who has been probing the

:45:15. > :45:21.probing amendment, I said to my four for Torbay, there no fear here that

:45:22. > :45:28.this bill is going to increase parking charges. It cannot do that.

:45:29. > :45:30.I would resist my honourable friend the minister's potential to spring

:45:31. > :45:36.to the dispatch box, because I know he will make a speech later. He is

:45:37. > :45:40.nodding his head to reassure me that I haven't put anything in this bill

:45:41. > :45:44.which will allow local authorities to increase charges, but simply

:45:45. > :45:51.saying that they need to ask people before they contemplate such a

:45:52. > :45:58.measure. Am grateful to my honourable friend for giving way.

:45:59. > :46:03.His seat of Bosworth, the A5 is the link through to Aldridge-Brownhills

:46:04. > :46:10.and onto Nuneaton. So three of us have something in common. But on the

:46:11. > :46:15.point about consultation, would he agree that as a resident of one of

:46:16. > :46:19.the -- one of the frustrating things is when you turn up in a town centre

:46:20. > :46:26.and you find that car parking charges have gone up and you had no

:46:27. > :46:29.idea about it. That is why consultation is important. When you

:46:30. > :46:33.open your purse and find you haven't got the right coins to put in the

:46:34. > :46:39.machine... I welcome the fact that this bill seeks to emphasise

:46:40. > :46:46.consulting and listening to the views of residents. My honourable

:46:47. > :46:52.friend knows how fast our area is developing. There is this huge

:46:53. > :46:57.business park being developed in my constituency and dust on the border

:46:58. > :47:01.of my honourable friend's constituency. My honourable friend

:47:02. > :47:05.and I have been working over the years to improve the A5 and there

:47:06. > :47:13.are some major improvements in the offing. It is of course a national

:47:14. > :47:18.road and an important relief road when there are problems on the M6

:47:19. > :47:21.and other roads. So I think we will see an improvement in traffic

:47:22. > :47:24.movements generally. And if you are going to have an improvement in

:47:25. > :47:29.traffic movements, you need an improvement in how you manage the

:47:30. > :47:34.people who are moving around. So when the road traffic act was put

:47:35. > :47:37.into place, I don't think anybody thought there would be the

:47:38. > :47:41.fluctuations in patterns of shopping that we have now. We are in a new

:47:42. > :47:47.landscape. The world has speeded up. It is a completely different world

:47:48. > :47:57.since the advent of mobile phones and/or the electronic media. So I

:47:58. > :48:00.think these two clauses together offer an opportunity to take into

:48:01. > :48:04.account the views of local communities while giving councils

:48:05. > :48:13.the flexibility to decrease parking charges and better support the goal

:48:14. > :48:17.of thriving town centres. Mr Speaker, I have also received

:48:18. > :48:29.support from other organisations, which is worth mentioning. There is

:48:30. > :48:36.an organisation which is very concerned with parking. I say to my

:48:37. > :48:41.honourable friends, we should be aware that the value of UK retail

:48:42. > :48:51.sales was 339,000,000,020 15, providing jobs for 3.3 million

:48:52. > :48:53.employees by 2017 in approximately 287,000 outlets. However,

:48:54. > :48:57.increasingly, the high street has been exposed to intense competition,

:48:58. > :49:02.including an increased rise in online shopping and out-of-town

:49:03. > :49:08.retailing, due to the ease with which consumers can use these

:49:09. > :49:12.options. I think this point that they raised about online shopping is

:49:13. > :49:17.important. We saw all the stories in the press about the impact on major

:49:18. > :49:27.stores of online shopping and how difficult it is for them to fight

:49:28. > :49:34.back. In the Midlands, we have these huge warehouses and distribution

:49:35. > :49:38.centres. We are particularly aware where the M1 and to join. This is

:49:39. > :49:44.the ideal place in the middle of England. I represent geographical

:49:45. > :49:57.middle of England. It is in my constituency. So that is important.

:49:58. > :50:00.There is another point, the parking charges barrier to regeneration,

:50:01. > :50:09.which colleagues might want to expand on. I give way. Just on the

:50:10. > :50:13.point my honourable friend mentioned about online retailing, one of the

:50:14. > :50:21.things that was highlighted in a report in 2011 highlighted the role

:50:22. > :50:25.of the small towns, who were charging way above the average in

:50:26. > :50:32.the UK, thus putting them at a disadvantage. Would my honourable

:50:33. > :50:37.friend agree that it is important that town councils have the

:50:38. > :50:42.flexibility to be able to react quickly in line with the threat from

:50:43. > :50:46.online retail? I do agree with that, and I am about to come to the impact

:50:47. > :50:53.of the bill will have across the country and how it will impact with

:50:54. > :50:57.some other figures. But may I indulge first by just referring him

:50:58. > :51:01.to the porters review, which clearly showed that car parking charges were

:51:02. > :51:08.the biggest barrier to the regeneration of our town centres. It

:51:09. > :51:16.is perhaps no surprise, considering that the average hourly parking

:51:17. > :51:27.which in London is ?8.44, 18% more than the minimum wage. It is a

:51:28. > :51:29.staggering figure. The Rethinking parking on the high street report

:51:30. > :51:34.clearly states that footfall does reflect town centre performance,

:51:35. > :51:39.with those towns that have higher footfall generating a high level of

:51:40. > :51:42.spend, meaning that the high street will remain under threat from

:51:43. > :51:54.out-of-town retail facilities and online, where lack of parking or

:51:55. > :51:57.extensive parking is not an issue. Would my honourable friend agree,

:51:58. > :52:01.given that he has referred to London as having expensive parking charges,

:52:02. > :52:05.but still having a thriving business centre around places like Oxford

:52:06. > :52:09.Street, would he agree that London operates very differently in terms

:52:10. > :52:12.of an economy than the rest of the country and that anything like that

:52:13. > :52:19.in any other town would have devastated the shopping centres and

:52:20. > :52:22.high-street businesses? I do accept that London is a special case and we

:52:23. > :52:29.don't represent London. But I thought it was instructive to make

:52:30. > :52:37.the point that these charges are so high here. What is also important,

:52:38. > :52:46.given my honourable friend's remarks just now, is to look at how this

:52:47. > :52:50.provision will operate in practice. For greater accuracy, I asked the

:52:51. > :52:55.Commons library to provide some figures for me of the scale of

:52:56. > :53:02.natural settlements known as build-up areas to most of us in the

:53:03. > :53:16.country. We actually have, according to the 2011 census, 56 cities, of a

:53:17. > :53:24.population of 5000 or more and 1590 villages with a population of

:53:25. > :53:31.between one and 5000. Each of the settlements could be affected by the

:53:32. > :53:37.provisions of this bill. Pride is a dangerous word in parliamentary

:53:38. > :53:43.life. I think we can get to proud sometimes, but am delighted to bring

:53:44. > :53:48.a bill to the House which affects not just a particular constituency

:53:49. > :53:51.matter, but has a national impact. And this bill will have huge

:53:52. > :54:00.ramifications for business. My honourable friend, the member for

:54:01. > :54:07.Nuneaton, is nodding. On that broader point of business and

:54:08. > :54:14.regeneration, I wonder if maybe my honourable friend will touch on

:54:15. > :54:18.this. Giving councils that ability to have the flexibility to reduce

:54:19. > :54:22.their car parking charges when they deem it necessary, be it for a

:54:23. > :54:27.specific event or whatever, that can play a vital part in regeneration,

:54:28. > :54:30.because whilst they may not be getting the income from the car

:54:31. > :54:35.parking, they don't have the cost associated with advertising for that

:54:36. > :54:39.reduction in car parking, but they could get an extra income through

:54:40. > :54:41.increasing the vibrancy of the high street through their nondomestic

:54:42. > :54:48.rate collection, which goes back into the council. My honourable

:54:49. > :54:55.friend for Aldridge-Brownhills has struck on a rich seam there. I am

:54:56. > :55:01.not personally going to mine it, but no doubt she can come back with me

:55:02. > :55:06.on this. The statistics I have just given, I should for clarity said

:55:07. > :55:13.that those towns and cities and villages are in England. And this

:55:14. > :55:18.bill would affect Wales, but will not be included in Wales. I don't

:55:19. > :55:23.have the statistics for Wales. I wanted him to something that hasn't

:55:24. > :55:29.been mentioned so far, and that is what I call unusual events.

:55:30. > :55:34.Exceptional events. I'm going to cite two exceptional events and

:55:35. > :55:44.suggest that this bill might be useful in those circumstances. I

:55:45. > :55:49.have always been happy to represent the constituency of Bosworth, which

:55:50. > :55:55.is where English history changed on the 22nd of August, 1485, when the

:55:56. > :56:06.last of the Yorkist Plantagenet line, King Richard, died in horrid

:56:07. > :56:18.circumstances, leaving Henry Tudor to be crowned Henry VII. Just before

:56:19. > :56:23.the 2015 election, the mortal remains of Richard had been

:56:24. > :56:36.discovered in a car park in Leicester. Interestingly, he was

:56:37. > :56:44.found, the exact position was under a parking bay with the letter R on

:56:45. > :56:51.it, which turned out to be for Rex, King of England. Just before the

:56:52. > :56:58.2015 general election, Richard's mortal remains were taken back to

:56:59. > :56:59.the Battle of Bosworth Field, where he had died, killed in action over

:57:00. > :57:22.500 years earlier. The question was, just how many

:57:23. > :57:28.people were going to turn up. I was invited, Madam Deputy Speaker, I

:57:29. > :57:36.welcome you to the chair, I was invited to attend the proceedings of

:57:37. > :57:40.Bosworth Field, and also to attend the events are two words in market

:57:41. > :57:44.with a police escort, given the with a police escort, given the

:57:45. > :57:50.narrow lanes, there was no way I could do more than one event, I

:57:51. > :57:53.couldn't do them all. I arrived at the battlefield two hours early

:57:54. > :57:58.because I had no idea how long that was going to take me to get there.

:57:59. > :58:05.We had a marquee that was I think six times the size of this chamber

:58:06. > :58:12.absolutely packed, journalists from all over the world, and the roads

:58:13. > :58:20.were very clogged. It was an incredibly emotional experience to

:58:21. > :58:24.see this often arrive on the field but was and then silence. A very

:58:25. > :58:32.special day was. The point is this, special day was. The point is this,

:58:33. > :58:37.if this gets its third reading today and comes back approved from the

:58:38. > :58:41.other place and becomes law, for councils in a situation like that

:58:42. > :58:44.they could at a stroke want to change the parking regulations on

:58:45. > :58:51.the day, they might be in a situation where they realised the

:58:52. > :58:58.charges are ridiculous and they need to process people quickly. The other

:58:59. > :59:02.events which I wanted to refer to was completely the opposite

:59:03. > :59:07.situation as far as traffic was concerned. That was to the solar

:59:08. > :59:17.eclipse that took place on August the 11th 1999. Would he agree that

:59:18. > :59:22.special events are about the community coming together and

:59:23. > :59:28.bringing a surge of trade and the local authorities wanted to rip

:59:29. > :59:31.people off we could see the effects like happened with the solar eclipse

:59:32. > :59:37.in Cornwall that were people increased prices, people just

:59:38. > :59:42.didn't,. I have a good recollection of this. The first point I would

:59:43. > :59:45.make is that it is not about raising charges, it is about lowering

:59:46. > :59:52.charges and grazing consultation levels. That is the sound bite. That

:59:53. > :59:56.is what this bill is all about and that is why allows my honourable

:59:57. > :00:02.friend to withdraw his amendment. He talks about private car park owners

:00:03. > :00:07.who wanted to ratchet up charges in Cornwall. My honourable friend, the

:00:08. > :00:12.member for Cornwall Southeast who is not here today he has had only dues

:00:13. > :00:16.with car parking, nor has the honourable member for Stevenage he

:00:17. > :00:19.has had his issues and had a successful debate in Westminster

:00:20. > :00:22.Hall the other day, but what happened was so much in the

:00:23. > :00:26.newspapers about the pandemonium that was going to be caused by the

:00:27. > :00:31.huge numbers of people going to Cornwall to watch the eclipse, which

:00:32. > :00:38.would have blocked out the light of the sun totally for about a minute,

:00:39. > :00:47.that there was so much media hype that nobody turned up. The numbers

:00:48. > :00:51.were way down. Quite the reverse happened. It might have been the

:00:52. > :00:53.councils had made provision to reduced charges then suddenly

:00:54. > :00:59.realised there was no need to do it at all. Rather than with a 21 days

:01:00. > :01:08.and have lost revenue, in that situation the opposite would have

:01:09. > :01:12.applied. I will be concluding my remarks soon. I wanted to refer to

:01:13. > :01:20.what the Federation of Small Businesses said to me yesterday.

:01:21. > :01:26.Apart from generously congratulating me on negotiating the narrows of the

:01:27. > :01:33.rivers to get to disappoint the Private Members' Bill, said that

:01:34. > :01:39.they are wholly supportive of the views of the measures in this bill

:01:40. > :01:44.and that it would be an additional tool for government to support local

:01:45. > :01:47.small businesses and ensure that they and their customers can park

:01:48. > :01:52.and that is why it would be very welcome. The room research shows

:01:53. > :01:57.that seven in ten small firms think parking is a priority for the future

:01:58. > :02:01.of independent shops, independent retailers in town centres are the

:02:02. > :02:10.engines which help make the UK's local communities what they are. In

:02:11. > :02:14.the reports, going the extra mile, they find that small businesses are

:02:15. > :02:22.overwhelmingly reliant on roads with nine in ten firms placing high value

:02:23. > :02:29.on the network with so many small businesses relying on the road

:02:30. > :02:34.network, they argue... The final point, they are clear the

:02:35. > :02:40.consultation with businesses before making local authorities increase

:02:41. > :02:52.the cost of parking is what we require. I thank my honourable

:02:53. > :02:56.friend forgiving way. Would he agree with me that this is particularly

:02:57. > :03:00.pertinent inroad communities and small market town for a lot of the

:03:01. > :03:07.trade has to come in from villages and so one? So the accessibility and

:03:08. > :03:12.ability to control prices in a way that facilitates the businesses that

:03:13. > :03:16.we want to survive because there is nothing sadder than a dying High

:03:17. > :03:21.Street, that is what we need to aim for. One is always looking for help

:03:22. > :03:25.in this place and I think my honourable friend has made

:03:26. > :03:30.Michaelson remarks for me. What we are talking about here is a simple

:03:31. > :03:34.to clause bill which has been reported from a committee without

:03:35. > :03:41.amendment that seeks to allow councils to reduced parking charges

:03:42. > :03:45.without consultation, but insists on consultation if they want to

:03:46. > :03:49.increase charges. Before I sit down I would just like to say to my

:03:50. > :03:55.honourable friend the member for Torbay, I think this is a very

:03:56. > :04:02.helpful amendment that he has proposed. He clearly feels

:04:03. > :04:06.passionately about this issue and he is right to come to the chamber and

:04:07. > :04:13.get us to scrutinise this in some detail, but I do hope that I have

:04:14. > :04:19.been able to give him the reassuring study requires and I look to my

:04:20. > :04:23.honourable friend the Minister who has responsibility for this who is

:04:24. > :04:28.sitting on the front bench, to flesh out any point that I have not made

:04:29. > :04:38.and give the government's approval, but that I thank my honourable

:04:39. > :04:43.friend from Torbay. I welcome the opportunity to comment on this

:04:44. > :04:50.amendment and the important points raised by my honourable friends, the

:04:51. > :04:55.member for Torbay. My honourable friends and constituency neighbour,

:04:56. > :05:00.the member for Bosworth, has already set out insignificant detail his

:05:01. > :05:08.views in relation to this amendment and whilst I think my honourable

:05:09. > :05:12.friend for Torbay's intentions are good, as they generally are and

:05:13. > :05:15.generally and the best interests of his constituents, I think my

:05:16. > :05:21.right to speak against the amendment right to speak against the amendment

:05:22. > :05:26.that has been tabled and now I am going to take this opportunity to

:05:27. > :05:32.separate the government's view as why we do not think that the

:05:33. > :05:38.amendment is a good idea and why the amendment should not stand. The bill

:05:39. > :05:41.creates the power to make regulations, to simplify the

:05:42. > :05:46.procedure is local authorities must follow if they want to lower the

:05:47. > :05:48.parking charges for it also introduces a consultation

:05:49. > :05:54.requirement if local authorities want to increase parking charges.

:05:55. > :05:59.Parking provision plays an important role in the line people to access

:06:00. > :06:05.our high streets in town centres. Town centres continue to play a

:06:06. > :06:08.central role in the lives of our communities and parking charges can

:06:09. > :06:15.be an important factor when people choose which town centre they want

:06:16. > :06:20.to visit. Some out-of-town shopping malls provide free parking and

:06:21. > :06:26.councils therefore need to think very carefully about the level and

:06:27. > :06:33.range of parking that is available. Parking charges will no doubt play a

:06:34. > :06:41.very important role in the choice that people make and the government

:06:42. > :06:45.is absolutely committed to promoting our town centres and high streets as

:06:46. > :06:53.thriving places at the heart of our communities. If I may now turn to

:06:54. > :06:57.the issue of consultation for increased charges. I strongly

:06:58. > :07:00.believe that it is right and proper for local authorities to consult the

:07:01. > :07:31.to increase charges. This is not, local communities and town centre

:07:32. > :07:31.and I would like to stress this, and I would like to stress this,

:07:32. > :07:32.asking councils in a very Luke List this is not about the government

:07:33. > :07:32.way to take account the views of way to take account the views

:07:33. > :07:43.local communities before they seek to increase charges. In May and

:07:44. > :07:46.constituency the local District Council has decided not to listen to

:07:47. > :07:56.views of local people, increase Parker and charges and the part --

:07:57. > :08:00.car parking charges has dropped by ?350,000, which shows why it is so

:08:01. > :08:04.important to consult local people, listen very carefully to what they

:08:05. > :08:08.say because quite often the views of those local people and the views of

:08:09. > :08:14.those business owners are the views of those very people who are going

:08:15. > :08:21.to be using those car parts and depending on those car parts for

:08:22. > :08:24.their livelihoods. I thank the Minister for giving away and it is

:08:25. > :08:32.disappointing to hear that that council does not have the kind of

:08:33. > :08:35.pro-business leadership inhabiting 2008 and 2010. Would he reassured me

:08:36. > :08:39.that under this bill if it goes forward the government would not be

:08:40. > :08:42.bringing it forward in a way that would be making it easier to

:08:43. > :08:48.increase parking charges and this is purely about making it easier to

:08:49. > :08:54.vary downwards, so we don't have consultations if you want to pay

:08:55. > :09:02.less money. I can certainly reassure him that if a council, whether that

:09:03. > :09:07.was in Torbay or whether it was in Nuneaton or elsewhere in the

:09:08. > :09:09.country, did seek to increase the charges following the limitation of

:09:10. > :09:20.this bill they would certainly have to consult with local people before

:09:21. > :09:24.taking that decision. I can reassure my honourable friend for Torbay that

:09:25. > :09:29.the provisions that we have before us today will not be implemented on

:09:30. > :09:33.the day that it receives Royal assent. We want to make sure that we

:09:34. > :09:39.have some balance to this and that the powers created are practical and

:09:40. > :09:44.proportionate, to make sure that these measures work in practice

:09:45. > :09:49.prior to the laying of regulations we will consult with local

:09:50. > :09:55.authorities and the Local Government Association. We will also consult

:09:56. > :09:58.with the British parking Association and other interested organisations

:09:59. > :10:04.to ensure that there import important views are taken into

:10:05. > :10:09.account before the regulations are made. Furthermore, Parliamentary

:10:10. > :10:13.colleagues will have the opportunity to consider any regulations by the

:10:14. > :10:17.normal procedure is for secondary legislation. My department will also

:10:18. > :10:23.undertake a new burdens assessment to establish the administrative

:10:24. > :10:30.affect on local authorities of this duty to consult. We also believe

:10:31. > :10:37.that this is a measure that will strengthen local democracy by giving

:10:38. > :10:43.people and businesses have voice in decisions on car parking charges

:10:44. > :10:51.that impact on the vitality of any particular town centre. On that

:10:52. > :10:54.point, do you think it is the most practical way of local businesses,

:10:55. > :10:58.particularly when you have a business improvement district within

:10:59. > :11:02.a time, Halesowen is going through the process of becoming a business

:11:03. > :11:06.improvement district. Would he agree that is an appropriate forum for

:11:07. > :11:12.local businesses to express their views about parking and charges and

:11:13. > :11:17.its impact in town centres? As ever, my honourable friend for Hill to one

:11:18. > :11:24.makes a very pertinent point. I am glad to hear about the business

:11:25. > :11:29.improvement district that businesses in Halesowen are trying to bring

:11:30. > :11:33.forward. I am also glad to say the businesses in my constituency in

:11:34. > :11:36.Nuneaton are trying to do a very similar thing and bring broader

:11:37. > :11:42.business improvement district. I think that is an excellent vehicle

:11:43. > :11:44.for local businesses to be able to express the view over this type of

:11:45. > :11:54.issue. It will be an excellent vehicle also

:11:55. > :11:57.for the local authority, taking two into account the measures of this

:11:58. > :12:07.bill to use that for an as one of the important consul tees that

:12:08. > :12:15.should be consulted before parking charges are increased within a local

:12:16. > :12:18.authority area. I welcome the news that my honourable friend's

:12:19. > :12:26.department will be consulting on the issue of consultation and seeking

:12:27. > :12:34.views. I understand that that may take time. Is he able to give us end

:12:35. > :12:44.the indication as to the timescale on this bill? Does he think the

:12:45. > :12:48.aspect over car parking charges will be in place before Christmas, given

:12:49. > :12:51.that it has been called the Santa clause Bill? We have heard a great

:12:52. > :12:56.deal about Santa Claus, and I am not sure whether my honourable friend

:12:57. > :13:02.for Portsmouth bought the Santa decoration he came across in the

:13:03. > :13:06.House shop. But perhaps he did, on the basis that once the Santa clause

:13:07. > :13:09.Bill hopefully passes through this House, not wanted to tempt fate, he

:13:10. > :13:15.will be able to put it on his tree next year. He said he didn't want to

:13:16. > :13:18.tempt fate, and hopefully we will not be doing that today, but the

:13:19. > :13:25.honourable lady makes a good point and that would certainly be our

:13:26. > :13:27.intention, to make sure the measures in relation to areas being able to

:13:28. > :13:41.reduce their parking charges can be brought forward to enable the

:13:42. > :13:46.situation she mentions. Whilst I appreciate that there has been much

:13:47. > :13:53.talk in today's Bill around car parking, would my four agree that

:13:54. > :13:55.one of the biggest areas of contention for residents and local

:13:56. > :14:00.people without question with this bill will help is around our local

:14:01. > :14:04.hospitals, where we have huge problems around parking and the

:14:05. > :14:11.facility to allow a consultation with those local people will make

:14:12. > :14:18.sure we get some good results and good shortages put in place? I think

:14:19. > :14:23.that consultation is always important, and the two issues are

:14:24. > :14:27.interlinked in terms of the fact that many of the hospitals he

:14:28. > :14:34.mentions are situated in and around town centres, which can cause all

:14:35. > :14:40.sorts of pressures. In relation to a local authority's position, it can

:14:41. > :14:47.also have a beneficial effect if they are able to use the measures

:14:48. > :14:51.within this bill in a positive way that would seek to increase the

:14:52. > :14:56.number of people using their car parks if they decide to lower

:14:57. > :15:00.charges, which would then take pressure off other car parks. It is

:15:01. > :15:05.also an important point that there are many town centres where there

:15:06. > :15:10.are also many residents living around those town centre areas

:15:11. > :15:15.where, if the parking charges are not proportionate to the situation,

:15:16. > :15:21.people will often seek to park in the streets around a town centre and

:15:22. > :15:28.avoid using the car parks because it is easy to walk into the town

:15:29. > :15:35.centre, exacerbating the problems for people who live in these areas

:15:36. > :15:40.because often, by definition, a town centre is a historic place in a

:15:41. > :15:48.particular area. Generally, the properties around the town centre

:15:49. > :15:55.will usually date back quite a while in history, say, the end of the 19th

:15:56. > :16:00.century, beginning of the 20th century, when nobody had a car.

:16:01. > :16:04.Therefore, those streets were not built for cars and there is a lot of

:16:05. > :16:07.pressure in those streets for parking just amongst the residents

:16:08. > :16:14.themselves. The last thing those residents want is councils that hike

:16:15. > :16:21.parking charges up and could do that without consultation, when it would

:16:22. > :16:31.put more pressure on those streets and the parking arrangements there.

:16:32. > :16:41.So it is an important part of the bill to put in place a situation

:16:42. > :16:47.where councils will consult. Would my honourable friend confirm that

:16:48. > :16:52.the regulations also cover coach parking? There was a situation in

:16:53. > :16:57.one of my market towns, Helmsley, where coach parking charges were

:16:58. > :17:01.increased significantly, which then deterred tourist coaches from coming

:17:02. > :17:08.to that town, which is a renowned market town in a tourist

:17:09. > :17:13.destination. And that reduced the number of coaches coming to the

:17:14. > :17:16.town. We then ran a campaign and the local authority decided to remove

:17:17. > :17:21.those charges, which has helped tremendously in generating and

:17:22. > :17:24.attracting new visitors to the town. I would be interested to hear the

:17:25. > :17:32.minister's thoughts on whether this is covered also. Thank you, Madam

:17:33. > :17:39.Deputy Speaker. I noticed that I have cleared the public gallery!

:17:40. > :17:41.Which is an achievement in itself. As the honourable gentleman says on

:17:42. > :17:49.the opposition front bench, not for the first time! It is always good to

:17:50. > :17:53.be part of the legislative process where the honourable gentleman on

:17:54. > :18:01.the front bench opposite is in his place. In terms of Helmsley, that is

:18:02. > :18:09.an interesting example. They were the winner of the 2015 great British

:18:10. > :18:11.high street competition, a competition that I thought at the

:18:12. > :18:19.time would put paid to my ministerial career, because Helmsley

:18:20. > :18:24.was in the final with Chipping Norton, and Chipping Norton was the

:18:25. > :18:31.constituency of the former Prime Minister David Cameron. And when

:18:32. > :18:35.Helmsley beat Chipping Norton in the final, I thought my life might not

:18:36. > :18:39.be worth living. But I am glad to say that the former Prime Minister

:18:40. > :18:45.did not hold it against me in that sense. But Helmsley is an important

:18:46. > :18:53.example, because it is a place where a significant number of visitors go,

:18:54. > :19:07.and therefore there has to be provision for things like coaches

:19:08. > :19:13.and buses to park in those areas. The parking of buses in a bus

:19:14. > :19:19.station is possibly subject to a different situation. And this is

:19:20. > :19:27.something I will probably have to come back to my honourable friend

:19:28. > :19:30.about. But I would say that in those places, we certainly have a

:19:31. > :19:35.situation where there are many events that happen where local

:19:36. > :19:37.traders may be heartened if the local authority were to use the

:19:38. > :19:44.provisions that come from this bill once it becomes an act and reduce

:19:45. > :19:49.their car parking charges. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I

:19:50. > :19:54.would like to say that I believe good communication between local

:19:55. > :19:59.authorities and the public is vital for healthy democracy. This extends

:20:00. > :20:04.to local authorities being clear about the decision-making process.

:20:05. > :20:07.This means the public knowing why those decisions were taken,

:20:08. > :20:14.decisions that affect individuals and their communities, decisions

:20:15. > :20:26.that can have a profound effect on the lives and jobs of many people. I

:20:27. > :20:29.thank the minister and particularly the member in charge, the honourable

:20:30. > :20:33.member for Bosworth, for the comments they made in response to

:20:34. > :20:40.the new clause. As I said, I moved this to get clear what the purpose

:20:41. > :20:43.of this bill is and the procedures that would be created under it in

:20:44. > :20:46.relation to local authorities and what they would be able to do. I

:20:47. > :20:53.accept that it is right that there is a flexibility. The drive of this

:20:54. > :20:56.bill is to make it easier to vary parking charges downwards.

:20:57. > :20:59.Therefore, having heard the extensive reassurances provided by

:21:00. > :21:03.the member in charge, which were particularly persuasive he has

:21:04. > :21:06.succeeded in his goal. And having heard the reassurances from the

:21:07. > :21:11.minister, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Is it the pleasure of

:21:12. > :21:17.the House that new clause one be withdrawn? New clause one by Leif

:21:18. > :21:29.withdrawn. Consideration completed, third reading what they? -- what

:21:30. > :21:38.they? Now? Now. With your leave, I beg to move that this bill be read a

:21:39. > :21:47.third time. If you could just say now... ! David driven it. Thank you,

:21:48. > :21:51.Madam Deputy Speaker. I am so shocked to have got a bill through

:21:52. > :21:57.the proceedings at this House that I forgot the procedure which I know so

:21:58. > :22:07.well at the last moment. Thank you for guiding me correctly. As I beg

:22:08. > :22:14.to move this third reading, I would like to make a couple of brief

:22:15. > :22:25.remarks. It is a special moment for me to bring a bill to counter the

:22:26. > :22:29.third bill in the House of Commons. I had three criteria for a private

:22:30. > :22:32.member's bill. I to be sufficiently uncontroversial to pass through all

:22:33. > :22:37.stages in the two Houses of Parliament, and I have sat through

:22:38. > :22:42.seven parliaments in this house and seen many bills but the dust on a

:22:43. > :22:53.Friday. I did not want to join that club. That is why I have kept it to

:22:54. > :22:56.two clauses. Secondly, I wanted to have a national impact. Some

:22:57. > :22:59.selecting a bill, I didn't want something that was parochial, I

:23:00. > :23:03.wanted something that would make a difference across the country.

:23:04. > :23:07.Thirdly, I wanted something that would improve the lives of our

:23:08. > :23:14.constituents. To use the old-fashioned language, our duty is

:23:15. > :23:19.to improve the condition of the people. That is what they said in

:23:20. > :23:30.the 19th century. The modern translation is that our job is to

:23:31. > :23:34.make people's lives better. So if I am allowed to be called a second

:23:35. > :23:38.time, I might offer a few words of thanks, but at this point I will sit

:23:39. > :23:42.down and say again how delighted I am that colleagues have allowed this

:23:43. > :23:49.bill to third reading. The question is that the bill now be read for the

:23:50. > :23:55.third time. Andy Slaughter. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a

:23:56. > :23:58.pleasure to be here for the opposition to respond to the

:23:59. > :24:03.honourable gentleman's bill. I wish him success with it, as my

:24:04. > :24:12.honourable friend said at the second reading. It has the support and I am

:24:13. > :24:26.sure it will do as he says and bring pleasure around the country. I would

:24:27. > :24:29.say in response to the bill, check the new burdens money, make sure it

:24:30. > :24:35.is all there at the appropriate time. Having said that, unlike last

:24:36. > :24:42.week, when we spent some five hours looking at different stages of a

:24:43. > :24:51.bill, I would make two short observations. The honourable member

:24:52. > :24:53.for Torbay was making his interesting and somewhat lengthy

:24:54. > :25:00.comment earlier. He said two things I mildly disagree with. One is that

:25:01. > :25:06.local authorities can fill their boots with parking charges and use

:25:07. > :25:09.it for whatever they like. Now, the facility to charge money and other

:25:10. > :25:16.road traffic regulation act was tested in the case of outfield and

:25:17. > :25:22.Barnett, and the conclusion there by the learned judge Mr Justice Lang

:25:23. > :25:29.was that the 1984 act is not fiscal measure does not authorise the local

:25:30. > :25:35.authority to charge for parking in order to rate surplus revenue for

:25:36. > :25:44.other transport purposes, funded by the general fund. Some authorities

:25:45. > :25:50.connected to local traffic matters, I don't think it can simply be used

:25:51. > :25:54.for revenue. Just to help the honourable gentleman and bring a

:25:55. > :26:02.little bit of clarity, I think he's in what he says in terms of on

:26:03. > :26:07.street ticket revenue. But in terms of off-street car parking, there are

:26:08. > :26:08.no current restrictions on how off-street ticket revenue is spent

:26:09. > :26:18.by local authorities. I was interested that the bill does

:26:19. > :26:23.deal with both on street and off-street parking. The other matter

:26:24. > :26:29.that was mentioned by the honourable member for Torbay was that he can't

:26:30. > :26:34.envisage circumstances when he would get letters from people asking for

:26:35. > :26:40.parking charges to go up. That may well be true about council owned car

:26:41. > :26:43.parks and off-street parking, but of course often it is the case of on

:26:44. > :26:52.street parking but this is shared use between residents and those who

:26:53. > :26:58.are nonresident who wish to park the and pay and display. Quite often,

:26:59. > :27:06.charging is for the purposes of regulating the access between

:27:07. > :27:11.residents and visitors and in some cases residents to ask for certain

:27:12. > :27:18.levels of charge. I don't think it goes to the heart. The intention is

:27:19. > :27:23.to give flexibility to local authorities and to encourage them to

:27:24. > :27:30.more boring than raising them. I just make that point because these

:27:31. > :27:36.matters are often fraught for councils. I hope that councils to

:27:37. > :27:42.try to do a decent job in pleasing everybody. If they don't, they tend

:27:43. > :27:52.to get booted out. Having made those pettifogging remarks I am not going

:27:53. > :27:58.to prolong comments. As the responders says, he wants to make

:27:59. > :28:08.people better -- like that of the people around the country. This been

:28:09. > :28:19.the first matter of discussion on the bill for reducing child poverty.

:28:20. > :28:23.If I may have humbly say as someone who has a great deal of child

:28:24. > :28:36.poverty in the constituency which we could get onto that. I am absolutely

:28:37. > :28:39.pleased to be able to contribute to this debate than I would like to

:28:40. > :28:44.thank the honourable member for Bosworth for bringing forward this

:28:45. > :28:49.Private Members' Bill for what is now the third reading. This bill

:28:50. > :28:54.seeks to make provision for the procedure to be followed by local

:28:55. > :28:58.authorities when varying the charges to be paid for off-street parking

:28:59. > :29:04.and parking on designated highways. As it amends provision within the

:29:05. > :29:08.Road traffic act of 1984 in order to convince -- in order to consider the

:29:09. > :29:12.merits of this bill it is necessary to consider the existing powers that

:29:13. > :29:15.local authorities have with regards to parking and hide this bill

:29:16. > :29:24.differs from the existing regulation. Section 41 and 42 of the

:29:25. > :29:28.Road traffic act 1991 awarded new powers to local authorities to vary

:29:29. > :29:34.car parking charges at both designated on street parking places

:29:35. > :29:40.and in the off-street car parks, too. I understand that the

:29:41. > :29:43.discussions on the provision of what would be caught in the 1991 act were

:29:44. > :29:46.fairly limited and that the only debate came at the Lords report

:29:47. > :29:54.stage with the government introduced a new clause on off-street car

:29:55. > :30:01.parks. The then Transport Minister said the amendment applies to the

:30:02. > :30:04.variation of charges and off-street parking places. Local authorities

:30:05. > :30:07.prescribing charges and off-street parking places will in the future be

:30:08. > :30:14.able to very those charges subsequently by the simpler public

:30:15. > :30:17.notice procedure, to be presented by regulations made by the Secretary of

:30:18. > :30:22.State and subject to the negative resolution procedure instead of

:30:23. > :30:27.having to make a new parking order. The powers which were provided to

:30:28. > :30:35.the 1991 act are contained in sections 35 C and 46 a of the Road

:30:36. > :30:40.traffic regulation act of 1984 as amended. The current procedures

:30:41. > :30:43.regarding the ability of local authorities to amend parking charges

:30:44. > :30:48.are stipulated also through regulations 25 of the local

:30:49. > :30:59.authorities traffic orders procedure is in England and Wales, regulation

:31:00. > :31:04.1996, specifically SI 1996/2489. When seeking to either increase or

:31:05. > :31:08.decrease charges, these regulations require the local authorities to do

:31:09. > :31:13.so and to do the following. First of all they have to publish a notice of

:31:14. > :31:17.variation at least once in a newspaper which circulates within

:31:18. > :31:21.the area where the charges are to be opted at least 21 days before the

:31:22. > :31:27.proposed changes are due to come into effect. They also have two...

:31:28. > :31:31.The relevant notice Altima specify the date when it is due to come into

:31:32. > :31:36.force Ulster that must stipulate parking place the notice relates to

:31:37. > :31:42.and must outline the alterations to the charges which would take effect

:31:43. > :31:46.for each parking place. Finally, the local authority must take steps to

:31:47. > :31:51.ensure that copies of the notice are displayed in the affected areas and

:31:52. > :31:56.that these remain in a legible condition until the date when the

:31:57. > :32:00.changes come into effect. Through amending the existing powers of the

:32:01. > :32:06.Secretary of State sections 35 C and 46 a of the Road traffic act 1984,

:32:07. > :32:09.this bill revisits the current regulations and seeks to reduce the

:32:10. > :32:15.bureaucratic burden placed on local authorities who are seeking to

:32:16. > :32:18.reduce the parking charges. Furthermore, this bill allows a new

:32:19. > :32:22.condition that will mean that local authorities will need to consult if

:32:23. > :32:27.they are looking to increase the parking charges under an existing

:32:28. > :32:35.traffic order. The intention behind this bill is fairly clear. It seeks

:32:36. > :32:40.to give councils more flexibility to innovate with regards to the parking

:32:41. > :32:45.strategies and to make it easier for them to reduce car parking charges

:32:46. > :32:49.in order to react to particular circumstances or events, many of

:32:50. > :32:54.which we have already heard on the floor of the house today. As the

:32:55. > :32:58.honourable member for Bosworth has rightly pointed out, parking

:32:59. > :33:03.policies have the potential to enhance the economic viability of

:33:04. > :33:05.our high streets and that benefits to town centres and communities

:33:06. > :33:11.whose strike the correct talents when it comes to parking charges can

:33:12. > :33:19.be considerable. Before entering this House, I worked in the retail

:33:20. > :33:23.industry for 30 years, during which time I witnessed first-hand the

:33:24. > :33:28.impact that parking strategies can have on the High Street. The

:33:29. > :33:34.independent retailers and traders and small businesses which are the

:33:35. > :33:38.lifeblood of our town centres rely on a balanced parking policy, which

:33:39. > :33:42.promotes the regular turnover of parking spaces. It also must manage

:33:43. > :33:47.traffic flows successfully and it must ensure that the level of

:33:48. > :33:50.charges are reasonable and proportionate in relation to the

:33:51. > :33:58.retail offer which is available to consumers. My own local authority

:33:59. > :34:02.has sought to introduce a range of additional charges over recent years

:34:03. > :34:10.and has miserably failed to strike such a balance. A pointer will

:34:11. > :34:16.return to shortly. Before doing so, it is worth exploring the link

:34:17. > :34:20.between town centre prosperity and car parking provision in more

:34:21. > :34:25.detail. There are of course our plethora of different factors that

:34:26. > :34:30.the town centre. For this reason, it the town centre. For this reason, it

:34:31. > :34:33.is incredibly difficult to evidence a clear link between parking

:34:34. > :34:40.policies and success of town centres. In 2013 a number of

:34:41. > :34:45.different organisations, including the Association of town and city

:34:46. > :34:51.management, the British parking Association, Springboard research

:34:52. > :34:54.Ltd and parking downtown research International put together a report

:34:55. > :35:00.entitled rethink parking on the High Street. It was guidance parking

:35:01. > :35:05.provision in town and city centres. This report look to see what

:35:06. > :35:10.evidence could be collated and what could be learnt regarding the

:35:11. > :35:14.relationship between car parking provision and town centre success.

:35:15. > :35:20.Through analysing a range of information using a representative

:35:21. > :35:23.group of town centres and primary indicators, those factors which are

:35:24. > :35:29.judged that the largest impact on the health of the town centre, the

:35:30. > :35:33.report provides some preliminary evidence which suggests important

:35:34. > :35:37.trends and which provides a solid foundation for comprehensive

:35:38. > :35:52.research. Due to the wide range of variable factors at play, the method

:35:53. > :35:57.used in the report was tightly drawn to focus on a number of specific

:35:58. > :36:02.influences, for example instead of considering alterations of parking

:36:03. > :36:06.the report focuses specifically on the first two hours as it was felt

:36:07. > :36:12.that this would cover those who have partners shopping and woods

:36:13. > :36:15.eliminate other parking habits, such as commuter parking, from the

:36:16. > :36:18.information. The parking variables which are considered included the

:36:19. > :36:25.cost of parking and the quality of the spaces. In relation to the many

:36:26. > :36:30.different indicators of town centre performance, the report measured the

:36:31. > :36:35.two key statistics of the default and spend. Finally, the individual

:36:36. > :36:39.towns which were the subject of the report were carefully selected so as

:36:40. > :36:45.to provide a representative sample of town centre landscapes across the

:36:46. > :36:50.UK. Towns in each region were included in the span the entire

:36:51. > :36:59.retail hierarchy run major city to district centre level. As a

:37:00. > :37:02.consequence of these precise methods that were used and acknowledging

:37:03. > :37:08.that the variables that were chosen are only able to reflect part of

:37:09. > :37:13.this wide and complex picture, we have to be naturally cautious of any

:37:14. > :37:16.sparing this amount of the report sparing this amount of the report

:37:17. > :37:21.does suggest interesting finds and trends. Firstly, that the parking

:37:22. > :37:26.operators are providing parking provision that equates to the

:37:27. > :37:30.football levels achieved by the location. Secondly, that there is no

:37:31. > :37:37.clear relationship between car parking charges, that is set by

:37:38. > :37:40.parking orders for operators, and the quality offer of the location

:37:41. > :37:45.with some live range or smaller town centre potentially overcharging.

:37:46. > :37:49.Finally, that the mid-range and smaller groupings of centres that

:37:50. > :37:54.charge more than the national average with regard to theirs offers

:37:55. > :38:00.suffer a higher than higher average decline in football in 2011, the

:38:01. > :38:03.year the information was collected. Whilst we have to be cautious and

:38:04. > :38:07.acknowledge that this is not conclusive evidence that the cost of

:38:08. > :38:11.parking has a tangible influence on town centre prosperity, it does open

:38:12. > :38:19.up an avenue for further research and it conforms to the common-sense

:38:20. > :38:23.opinion with regard to the likelihood of the existence of a

:38:24. > :38:26.link. Indeed, the fact that the report suggest that town centres

:38:27. > :38:32.with higher than average parking costs showed an average decline in

:38:33. > :38:38.2011 will hardly come as a surprise to most. It is evident that further

:38:39. > :38:44.research is required before it can be categorically stated that any

:38:45. > :38:48.such link exists. Furthermore, this tale of any detrimental impact than

:38:49. > :38:53.higher than average parking costs may have the High Street and habits

:38:54. > :38:58.of consumers is also unknown and requires additional investigation.

:38:59. > :39:03.Each town centre is unique and is exposed the widely different

:39:04. > :39:08.external factors and so what is true in one context may not be

:39:09. > :39:12.demonstrated in another. I ever, the initial trend as suggested by this

:39:13. > :39:20.report certainly should act as a wake-up call for local authorities

:39:21. > :39:27.up and down the country. The very point leads me onto the record of my

:39:28. > :39:30.own local authority, Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council, who

:39:31. > :39:35.have had a chequered history when it comes to implementing parking

:39:36. > :39:38.charges. During the second reading of this bill a few months ago I

:39:39. > :39:43.challenge the notion that local authorities do not use car parking

:39:44. > :39:50.charges as a means of generating additional revenue. Now whilst I am

:39:51. > :39:54.not placed to comment on the choices that other local authorities have

:39:55. > :39:59.made over the last few years, I can say a few words about Calderdale's

:40:00. > :40:04.unflattering record in this regard. In 2012 the Cabinet of Calderdale

:40:05. > :40:11.Council approved a raft of additional car parking charges. The

:40:12. > :40:19.title of the paper was the parking income generation study. And the

:40:20. > :40:24.first line of the report unashamedly made it explicitly clear that the

:40:25. > :40:32.intention of the proposals was to generate additional revenue from

:40:33. > :40:36.parking. The proposals included a wide-ranging additional charges were

:40:37. > :40:42.parking was free up to then added into generate an extra ?800,000 per

:40:43. > :40:48.annum. Some of the measures outlined in the report were a genuine temp

:40:49. > :40:53.two manage existing parking and traffic difficulties, including

:40:54. > :40:55.long-standing problems around Calderdale Royal Hospital for

:40:56. > :41:02.example, many of the proposals the areas where there was no

:41:03. > :41:06.identifiable problems of parking or traffic management. Such measures

:41:07. > :41:10.included the introduction of evening car parking charges in car parks

:41:11. > :41:16.which were previously free in the small market towns and villages of

:41:17. > :41:22.my constituency, such as Brighouse, Wrekenton and West feel. As members

:41:23. > :41:29.will be aware, local authorities are only allowed to spend parking income

:41:30. > :41:33.on certain things. Section 55 of the Road traffic regulations act of 1984

:41:34. > :41:38.as amended is the relevant piece of legislation here. It states that the

:41:39. > :41:41.local authority shall keep an open account of their income and

:41:42. > :41:50.expenditure in respect of parking places for which they are at the

:41:51. > :41:53.local authority. Sections 55 subsection two and subsection four

:41:54. > :41:54.other particularly prevalent parts that other what a surplus may be

:41:55. > :42:04.spent on. These are where the council has

:42:05. > :42:16.previously used money from a general fund to pay back money, meeting

:42:17. > :42:24.parts of costs of provision of parking accommodation. If it appears

:42:25. > :42:26.that the provision of further off-street accommodation is

:42:27. > :42:30.unnecessary or undesirable for the following purposes, meeting costs

:42:31. > :42:35.incurred whether by the local authority or some other person in

:42:36. > :42:38.the local transport services. The purposes of highway or road

:42:39. > :42:42.improvement projects in the local authority's area, in the case of

:42:43. > :42:50.London authorities, meeting costs incurred by the authority in respect

:42:51. > :42:53.of the maintenance of roads. The purposes of environmental

:42:54. > :42:56.improvement in the local area and finally, they can use money in the

:42:57. > :43:02.case of such local authorities as may be prescribed for any other

:43:03. > :43:09.purposes for which the authority may lawfully incur expenditure around

:43:10. > :43:12.parking. Of course, some of these charges which are implemented by

:43:13. > :43:16.local authorities fit more comfortably than others within the

:43:17. > :43:20.remit of legislation in section 55. In the examples given a few moments

:43:21. > :43:25.ago within my own local authority, it could be argued that while the

:43:26. > :43:29.measures to address problem parking issues around a busy hospital for

:43:30. > :43:34.within both the letter and the spirit of the law, the proposals to

:43:35. > :43:39.cash in on the lucrative market of evening parking charges in a busy

:43:40. > :43:46.town centre are more questionable and difficult to justify. Local

:43:47. > :43:50.authorities such as Calderdale will, I suspect, continue to try to defend

:43:51. > :43:59.their actions in increasing parking charges. However tenuous the links

:44:00. > :44:02.with a genuine desire to improve traffic situations in the area. The

:44:03. > :44:07.judgment which has already been mentioned by the right honourable

:44:08. > :44:12.member opposite in the case of Attfield and Barnet council

:44:13. > :44:17.clarified the position where local authorities seek to use their powers

:44:18. > :44:22.to charge local residents for parking explicitly in order to raise

:44:23. > :44:27.surplus revenue for other transport purposes funded by the General fund.

:44:28. > :44:32.In making her judgment against Barnet Council, Mrs Justice Lang

:44:33. > :44:37.said that the council cannot set out with the objective of raising

:44:38. > :44:48.parking charges in order to generate a surplus to fund other transport

:44:49. > :44:52.schemes. David Attfield was able to win the case because the council was

:44:53. > :44:56.open about increasing charges to provide revenue. The Cabinet

:44:57. > :45:00.committee paper I alluded to earlier is produced by Calderdale Council

:45:01. > :45:04.was frequently explicit in its overt intention to raise charges to

:45:05. > :45:10.provide additional revenue. So I suspect that had this proposal been

:45:11. > :45:13.formally challenged in the courts, a similar outcome to the verdict in

:45:14. > :45:18.Attfield and Barnet may have been reached. Residents and community

:45:19. > :45:21.groups, not to mention opposition councils and local authorities

:45:22. > :45:27.across the country, may wish to pay attention to the ways in which local

:45:28. > :45:31.authorities attempt to justify such increases in the future, as I am

:45:32. > :45:37.sure Barnet Council is not unique in seeking to use motorists as cash

:45:38. > :45:42.cows. In the absence of any further legal challenges to the practices of

:45:43. > :45:45.local authority, it is down to residents and councillors to hold

:45:46. > :45:51.local politicians to account. The additional charges I mentioned in

:45:52. > :45:55.Calderdale that were improved in 2012 formally took effect in 2014.

:45:56. > :45:59.Within months, the discontent of local residents and businesses who

:46:00. > :46:03.were adversely affected by the charges had triggered opposition

:46:04. > :46:08.councillors to hold a vote of no-confidence in the ruling Labour

:46:09. > :46:12.administration and the council. The vote was carried and within weeks of

:46:13. > :46:15.the new parking meters being installed, they were removed once

:46:16. > :46:20.again on the orders of the new Conservative-led administration.

:46:21. > :46:28.That is just one example of local democracy in action. However, such

:46:29. > :46:31.is the nature of the finely balanced political landscape of Calderdale

:46:32. > :46:36.Council that a few years later, the same Labour Cabinet once again were

:46:37. > :46:40.in control and they are now seeking to reimpose many of the same

:46:41. > :46:49.additional parking charges once again. The latest proposals for

:46:50. > :46:53.additional charges affect a number of local towns including Brickhouse,

:46:54. > :46:58.where the local business group have worked incredibly hard to

:46:59. > :47:02.reinvigorate the town centre and to increase footfall. The efforts of

:47:03. > :47:11.the traders in Brickhouse have seen town centre flourish and it runs

:47:12. > :47:14.several farmers' markets every year, which bring people from across the

:47:15. > :47:18.country. To the dismay of the traders, the residents and local

:47:19. > :47:25.councillors, the counsellor seeking to impose on street parking charges

:47:26. > :47:29.in the town centre despite it being widely acknowledged that there are

:47:30. > :47:33.no problems with the flow of traffic, nor with the turnover of

:47:34. > :47:38.parking spaces for consumers. To say the local business community are

:47:39. > :47:40.furious is an understatement. The traders are rightly concerned about

:47:41. > :47:44.the damaging effect that these proposals could have upon their

:47:45. > :47:50.businesses and their livelihoods and despite making their feelings known

:47:51. > :47:54.to the council, the local Labour politicians seem content to proceed

:47:55. > :48:01.with their plans regardless of the scale of any opposition. This bill

:48:02. > :48:04.makes provision for local authorities to consult interested

:48:05. > :48:08.parties if they are seeking to increase the cost of parking

:48:09. > :48:15.charges, to ensure the impacts of the towns are fully considered. This

:48:16. > :48:21.can only be a positive step forward. Local businesses, residents and

:48:22. > :48:27.councillors understand their own town centres and communities. They

:48:28. > :48:32.are the ones who can recognise which measures will work and how their

:48:33. > :48:36.local high street can be properly managed. It is a right that they are

:48:37. > :48:41.consulted on any potential increases in charges and that detailed

:48:42. > :48:46.consideration is given the impacts of such proposals on their town

:48:47. > :48:51.centres. I appreciate that many local authorities will engage in

:48:52. > :48:55.thorough consultation with their communities when it comes to such

:48:56. > :49:02.issues, and I applaud them for doing so. But let me assure members that

:49:03. > :49:05.this does not happen everywhere, so I wholeheartedly welcome the

:49:06. > :49:09.provision within this bill to ensure that local communities are involved

:49:10. > :49:14.in the decision-making process. I am sure that local communities such as

:49:15. > :49:18.Brighouse will also welcome this measure and the opportunities it

:49:19. > :49:22.will present to them to ensure that their views are taken into

:49:23. > :49:26.consideration. During the second reading of this bill, the honourable

:49:27. > :49:31.member from Royton, the opposition spokesman, raised questions in

:49:32. > :49:38.relation to how the consultation process might work. He is correct in

:49:39. > :49:41.that further detail with relation to the consultation process is indeed

:49:42. > :49:44.required, and I trust that my honourable friend the member for

:49:45. > :49:51.Nuneaton will elaborate upon this point later. As well as making

:49:52. > :49:55.provision for consulting local communities, this bill also seeks to

:49:56. > :49:59.make it easier for local authorities to lower their parking charges to

:50:00. > :50:04.promote the economic viability of town centres. Specifically, it makes

:50:05. > :50:10.provision for a reduction in charges without the need for the current 21

:50:11. > :50:13.days' notice. This reform will provide local authorities with the

:50:14. > :50:18.flexibility to react more quickly to changes and the ability to innovate

:50:19. > :50:23.in providing additional support town centres. Many of the market towns

:50:24. > :50:28.within my constituency, such as Hebden Bridge, are still getting

:50:29. > :50:37.back on their feet following the devastating floods they experienced

:50:38. > :50:40.on Boxing Day in 2015. And just as a note, Hebden Bridge won the small

:50:41. > :50:45.market town category of the great British high street awards last

:50:46. > :50:50.year. And that is despite the flooding, so well done to them. Many

:50:51. > :50:55.of the businesses within these towns struggled in the months after the

:50:56. > :50:59.floods, when footfall on the high street was significantly reduced.

:51:00. > :51:03.This proposal would have allowed the local authority flexibility of

:51:04. > :51:09.quickly deciding how car parking charges in those towns could have

:51:10. > :51:14.been used as a tool to support local businesses. Ideas such as free

:51:15. > :51:23.parking on certain days or unlimited -- a limited production dock I will

:51:24. > :51:30.give way. Just on that point flexibility and a local authority

:51:31. > :51:33.being able to reduce car parking charges to reflect a situation like

:51:34. > :51:38.the flooding, would my honourable friend agree that another advantage

:51:39. > :51:42.of that would be, when you have an issue such as flooding, those

:51:43. > :51:47.volunteers that come from outside to help those communities through a

:51:48. > :51:50.difficult patch, and one of my local councillors had a collection of

:51:51. > :51:56.materials to help in that situation, it would have been a great gesture

:51:57. > :52:03.for the council to be able to make? I would like to thank my honourable

:52:04. > :52:08.friend for her interjection. One of the great points about the floods

:52:09. > :52:11.was that it was not the dozens of volunteers that game, but we had

:52:12. > :52:20.thousands of people come to the Calder Valley, as no doubt other

:52:21. > :52:22.areas did as well. And the outpouring of support for our

:52:23. > :52:26.communities at that time from the whole of the UK, we had people

:52:27. > :52:33.coming from Cornwall and even overseas to help, firemen and people

:52:34. > :52:40.bringing food, mops, buckets, cleaning materials. You are right,

:52:41. > :52:44.it is about giving something back to those people, for example a free car

:52:45. > :52:52.parking. It is a small gesture compared to the huge support they

:52:53. > :52:58.gave us at that awful time. But as I have said, ideas such as parking on

:52:59. > :53:06.certain days for free or limited reductions in charges could have

:53:07. > :53:10.been considered. Measures such as these would have provided traders in

:53:11. > :53:17.these towns with a boost at the time that they were struggling to attract

:53:18. > :53:24.footfall. We don't want football, because we haven't got a football

:53:25. > :53:27.pitch! It is now over 12 months since the flooding hit the Calder

:53:28. > :53:34.Valley, and the effects of the floods are still being felt by many

:53:35. > :53:37.businesses. One of the main gateways to the town centre of a limp was

:53:38. > :53:43.destroyed by the floods and still remains closed to traffic, in effect

:53:44. > :53:50.cutting the town of Elland in half, very similar to what we have seen in

:53:51. > :53:54.other places. Traders and small businesses in Elland have struggled

:53:55. > :53:57.with significantly lower levels of footfall in the past year, not least

:53:58. > :54:01.as a consequence of the closure of that bridge. Under this bill, the

:54:02. > :54:05.local authority could have sought to introduce an imaginative strategy to

:54:06. > :54:10.bring people to the town. This would have provided a huge lift to the

:54:11. > :54:15.traders and the community and would have been a clear signal that the

:54:16. > :54:18.town was open for business. It is vital that councils have the

:54:19. > :54:23.flexibility to reduce or suspend charges at short notice to still

:54:24. > :54:27.elect the high street. Sometimes, this may be in relation to

:54:28. > :54:32.exceptional circumstances such as those I have alluded to. On other

:54:33. > :54:35.occasions, it may be to support a community event or festival, such as

:54:36. > :54:41.reducing charges in the run-up to Christmas trading. Furthermore, it

:54:42. > :54:44.will allow councils to experiment and innovate. In many towns, there

:54:45. > :54:49.is a significant difference between the levels of occupation in

:54:50. > :54:53.different car parks and on street parking bays within the same

:54:54. > :54:57.locality. This bill will allow councils to develop temporary

:54:58. > :55:05.incentives to increase the awareness of underutilised assets and to see

:55:06. > :55:11.which parking strategy is best suited to areas within a town.

:55:12. > :55:15.Requiring 21 days' notice for the announcement to be published in a

:55:16. > :55:20.local paper in the area is both over bureaucratic and unnecessary in this

:55:21. > :55:29.day and age. When the council is competing with the private sector,

:55:30. > :55:33.as in many areas it also puts them at a significant competitive

:55:34. > :55:42.disadvantage, as private firms can currently vary charges as they see

:55:43. > :55:45.fit. With the honourable gentleman agree that it is right that there

:55:46. > :55:48.are some restrictions in terms of making it more difficult for

:55:49. > :55:52.councils to deal with the sort of rapacious behaviour described by his

:55:53. > :55:58.own counsel when the Labour Party are in charge of it? My honourable

:55:59. > :56:02.friend is correct. I refer back to the fact that I spent 30 years in

:56:03. > :56:07.retail. I know from my experience that when there is a proper parking

:56:08. > :56:12.strategy in place, it benefits everybody. I remember one store in

:56:13. > :56:17.particular that I worked for, Wilkinson 's home and garden stores,

:56:18. > :56:26.when I was a general manager in their store in Bury in the cache. --

:56:27. > :56:34.in Lancashire. When the council there put a strategy in place for a

:56:35. > :56:39.car park next 's, business increased by 15%, a significant uplift, just

:56:40. > :56:42.by getting the car parking strategy right. So my honourable friend is

:56:43. > :56:49.right. By getting the strategy and making sure that we have a proper,

:56:50. > :56:53.open and honest debate about what can benefit all parts of towns,

:56:54. > :56:58.whether it is the high street or the local hospital area, it can make a

:56:59. > :56:59.huge difference not only to business, but also to residents and

:57:00. > :57:11.people coming to the town. I thank the honourable member for

:57:12. > :57:16.giving way. It seems to me that he is being more than a bit partisan

:57:17. > :57:19.here. Is he aware it is often Conservative controlled councils

:57:20. > :57:24.which make the most money from parking across the UK? I have looked

:57:25. > :57:29.at the Independent newspaper for December 2000 15. They say

:57:30. > :57:37.Westminster Council made an astonishing 46.4 million that year.

:57:38. > :57:43.I would like to thank the honourable gentleman for his intervention. I

:57:44. > :57:49.think I said earlier in my speech that actually those councils that do

:57:50. > :57:53.it well are welcome. Sadly there are far too many and in my case, in my

:57:54. > :57:57.own experience in a Labour-controlled council in

:57:58. > :58:03.Calderdale, they have openly admitted it. As did Barnett, who

:58:04. > :58:09.went to court, they were taken to court, that they use it as a cash

:58:10. > :58:12.cow. That is why I was not being particularly partisan but pointing

:58:13. > :58:16.out the mere fact Calderdale is a Labour-controlled council but were

:58:17. > :58:26.honest enough to say they were using it as a cash cow. I will give way. I

:58:27. > :58:31.made an early intervention that by trying to use comparators in central

:58:32. > :58:34.London to the rest of the country is ridiculous. The reason why

:58:35. > :58:40.Westminster Council makes a lot out of parking is because it is in the

:58:41. > :58:44.very centre of London. As always my honourable friend makes a valid

:58:45. > :58:50.point. Whether it is London, centre of Manchester, Birmingham or indeed

:58:51. > :58:56.leads, the strategies they will have in place compared to what they would

:58:57. > :59:01.have in small villages like Brighouse would be entirely

:59:02. > :59:07.different. He is absolutely right. I will give way to the honourable

:59:08. > :59:11.member. His experience contrasts with my experiences with our local

:59:12. > :59:15.Conservative council, this is not a political point but it reflects, I

:59:16. > :59:21.believe, a very pro-business culture in that council. One of our market

:59:22. > :59:27.towns in Thirsk have introduced a scheme in the market square car park

:59:28. > :59:31.with the first hour free, which has increased the turnover of shoppers

:59:32. > :59:39.and parkers. As I think he related to in his first remarks. He makes an

:59:40. > :59:42.incredibly valid point. As a retailer it is vitally important

:59:43. > :59:47.that when a local resident is popping down to the town centre to

:59:48. > :59:53.get a pint of milk or a loaf of bread, the essentials we need for

:59:54. > :59:59.daily living, that they can do so at absolute ease. And an excellent car

:00:00. > :00:04.parking strategy would be one that allows people to do that as fluidly

:00:05. > :00:09.and as quickly as they possibly can. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, high

:00:10. > :00:14.streets and town centres continue to play a fundamental role in the lives

:00:15. > :00:21.of our communities and parking is one of those factors which is most

:00:22. > :00:23.able to shape the success. If local authorities can get the correct

:00:24. > :00:30.balance, a successful parking strategy can bring visitors. And

:00:31. > :00:33.just on that point I would say, I mentioned the Brighouse business

:00:34. > :00:39.initiative earlier, how they do farmers markets in our area. One of

:00:40. > :00:44.the things they do every year is a massive 1940s we can. It brings

:00:45. > :00:50.about 200,000 people, additional people, in. That is how initiatives

:00:51. > :00:57.in town centres can really bring in footfall. Car parking plays a vital

:00:58. > :01:02.role in that. It helps to reinvigorate a town centre, as well.

:01:03. > :01:05.Certainly if the local council gets it wrong, a town centre can

:01:06. > :01:09.experience an all too different result. Where local authorities seek

:01:10. > :01:14.to support the high street by reducing charges, this Bill will

:01:15. > :01:19.facilitate them and give them the flexibility to do so. If they adopt

:01:20. > :01:22.a different approach and seek to raise charges, this Bill ensures

:01:23. > :01:27.local people and businesses are properly consulted and the impact on

:01:28. > :01:33.the town is fully considered before any changes are made. This Bill,

:01:34. > :01:38.Madam Deputy is bigger, has the potential to make a lasting positive

:01:39. > :01:42.impact upon our town centres, and I wholeheartedly support the intention

:01:43. > :01:45.behind it. I welcome the fact the Government and opposition have

:01:46. > :01:48.suggested they will support the Bill and I commenced the honourable

:01:49. > :01:53.member for Bosworth for bringing it before the House. The very final

:01:54. > :01:58.point I will make before I sit down is a message to the Minister, just

:01:59. > :02:07.to point out that whilst he has a great knack of HMV Gallery, if you

:02:08. > :02:14.would like to have a look at, the gallery is almost full. -- playing

:02:15. > :02:17.to the gallery. I would also like to add my congratulations to the

:02:18. > :02:21.honourable member for Bosworth for I think achieving his goal, which I

:02:22. > :02:26.think is incredibly simple, but also really makes a lot of common sense.

:02:27. > :02:33.The importance of this Bill is not to be underestimated. Certainly

:02:34. > :02:38.Derby City Council in the last five years have made around ?20 million

:02:39. > :02:43.from parking and fines. But for me what this does is actually enables,

:02:44. > :02:47.instead of the money just going to parking and focusing on parking, it

:02:48. > :02:54.actually enables us to look at what we should be doing to the city and

:02:55. > :03:01.city regeneration and making it better and easier for people to come

:03:02. > :03:05.in and use our cities wisely. So the provision, I think, is rightly to

:03:06. > :03:11.aim for the flexibility. This is something of particular importance

:03:12. > :03:16.to do this, to try to get people coming into our cities more often.

:03:17. > :03:21.We have mentioned before the great British high-street awards and in

:03:22. > :03:27.actual fact, the Cathedral Quarter in Derby won it last year, the

:03:28. > :03:32.high-street of the year award. We are very proud of that. It is not to

:03:33. > :03:39.be underestimated how we did that, because we took a challenge, which

:03:40. > :03:44.was a centre which was built, a new centre, built ten years ago, which

:03:45. > :03:49.at the time took away the business from other parts of the city and

:03:50. > :03:54.offered parking and shopping all in one place. Whereas now what we have

:03:55. > :03:58.managed to do is regenerate two other parts of the city, we are

:03:59. > :04:04.working on that and parking plays a significant part in that. And

:04:05. > :04:09.certainly one of the things I would look to encourage is the flexibility

:04:10. > :04:14.councils can offer in terms of looking at other things they can do

:04:15. > :04:19.in terms of having one Saturday per month where they offer cheaper

:04:20. > :04:23.parking to go to certain areas, or indeed, could they have free parking

:04:24. > :04:28.at night, or one hour in the morning, as one of my honourable

:04:29. > :04:33.friend 's mentioned? I think this is a great opportunity. I certainly

:04:34. > :04:41.think this is something we should absolutely consider. The work of the

:04:42. > :04:46.bid, and we have spoken about it before, is not going to be

:04:47. > :04:52.underestimated, because they have a challenge in terms of getting people

:04:53. > :04:55.who would normally want to have convenience shopping to actually

:04:56. > :04:59.take advantage of places not in our shopping centre. Therefore one of

:05:00. > :05:06.the ways they can do this is by having very reasonable and

:05:07. > :05:10.convenient parking. So people will think this is destination shopping

:05:11. > :05:15.where they can go, Park readily, get out of their car, they know it will

:05:16. > :05:20.be reasonable and they can go and do their shopping. This is where I

:05:21. > :05:25.think we can help, certainly small businesses, to do that. And we can

:05:26. > :05:30.encourage a two centre shopping experience as opposed to the one

:05:31. > :05:35.centre shopping experience was seeming to dominate at one point. I

:05:36. > :05:42.also think one of the things we take great advantage of in Derby is the

:05:43. > :05:48.use of events. We have the Derby test, which is very well attended,

:05:49. > :05:52.with people performing in the street, we also have Christmas

:05:53. > :05:59.markets, farmers markets, all of which we are trying to regenerate in

:06:00. > :06:03.an area in Derby for people to come and enjoy and seek entertainment.

:06:04. > :06:08.Clearly one of the things that should be done on these events is to

:06:09. > :06:13.offer a parking offer as well, to make it more attractive for people

:06:14. > :06:19.to be able to come along and attend these events. Because there is a

:06:20. > :06:25.danger that people tend to go to the shopping centre, park there and not

:06:26. > :06:32.then get out of the centre to go to other places where they will find

:06:33. > :06:37.and have entertainment. So responding to local needs is exactly

:06:38. > :06:42.what we need to do. And I certainly see this as a great opportunity for

:06:43. > :06:44.us. One of the things we are also trying to do is encourage people to

:06:45. > :06:51.walk from one destination to another. At the moment that isn't

:06:52. > :06:55.happening because you can have a cheaper offer in our centres,

:06:56. > :06:59.meaning people are parking in the centres and staying in the centres.

:07:00. > :07:05.Whereas if we had a cheaper parking outside of the centres, say in the

:07:06. > :07:09.Cathedral Quarter or Saint Peter 's quarter, that would mean people are

:07:10. > :07:13.able to park there and then go and explore other parts of our great

:07:14. > :07:17.city. Or indeed go to the market Hall where they can experience the

:07:18. > :07:24.delights of the Derby pie clips, which I can recommend to many

:07:25. > :07:32.people. If you do not know what that is it is a flattened crumpet. Like

:07:33. > :07:38.my honourable friend for Calder Valley, I have been in retail, I was

:07:39. > :07:43.in retail before I came here for over 30 years and it is not to be

:07:44. > :07:48.underestimated the value retail can actually have on our economy. And

:07:49. > :07:52.certainly the Federation of small businesses have highlighted the

:07:53. > :07:56.parking charges as one of the main issues discouraging shoppers from

:07:57. > :08:00.visiting traditional high streets. For me one of the most important

:08:01. > :08:03.things we can do is try and regenerate these traditional high

:08:04. > :08:10.street is, get people back and using them. And dependence, as well. I

:08:11. > :08:18.think these parking charges will definitely be in courage in that. --

:08:19. > :08:22.dependents. -- encouraging that. I think again what we need to do is

:08:23. > :08:27.make it as easy and attractive as possible for people to visit the

:08:28. > :08:32.high-street and cities instead of sitting and doing online shopping

:08:33. > :08:35.and it is automatically delivered to your door. Because what we are

:08:36. > :08:40.trying to do as well, certainly in Derby city, and I suspect in a lot

:08:41. > :08:44.of other city centres as well is to have not only a daytime economy we

:08:45. > :08:49.are boosting, but a night-time economy, as well. It would be lovely

:08:50. > :08:54.if we could see people walking along the high-street, having a bit of a

:08:55. > :09:00.cafe culture that you see and taking part in what is the richness of our

:09:01. > :09:06.Cathedral city. In my time as an MP I have taken part in small-business

:09:07. > :09:14.Saturday each year and gunships in some of our local shops. And I have

:09:15. > :09:17.to say... Done shifts in some of our local shops. We need to do

:09:18. > :09:22.everything we can to get people to come to these shops. If we can get

:09:23. > :09:25.people parking resolutely and easily and get them through the door they

:09:26. > :09:30.will see the offer that is available is something unique and interesting.

:09:31. > :09:34.And also something to certainly being courage. I will give way to

:09:35. > :09:43.the honourable member. -- encouraged. Would she also agree

:09:44. > :09:48.that one of the things of the high streets have is a small independent

:09:49. > :09:53.trader? Which is what business Saturday is all about. And in those

:09:54. > :09:57.shops very often you get a different offer that he would not necessarily

:09:58. > :10:03.get on the Internet. You also get that personal service. And actually,

:10:04. > :10:08.that is something worth having. So anything we can do to attract people

:10:09. > :10:14.to enjoy our towns and cities and use that as leveraged, we must

:10:15. > :10:20.encourage. Absolutely. As I mentioned earlier, we have just won

:10:21. > :10:23.a high-street award. One of the reasons is that in the Cathedral

:10:24. > :10:27.Quarter we have a unique offer in terms of shops that are available. I

:10:28. > :10:33.would like to mention one of them which I think is a good way forward,

:10:34. > :10:36.where a group of designers all get together and they all offer goods in

:10:37. > :10:40.their shop, all very individually designed and then they take a turn

:10:41. > :10:47.in working and selling those products. I think that is very

:10:48. > :10:51.innovative. It is also inspirational and draws people in because you

:10:52. > :10:56.would not get that as an example in our shopping centre. So absolutely,

:10:57. > :11:02.I completely agree with my honourable friend. The private

:11:03. > :11:07.sector has such an important part to play in this and again I think this

:11:08. > :11:14.is why we should definitely... Of course I will. She makes a point

:11:15. > :11:18.about the private sector and it is so important local authorities

:11:19. > :11:23.consult with the private sector. Yet in York when I first located a

:11:24. > :11:26.business and in our head offices, the council sold the car parks and

:11:27. > :11:31.raised the charges on the remaining car parks. Really destroyed a lot of

:11:32. > :11:36.the independent retailers in that city. Because at the same time they

:11:37. > :11:42.were giving consent for out of town shopping centres, of which the rock

:11:43. > :11:46.four around York, and then they gained from huge contributions back

:11:47. > :11:49.into the council coppers, it is really anti-business in terms of

:11:50. > :11:52.what is she says is the really important independent retailers in

:11:53. > :12:04.our towns and city centres. Having been not just in retail but

:12:05. > :12:11.an avid shopper for 30 years, I have on many occasions visited York. It

:12:12. > :12:16.is a shame. Shopping centres do have their place, but we need to work in

:12:17. > :12:21.partnership and make sure that we have two offers. As I mentioned

:12:22. > :12:25.earlier, it is two almost defined destinations. One will be the

:12:26. > :12:28.shopping centre and the other will be the independent retailers with a

:12:29. > :12:33.very different for that is available. By allowing councils like

:12:34. > :12:37.derby the freedom to set their parking charges on a more flexible

:12:38. > :12:42.basis, we can allow local knowledge to have an impact on the local

:12:43. > :12:53.understanding in terms of meeting local demand. At the same time, I

:12:54. > :12:57.think it is relevant that the local authority needs to consult in terms

:12:58. > :13:05.of whether they increase parking charges. They need to be given the

:13:06. > :13:13.opportunity to consider whether the pay increase is correct and also

:13:14. > :13:17.allow local people and businesses to be consulted in terms of whether it

:13:18. > :13:24.is appropriate. Whilst I acknowledge that they still will be able to put

:13:25. > :13:30.up prices if they choose, the opportunity to have that discussion

:13:31. > :13:33.is important. That will mean there won't be any surprises and people

:13:34. > :13:39.will at least know if prices are going up and it will allow

:13:40. > :13:50.businesses and consumers to take note of that.

:13:51. > :13:57.Finally, from my point of view, I fully support this sensible bill

:13:58. > :14:08.that is being put forward. I can't emphasise enough the need for us to

:14:09. > :14:14.keep supporting these retailers and independents and to keep encouraging

:14:15. > :14:21.entrepreneurship. Parking is such a simple, effective way of encouraging

:14:22. > :14:25.people to come into our city centres and see what the offerings. To

:14:26. > :14:31.conclude, I give my full support to this bill. I think its provisions

:14:32. > :14:36.are long overdue. It is one of these things that surprises me. Why hasn't

:14:37. > :14:42.it been brought forward before? It makes so much sense. I think these

:14:43. > :14:48.changes will be positive for villages, towns and cities up and

:14:49. > :14:52.down the country. James Morris. I would also like to congratulate the

:14:53. > :14:57.honourable member for Bosworth. This bill has the virtue of being very

:14:58. > :15:01.simple, and I think that matches his criteria. It will also meet the

:15:02. > :15:10.other criteria he laid out, so I welcome this bill and rise to

:15:11. > :15:14.support third reading of it. High streets across the UK are under

:15:15. > :15:20.pressure from a shift in spending from physical shops to online stop

:15:21. > :15:25.there were 15 shop closures a day across the UK in the first half of

:15:26. > :15:32.2016. And the number of new openings has fallen to the lowest level for

:15:33. > :15:36.five years. That is why local authorities need to be able to do

:15:37. > :15:45.all they can to help support local high streets and shops. And this

:15:46. > :15:50.bill, with its simple implementation of new provisions, will give local

:15:51. > :15:58.councils like mine the flexibility to help. I know from my own

:15:59. > :16:04.constituency the problems local businesses are facing. Halesowen,

:16:05. > :16:08.Craig Lee heath and Blackheath have important high streets within my

:16:09. > :16:12.constituency that have a wide variety of shops, places of worship

:16:13. > :16:21.Tom local services and entertainment venues which are popular among local

:16:22. > :16:25.people. However, any time I visit one of my local high streets,

:16:26. > :16:30.parking is nearly always the number one concern of local shop and

:16:31. > :16:37.business owners. The Halesowen chamber of trade in particular and

:16:38. > :16:43.local councillors in Halesowen have for a long time been campaigning for

:16:44. > :16:47.reduced charges and where appropriate, free parking on our

:16:48. > :16:53.local high street. Conservative councillors in Halesowen have

:16:54. > :17:00.secured an important trial period for two hours of free parking to

:17:01. > :17:03.help boost local footfall. If successful, I hope to see this move

:17:04. > :17:07.extended to all council owned car parks. However, while I feel this

:17:08. > :17:14.bill will prove useful to do Dudley bill will prove useful to do Dudley

:17:15. > :17:17.well councils in my constituency because it would give them the

:17:18. > :17:21.flexibility to do this more witty and more efficiently, as it stands

:17:22. > :17:25.at the moment, local residents will need to wait until April for this

:17:26. > :17:28.measure to come into effect. But local businesses are frustrated at

:17:29. > :17:33.the time it takes to get this initiative going. The chamber of

:17:34. > :17:40.trade is actively taking steps to increase footfall around the town,

:17:41. > :17:43.looking at ideas for more activities, organising celebration

:17:44. > :17:49.events and consulting with local businesses on what they need to help

:17:50. > :17:51.them succeed. I would also like to take this opportunity is to

:17:52. > :17:57.congratulate the chamber in Halesowen for the work they have

:17:58. > :18:00.done to establish the first business improvement district within the

:18:01. > :18:07.Dudley Boro, and hope that their well thought out is this plan is

:18:08. > :18:12.approved next week. Traders' groups across the country organise special

:18:13. > :18:16.promotional days to create more interest and increase the number of

:18:17. > :18:21.people visiting, but many of these groups are frustrated by the

:18:22. > :18:25.unnecessary bureaucracy they face when working with local councils to

:18:26. > :18:33.set promotional incentives on parking. Many members of this House

:18:34. > :18:37.will support their local high streets, as the honourable member

:18:38. > :18:41.Ford Dudley North dead on small business Saturday. We should be

:18:42. > :18:48.using campaigns like this to help our local shopkeepers. Just last

:18:49. > :18:52.week, I visited a new business on Halesowen high street, the English

:18:53. > :18:58.rose tea room, owned by the inspirational Gemma. She has

:18:59. > :19:03.fulfilled her lifelong dream of owning her own business and not

:19:04. > :19:14.allowed her challenges - she has been suffering from autism -- which

:19:15. > :19:20.has not held her back. We should do all we can to create an environment

:19:21. > :19:25.to help businesses like Gemma's thrive and remove barriers to

:19:26. > :19:29.success. The Federation of Small Businesses references, as the

:19:30. > :19:34.honourable member for Bosworth alluded to in his remarks, high

:19:35. > :19:38.parking charges along with other issues such as changes in the way

:19:39. > :19:43.people shop is discouraging shoppers from visiting traditional high

:19:44. > :19:47.streets. The impact on the high street has been most seriously felt

:19:48. > :19:53.by small retailers in smaller town centres. They agree that making it

:19:54. > :20:00.easier to reduce car parking charges will go some way towards alleviating

:20:01. > :20:02.this pressure. Unfortunately, as other honourable members have

:20:03. > :20:07.pointed out, many local authorities are planning to hike parking charges

:20:08. > :20:12.even further. The local government information unit think-tank last

:20:13. > :20:17.year produced a report which suggested that nine in ten local

:20:18. > :20:22.councils were considering to increase parking charges for off

:20:23. > :20:28.street parking, despite the enormous amounts of money already raised

:20:29. > :20:30.nationally. In my opinion, this is a short-sighted measure. It does not

:20:31. > :20:34.address the problem facing our high streets and is just a quick method

:20:35. > :20:42.of finding more ways to make money out of local motorists. For this

:20:43. > :20:49.reason, it is important that local people and businesses are properly

:20:50. > :20:53.engaged with the procedure if local council decides to increase parking

:20:54. > :20:55.charges. It is only right that there is proper consultation on measures

:20:56. > :21:01.which could adversely impact on local residents. This bill would

:21:02. > :21:05.result in local authorities being required to consult interested

:21:06. > :21:11.parties like local Traders' groups if there are seeking to increase the

:21:12. > :21:17.cost parking charges. I welcome this. It is essential that the views

:21:18. > :21:24.of those who work, live and rely on our high streets feel as if they

:21:25. > :21:32.have the opportunity to make their case and that their views are

:21:33. > :21:37.properly considered. In places like Brighouse and Hebden Bridge in my

:21:38. > :21:42.constituency, where the local business initiatives work tirelessly

:21:43. > :21:48.to put events on to boost footfall in the town centre, would my

:21:49. > :21:53.honourable friend agree that those types of organisations and business

:21:54. > :21:56.traders are the very people that need a high input into these

:21:57. > :22:06.consultations, because they know what goes on? The honourable

:22:07. > :22:09.gentleman makes a good point. In his constituency and my constituency,

:22:10. > :22:13.organisations like the Halesowen chamber of trade, which has done a

:22:14. > :22:17.huge amount of work trying to bring extra footfall into Halesowen, are

:22:18. > :22:21.the group who should be front and centre of consultation on the

:22:22. > :22:30.parking charges regime proposed for Halesowen, and that voice needs to

:22:31. > :22:36.be heard. This measure is not necessarily to prohibit any increase

:22:37. > :22:40.at all in charges. Occasionally, it may be necessary to increase charges

:22:41. > :22:45.if the overhead costs are rising as well, especially in car parks would

:22:46. > :22:53.require access through machines and extra staffing. It is about ensuring

:22:54. > :22:57.the impacts on towns are fully considered and preventing increases.

:22:58. > :23:02.On street parking often sees the same level of increases as

:23:03. > :23:07.off-street, when the costs of providing these spaces are nowhere

:23:08. > :23:12.near the same. This often leads to local residents feeling that they

:23:13. > :23:16.are a cash cow, as other honourable members have pointed out, for local

:23:17. > :23:19.authorities to plug a financial hole. A balance needs to be struck.

:23:20. > :23:23.It is not a one size fits all situation. This bill will make it

:23:24. > :23:28.quicker and easier for local authorities to do the right thing

:23:29. > :23:33.where they think necessary. This measure will also allow local

:23:34. > :23:36.authorities the flexibility to incentivise use of car parks which

:23:37. > :23:40.are underused. These are spaces which the Council are paying to

:23:41. > :23:46.maintain and are sitting idle with little use. This is not a benefit to

:23:47. > :23:48.either the local authority or shopping centres. Empty car parks

:23:49. > :23:53.can become a magnet for anti-social behaviour and crime, so it is

:23:54. > :23:57.important for local authorities to be able to respond to declining

:23:58. > :24:07.numbers quickly and within the best interests of the local area. The

:24:08. > :24:13.honourable gentleman makes a salient point about when car parks fall into

:24:14. > :24:15.disrepair. They become places of anti-social behaviour, which acts as

:24:16. > :24:20.a double disincentive for people wanted to come to towns. I thank the

:24:21. > :24:27.honourable lady for her intervention. I totally agree. We

:24:28. > :24:32.mustn't allow these places to become centres of anti-social behaviour.

:24:33. > :24:37.They are critical in getting car parking white and making them places

:24:38. > :24:41.that people want to go. It is critical to town centre regeneration

:24:42. > :24:46.and creating that good retail environment. I further welcome the

:24:47. > :24:54.government's moved to look at further reforms to the local

:24:55. > :24:57.government transparency code, which tends to ensure that motorists can

:24:58. > :25:01.see first-hand the complete breakdown of parking charges that

:25:02. > :25:07.their councils impose and how much they raise. There is normally a

:25:08. > :25:12.suspicion among drivers that parking charges and penalties are being used

:25:13. > :25:16.to increase the amount of money that local authorities can spend. Local

:25:17. > :25:19.authorities have no legal powers to set parking charges at a higher

:25:20. > :25:23.level than that needed to achieve the objective of relieving or

:25:24. > :25:31.preventing congestion of traffic. This bill allows local authorities

:25:32. > :25:36.to become more mindful of this fact. In the 2013-14 financial year,

:25:37. > :25:41.councils received just under ?739 million from on street parking and

:25:42. > :25:46.?599 million from off-street parking. The income received varies

:25:47. > :25:51.wildly from counsel to counsel. The boards did not receive any income

:25:52. > :25:56.from parking, whereas Cambridge City Council received over ?3 million

:25:57. > :26:05.from on street parking. In total, councils in England made net profits

:26:06. > :26:09.of 60 million and more from penalty charge notices. My own local

:26:10. > :26:14.authorities have recorded nearly half ?1 million between them in

:26:15. > :26:17.profit from parking charges. Local people want and deserve to have

:26:18. > :26:25.faith that this money is being used properly. Under the last Labour

:26:26. > :26:32.government, revenue from parking increased from 608,000,019 97 to 1.3

:26:33. > :26:36.billion in 2010. Such parking enforcement has undermined local

:26:37. > :26:39.high streets and I'm grateful to the government for making efforts to

:26:40. > :26:45.rein in these overzealous and unfair rules.

:26:46. > :26:52.I have supported the government's action on tackling higher parking

:26:53. > :26:54.charges and aggressive parking enforcement which causes

:26:55. > :27:00.considerable distress to thousands of motorists. I want to congratulate

:27:01. > :27:06.the government on the measures it has used to stop parking being used

:27:07. > :27:12.as a stealth tax, including stopping the industrial use of CCTV spy cars.

:27:13. > :27:15.I believe it is in the best interest of my constituents and that of local

:27:16. > :27:23.businesses and high streets that this bill, very ably introduced by

:27:24. > :27:27.the honourable member for Boswell, will enact the link between parking

:27:28. > :27:33.charges and the health of British high street. It cannot be under

:27:34. > :27:38.estimated, this will make it easier for local authorities to lower their

:27:39. > :27:41.charges to promote economic vitality in our town centres and if an

:27:42. > :27:47.increase is to be considered, the right steps should be taken to make

:27:48. > :27:51.sure they are properly considered. I believe these are the right measures

:27:52. > :27:57.to help our local high streets and inject that much-needed incentive to

:27:58. > :28:07.revive town centres and high Street in my constituency and across the

:28:08. > :28:09.country. First, I would like to congratulate my honourable friend

:28:10. > :28:18.Tom Bosworth in bringing forward this very important bill. It is a

:28:19. > :28:21.dilemma and I will always be a champion of small, independent

:28:22. > :28:31.businesses. Everything we do in terms regulation should consider the

:28:32. > :28:37.needs of small businesses and try to create that level playing field with

:28:38. > :28:43.large business that we absolutely need to seek to encourage the

:28:44. > :28:47.success of the local, small, independent retailer and business.

:28:48. > :28:56.Small, independent businesses cover around 60% of our private in sector

:28:57. > :29:03.employed workforce and around 60% of private sector turnover, so they are

:29:04. > :29:09.hugely important. I must declare and called house's attention to my

:29:10. > :29:16.declaration of member's interests. We have an estate agent business,

:29:17. > :29:21.which has 190 small, independent shops around the UK in various high

:29:22. > :29:25.Street and market towns. We do not rely on them all in terms of

:29:26. > :29:31.football, so it is not a big issue for us in terms of car parking and

:29:32. > :29:35.people coming to town centres and city centres, but it is for the

:29:36. > :29:40.general health of those towns and villages and our cities to make sure

:29:41. > :29:49.that we absolutely have a vibrant and healthy sector in our high

:29:50. > :29:56.streets and town centres. As our business started to grow, we started

:29:57. > :30:02.in 1992, our business grew and we became the market leader in our town

:30:03. > :30:08.of York which is where our first business started. We thought, this

:30:09. > :30:13.is going quite well, we are doing OK, our business is starting to

:30:14. > :30:25.prosper. And then three or four years another very good independent

:30:26. > :30:29.started up later. We looked very carefully at the business and what

:30:30. > :30:35.we were doing and we started to work harder again and it made us focus on

:30:36. > :30:40.what made a successful in the first place. That is a small illustration

:30:41. > :30:46.of what the importance is of small, independent businesses. It is not

:30:47. > :30:51.just about the fact that they are at the heart of the community. It is

:30:52. > :30:56.not just about the fact that they provide a better service, as my

:30:57. > :31:03.honourable friend from Bury St Edmunds referred to. It is also

:31:04. > :31:07.about their dynamics of the commercial realities of business.

:31:08. > :31:17.They hold big business to account. Wherever we see a situation with big

:31:18. > :31:22.business in a monopolistic situation, and they tend to

:31:23. > :31:25.monopolise the out-of-town shopping centres we see, I think we can see

:31:26. > :31:31.less good quality. An extreme example of that, I believe, is

:31:32. > :31:37.British Telecom. It is a private sector monopoly. We have all

:31:38. > :31:40.experienced some of the letters and complaints we get from our

:31:41. > :31:45.constituents about the lack of quality when you get a private

:31:46. > :31:51.sector monopoly. We absolutely need to have that balance between big

:31:52. > :31:57.business and our many, very good big businesses in this nation, and our

:31:58. > :32:03.business aspired to be a big business, but we also need to make

:32:04. > :32:06.sure that we have a very vibrant small, independent business sector.

:32:07. > :32:13.That is why I think this is so important. In my experience I have

:32:14. > :32:17.experienced some really bad policies, bad local government

:32:18. > :32:23.policies in terms of car parking, and the one I referred to earlier is

:32:24. > :32:28.the one we saw in Europe where we started our first business. It is

:32:29. > :32:32.not in my constituency, a lot of my constituents work in Europe and a

:32:33. > :32:38.lot have businesses in your and our head office is still in York, but

:32:39. > :32:42.York City Council went through a policy of selling of important city

:32:43. > :32:47.centre car parks which created revenues for the Council, which also

:32:48. > :32:54.created section 106 contributions from the developers of those car

:32:55. > :32:57.parks. The remaining car parks had more pressure put on them and the

:32:58. > :33:05.charges went up in those car parks. In the centre of Europe it is ?2 an

:33:06. > :33:11.hour to park. It is ridiculous, a deterrent from getting people into

:33:12. > :33:14.the centre. At the very same time they are granting planning consent

:33:15. > :33:19.for out-of-town shopping centres with free parking. There are four

:33:20. > :33:24.out-of-town shopping centres around York in a town with 200,000

:33:25. > :33:29.residents. There was no consultation with local businesses. Any

:33:30. > :33:35.consultations that did happen, there were panics with some of the

:33:36. > :33:40.independent retailers in the centre of York, but the council pushed

:33:41. > :33:45.ahead anyway much to the detriment of independent retailers in the city

:33:46. > :33:51.centre. But some more positive examples I feel are in my

:33:52. > :34:00.constituency. Hamilton District Council has a very innovative policy

:34:01. > :34:05.in some of their conurbations. In Thirsk they have a market square car

:34:06. > :34:10.parks and they allow people to come and park for an hour and they get a

:34:11. > :34:16.ticket from a machine and they get an hour's free parking, or they can

:34:17. > :34:20.pay 60p and park for two hours. It creates tremendous turnover in the

:34:21. > :34:28.town centre which is what businesses want. They want people to come in so

:34:29. > :34:32.they can shop in that short cycle when people want to come in for a

:34:33. > :34:39.short time and shop or go to lunch. It is easy to do that, rather than

:34:40. > :34:43.to get the money and the machine if you want to park for longer. It

:34:44. > :34:50.means great turnover in the town. You can pay to park for longer.

:34:51. > :34:55.Would he agree with me, because somewhat similar to my constituency

:34:56. > :35:00.near to a large town, in my case Cambridge, in his case York, that is

:35:01. > :35:07.a different environment to those small, rural environments around

:35:08. > :35:11.small market towns that we want to generate that throughput so those

:35:12. > :35:15.traders can survive so the people in the locality who cannot very often

:35:16. > :35:19.achieved their shopping without getting in their car have an equal

:35:20. > :35:24.choice to others who live near a town. She makes a very good point

:35:25. > :35:29.and I could not agree with her more. I guess the key is what we are

:35:30. > :35:33.looking for here is a symbiotic relationship between the local

:35:34. > :35:38.authority and the businesses in that town. There is a close relationship.

:35:39. > :35:45.Of course the local authority benefits from success of a business

:35:46. > :35:50.in a town. But sometimes that conversation is not as comprehensive

:35:51. > :35:55.as it needs to be, or is not as close. The understanding is not

:35:56. > :35:59.there. Some of the provisions of this bill, which is about the

:36:00. > :36:02.consultation of changes to car parking, or the ability to lower car

:36:03. > :36:09.parking without going through a detailed process, that is why it is

:36:10. > :36:16.so important to take this legislation through. Another good

:36:17. > :36:20.example is my town of Malton. In the centre it is still owned by the

:36:21. > :36:25.Fitzwilliam estate, so most of the shops and the car parks in the

:36:26. > :36:30.centre are owned by an estate. It is in their very interest because they

:36:31. > :36:36.owned the shops, and there are quite a few houses in the centre, and they

:36:37. > :36:40.own the car parks. It is a very vibrant commercial environment. As

:36:41. > :36:48.well as investing heavily in the town and improving the shops, they

:36:49. > :36:53.changed the parking in the town so there is two hours free car parking

:36:54. > :37:00.in the town centre car parks, which again has provided this fantastic,

:37:01. > :37:09.vibrant commercial activity which we see in Malton. It has been

:37:10. > :37:16.tremendously successful. There is a guy called Tom Leland who has set

:37:17. > :37:22.out to develop a brand around Malton. He has called the

:37:23. > :37:26.Yorkshire's food capital. We have the Malton food Festival. We have a

:37:27. > :37:32.fantastic weekend. Honourable members must consider coming. There

:37:33. > :37:36.is music, there is a beer festival at the same time and some of

:37:37. > :37:45.Yorkshire's finest food. Yorkshire does have the finest produce for

:37:46. > :37:50.food. So... As you can tell. It has been a wonderful success story and

:37:51. > :37:54.the town has been regenerated on the back of it. It has to be seen to be

:37:55. > :37:58.believed and that is because there was a sin by author relationship

:37:59. > :38:01.between the car park owners, the town centre owners and the

:38:02. > :38:09.businesses, a deep understanding between them. Helmsley, again it is

:38:10. > :38:16.a place where you get a lot of coach parties coming to see the wonders of

:38:17. > :38:23.Helmsley, a fantastic market town. Richard III had a connection with

:38:24. > :38:33.Helmsley. The last King of the House of York was Richard III, so he had a

:38:34. > :38:40.connection in Helmsley Castle. Richmond Castle as well. As the

:38:41. > :38:42.minister said earlier, it was successful in the British high

:38:43. > :38:48.street towards winning best market town. It was on the back of the

:38:49. > :38:53.fantastic efforts of the traders and the local authority in that town.

:38:54. > :39:02.But coach parking was introduced in one of the car parks and it became a

:39:03. > :39:08.real deterrent for coaches coming to the town, coaches carrying 50

:39:09. > :39:12.tourists. So local people went to the council and campaigned on this

:39:13. > :39:16.issue and they got the charges taken away, which brought the coach

:39:17. > :39:21.parties back to the town. It is a good example of how business,

:39:22. > :39:26.working with local authorities, can have a positive effect and have a

:39:27. > :39:32.deep understanding of some of the challenges around running small,

:39:33. > :39:35.independent businesses. Of course those are positive examples, but

:39:36. > :39:45.there are examples we have heard of already here today. According to the

:39:46. > :39:55.RAC, ?756 million of charges and penalties in 2015 for car parks

:39:56. > :40:02.across the UK, up 9% on 2015. 34% on 2010. This attacks the shoppers and

:40:03. > :40:07.the businesses, businesses that are paying rates. They want service from

:40:08. > :40:13.the council, yet they are seen, as we have heard before, as sitting

:40:14. > :40:22.ducks, golden geese, or whatever analogy you want. A sitting duck and

:40:23. > :40:26.a golden goose at the same time! We should make sure we look after that

:40:27. > :40:35.golden goose and not treat it as a sitting duck! Because ultimately

:40:36. > :40:39.people, shoppers and businesses will vote with their feet. In

:40:40. > :40:46.conclusion... Very happy to give way. While my honourable friend is

:40:47. > :40:49.on the subject of geese, doesn't he think the local authorities who take

:40:50. > :40:57.the wrong approach to this are likely to cook their goose? It is a

:40:58. > :41:06.very good point. It has been a fantastic debate. We have talked

:41:07. > :41:11.about the foul consequences of not having good parking policies in the

:41:12. > :41:20.local town. We did mention the dog and duck earlier in my honourable

:41:21. > :41:26.friend's remarks. Our local pub has a connection with the Neville family

:41:27. > :41:31.and it was a staging post on the web from Durham Cathedral to York

:41:32. > :41:37.Minster. In conclusion, what we need is a level playing field. We must

:41:38. > :41:43.always look after the interests of small business. We should not in

:41:44. > :41:47.this house worship at the altar of big business. We should absolutely

:41:48. > :41:52.put small business, independent retailers, at the heart of

:41:53. > :41:55.everything we do and I absolutely support the provisions of this bill

:41:56. > :42:01.because I think that is exactly what it does.

:42:02. > :42:08.Can I remind members that it is a narrow bill and although the

:42:09. > :42:17.contributions are enjoyable, it would be nice... ! I shall do my

:42:18. > :42:22.best to focus on the content of the bill. I must congratulate my

:42:23. > :42:27.honourable friend, the member for Bosworth for bringing in this brief,

:42:28. > :42:30.but important bill, which as other members have said, could be of such

:42:31. > :42:36.benefit to their constituents and mine also. It is a pleasure to

:42:37. > :42:38.follow my honourable friend, the member for Thirsk and Malton, who

:42:39. > :42:44.has talked about many of the benefits of the bill. Although I

:42:45. > :42:53.will try and stick to the topic, I will follow his example in making

:42:54. > :42:58.sure I don't duck the issues. I am very lucky to represent a

:42:59. > :43:04.constituency which is peppered with historic towns and villages. I will

:43:05. > :43:08.mention particularly the historic market town of Faversham and the

:43:09. > :43:13.villages of Lennon and Headcorn. I mention those not because the other

:43:14. > :43:20.villages are not worth visiting, but because those three or have car

:43:21. > :43:25.parks in them. In the car parks are very important for allowing

:43:26. > :43:30.residents to access the shops and services in each of those centres.

:43:31. > :43:35.And those centres, despite the pressures on the appeal of

:43:36. > :43:42.out-of-town shopping and supermarkets and the internet, those

:43:43. > :43:46.centres are doing well. Just last year, Faversham was a rising star

:43:47. > :43:52.award winner in the great British high-street awards. It is a town

:43:53. > :43:57.that I take great pleasure in shopping in regularly. Lots of small

:43:58. > :44:01.shops are providing services that can be hard to find if you go to the

:44:02. > :44:07.supermarket. You are unlikely to get your pictures framed at the

:44:08. > :44:12.supermarket. And they do a fabulous selection of flowers at the florist

:44:13. > :44:19.which you can get made appropriately for an event. The yarn shop which

:44:20. > :44:23.recently opened, because as we know, there is a boom in knitting and

:44:24. > :44:29.sewing crafts, is serving that. So there are new shops opening, along

:44:30. > :44:35.with a huge amount of historic sites to visit while you are there. So

:44:36. > :44:41.these towns and villages are managing despite the pressures they

:44:42. > :44:44.are facing, but it's not easy. Faversham had to say goodbye to our

:44:45. > :44:48.sweet shop just a couple of weeks ago, which is a lovely feature of

:44:49. > :44:57.the town. It was attractive to see all the sweets. That has fallen foul

:44:58. > :45:02.of these pressures, as well as our attempts to lead healthier lives.

:45:03. > :45:06.Perhaps the children of Faversham are not eating so many sweets now.

:45:07. > :45:13.But I know my son will miss going to that when recycling to town. -- when

:45:14. > :45:17.we cycle into town. I value our towns and village centres, as I know

:45:18. > :45:22.many of my constituents do. It is not just for the shops that you can

:45:23. > :45:27.visit, but also the way that these town centres serve as a community

:45:28. > :45:30.meeting place. You will often bump into somebody you have not seen for

:45:31. > :45:38.a while if you are in the Market Square in Faversham. For me, it is a

:45:39. > :45:41.great way to catch up with constituents, with councillors. I

:45:42. > :45:45.almost always meet not one, but several people as I go through

:45:46. > :45:49.Faversham. My husband knows not to expect me back at the time I say I'm

:45:50. > :45:52.going to get back because I will inevitably meet several people and

:45:53. > :45:58.have long conversations as I go through. With the honourable lady

:45:59. > :46:04.agree that one of the ways of keeping town centres vibrant is to

:46:05. > :46:09.ensure that car parking prices can vary, relating to events going on

:46:10. > :46:15.and to encourage people to go in and in particular, that they are

:46:16. > :46:18.competitive as well? I thank my honourable friend for making these

:46:19. > :46:26.points. This is why I am talking about the value of town and village

:46:27. > :46:29.centres and the importance of them to community, because it is linked

:46:30. > :46:35.to the role car parking charges play in helping towns and villages to

:46:36. > :46:39.play this role. As I said, the chance meetings that you have in the

:46:40. > :46:44.town and village centre are valuable part of keeping our community is

:46:45. > :46:51.strong. And we know we need our communities to get stronger again. I

:46:52. > :46:53.would not deny that the large out-of-town shopping centre doesn't

:46:54. > :46:58.have an important role to play. I know some of my constituents will go

:46:59. > :47:04.to Bluewater when they want to get clothes or do a big shop. It is not

:47:05. > :47:08.in my constituency, so I am not a regular visitor that, but it has a

:47:09. > :47:11.role to play. But it is not the place where you are going to bump

:47:12. > :47:17.into somebody that you have not seen for a while. This is a challenge. It

:47:18. > :47:23.is difficult for our towns and villages to compete with those

:47:24. > :47:28.destination shopping sites and the internet, and we know that parking

:47:29. > :47:34.charges are a factor in this. Other members have reported to the -- they

:47:35. > :47:39.have referred the Federation of Small Businesses' report which said

:47:40. > :47:44.the car parking charges are a factor in people deciding where they are

:47:45. > :47:48.going to shop. In a rural area, much though we want to encourage people

:47:49. > :47:52.to use other modes of transport, the reality is that the car is the way

:47:53. > :47:56.most people need to travel. So car parking charges are a factor for

:47:57. > :48:01.most people in deciding where they are going to shop. So for the sake

:48:02. > :48:06.of our towns and villages and many of us who would like to see car

:48:07. > :48:13.parking charges as low as possible, I understand that it is not as

:48:14. > :48:16.simple as putting car parking charges down to the lowest possible

:48:17. > :48:20.level or getting rid of them altogether. There is an element of

:48:21. > :48:24.the revenue that is needed to maintain car parks. There is also

:48:25. > :48:29.the point of when you have a station near the town centre. You don't want

:48:30. > :48:34.your town centre car park to be used as all-day station parking. And that

:48:35. > :48:39.is a risk, that it if you get rid of car parking charges, it would just

:48:40. > :48:42.become a station car park and therefore, you wouldn't have the

:48:43. > :48:48.footfall of people coming and going and being able to use the car park

:48:49. > :48:52.to get to the shops. So it is important that there be flexibility

:48:53. > :48:58.about the level that car parking charges are set, and also for a

:48:59. > :49:06.council to be able to experiment and work out what works and critically,

:49:07. > :49:13.to enable councils to be able to reduce car parking charges at times

:49:14. > :49:17.for special events. If you have a station in a town, the idea of

:49:18. > :49:22.having a very low car parking charge may be impossible to do all the

:49:23. > :49:30.time, but you could for specific events reduce the charges for that

:49:31. > :49:38.event. Faversham is a fantastic town for special events. My honourable

:49:39. > :49:42.friend, mentioned the food festival in his constituency in Malton.

:49:43. > :49:46.Faversham has a food festival and a separate beer festival. We don't

:49:47. > :49:50.have to have them on the same day! It is a hop festival. I shall be

:49:51. > :49:56.called out if I call it the beer festival. It is the Faversham hop

:49:57. > :50:02.festival. Albeit for that festival, a lot of people come by train. You

:50:03. > :50:07.may understand why! We also have the hat festival, the nautical festival,

:50:08. > :50:14.because Faversham is also a nautical town, the transport festival and we

:50:15. > :50:19.have markets on the first and third Saturday of the month. So there are

:50:20. > :50:23.many events to come to in Faversham. Those could be days for the council

:50:24. > :50:27.to drop the car parking charges, or on the other hand, it might be an

:50:28. > :50:33.opportunity to experiment with dropping car parking charges on days

:50:34. > :50:37.when the town is quieter and there is a way to bring people into town

:50:38. > :50:41.when there is not an event going on. The point is that this bill is about

:50:42. > :50:46.giving councils more flexibility to be able to do that and to test what

:50:47. > :50:51.works for bringing more footfall into a town. That is why I am

:50:52. > :50:57.delighted to support the bill. On the other hand, one point was made

:50:58. > :51:01.today which is worthwhile, emphasising that increasing car

:51:02. > :51:05.parking charges is another matter. It is important that increases the

:51:06. > :51:11.car parking charges should be consulted on with rigour, because

:51:12. > :51:19.increases to car parking charges are clearly a concern for residents and

:51:20. > :51:24.a concern for businesses. Given what I have been saying about how car

:51:25. > :51:27.parking charges affect people's decisions, increasing car parking

:51:28. > :51:30.charges could be a concern for businesses and some worry that they

:51:31. > :51:34.might be put out of business. So it is right that if car parking charges

:51:35. > :51:41.are to be increased, there should be consultation. Something I did before

:51:42. > :51:49.speaking today was check with my local councils what their thoughts

:51:50. > :51:53.were about this bill. I was in touch with the chair of the transportation

:51:54. > :52:00.committee of Maidstone borough council, one of the two councils in

:52:01. > :52:05.my constituency and Councillor David Burton, the chair of the committee,

:52:06. > :52:10.said of this bill that he was happy with it and that it would place no

:52:11. > :52:17.extra burdens on local councils. So I thought that was a good thing to

:52:18. > :52:27.hear. He also flagged how he thinks the excellent modern transport Bill

:52:28. > :52:29.is valuable and emphasised the point that councils will have to move

:52:30. > :52:37.quickly to keep up with the pace of change. I certainly welcome that my

:52:38. > :52:41.local councils have been good at bringing in payment by smartphone,

:52:42. > :52:45.which is another thing which can be very helpful when thinking of

:52:46. > :52:51.flexibility, enabling people to pay as they leave or top up easily while

:52:52. > :52:56.parking. These are all important for councils to be using to support

:52:57. > :53:05.local towns and villages and the shops in them. To conclude, I very

:53:06. > :53:09.much support and want to see thriving towns and villages enter

:53:10. > :53:17.is. Therefore, I am delighted to support this bill. Wendy Morton.

:53:18. > :53:21.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I write to support my honourable

:53:22. > :53:27.friend from Bosworth's bill again today. And I congratulate him on all

:53:28. > :53:31.the work he has been doing in getting the bill thus far. I am

:53:32. > :53:39.sure, like others in this chamber, we all wish it is speedy passage

:53:40. > :53:42.through this place, because we can understand the benefits it will

:53:43. > :53:51.bring to our constituents and constituencies. I believe that this

:53:52. > :53:56.bill will make a difference across the country. My honourable friend

:53:57. > :53:59.used the phrase "We come into politics to make a difference", and

:54:00. > :54:07.this bill can make a difference to so many people in a small, but

:54:08. > :54:09.simple way. The aim of the bill is to make it easier for local

:54:10. > :54:16.authorities to lower their parking charges, to promote the economic

:54:17. > :54:19.vitality of town centres allowing local authorities to react more

:54:20. > :54:25.quickly to market changes, putting them on an even footing with the

:54:26. > :54:28.private sector and promoting parking flexibility, something we have heard

:54:29. > :54:32.so much about today, by allowing local authorities at short notice to

:54:33. > :54:36.provide free or discounted parking to support town centre events. It is

:54:37. > :54:40.also intended to provide local authorities to consult interested

:54:41. > :54:45.parties if they are seeking to increase the cost of parking charges

:54:46. > :54:52.and to ensure the impacts on the towns are considered. The it was

:54:53. > :54:56.described earlier as the Santa clause Bill, but this bill is not

:54:57. > :55:01.just for Christmas. I believe it is for all year round. I apologise, I

:55:02. > :55:08.needed to get that one in today! But it does seem a little crazy. My

:55:09. > :55:12.honourable friend is not in her place at the moment but she alluded

:55:13. > :55:15.to the fact that why haven't we sought to change the law in this

:55:16. > :55:21.regard before? It does seem crazy that currently, if the local

:55:22. > :55:23.authority wanted to offer free parking in the run-up to Christmas

:55:24. > :55:32.or Thursday night for late-night shopping or four a special event, it

:55:33. > :55:38.would cost them to do so. Because of the requirement to make all the

:55:39. > :55:42.necessary advertisements. That seems hardly an incentive for a local

:55:43. > :55:47.authority to go down the route. It has almost been a barrier to them to

:55:48. > :55:51.make those changes. In today's economic climate, we have heard a

:55:52. > :55:53.lot about the rise of internet shopping, the rise of the

:55:54. > :56:00.out-of-town shopping centres. They all have their role to play. But it

:56:01. > :56:07.strikes me that this bill offers a simple and cost-effective way to

:56:08. > :56:12.enable councils to effect change. It is not about saying they must lower

:56:13. > :56:17.all the car parking charges, much as we would all like that. It is about

:56:18. > :56:21.giving them the flexibility to lower our parking charges when they feel

:56:22. > :56:30.it is in the interests of that local community to do so, taking account

:56:31. > :56:35.of community needs. I see it is almost a tool in the tool box of

:56:36. > :56:37.local authorities. I believe it means that the councils can win

:56:38. > :56:43.because of that reduction in the cost of advertising. Residents can

:56:44. > :56:49.win because it saves them money and crucially, retailers and local high

:56:50. > :56:55.streets can win as well. I understand that car parking revenue

:56:56. > :56:58.is important to local authorities. I made the point earlier in one of my

:56:59. > :57:04.interventions about the need to strike that balance. But sometimes,

:57:05. > :57:10.by reducing car parking charges for an event, say, a local authority can

:57:11. > :57:14.get extra revenue overall from businesses because if they have a

:57:15. > :57:22.thriving town centre, they get the income from business rates.

:57:23. > :57:28.I really believe local authorities will be able to react quicker,

:57:29. > :57:33.support local events and businesses, support local residents, and that is

:57:34. > :57:39.what this bill is fundamentally about. We are unfortunately in my

:57:40. > :57:47.constituency, we do at least have some free parking. I think in

:57:48. > :57:53.Aldridge Village Centre in particular. Where you are able to

:57:54. > :57:59.offer that, it really does encourage people to go in and shop locally. It

:58:00. > :58:03.is something I know members on both sides of this house are often

:58:04. > :58:08.speaking of and are often encouraging people and residents to

:58:09. > :58:13.do so. If you pop into the local shops, you do your banking, you go

:58:14. > :58:18.to the post office. In Aldridge you would go and have a cup of coffee or

:58:19. > :58:23.a sweet and you spend that little bit more time in the town centre,

:58:24. > :58:30.all adding to that vibrancy. I think this bill is about cutting down

:58:31. > :58:34.bureaucracy. Something else that we on this side of the chamber often

:58:35. > :58:40.talk about. This bill will remove that you're crazy. Put simply, it is

:58:41. > :58:50.a no-nonsense bill, it is a common-sense bill, and I will be

:58:51. > :58:54.supporting it. It is my pleasure to add to others the congratulations to

:58:55. > :58:59.the honourable member for Boswell for bringing forward what is

:59:00. > :59:05.unusually a very simple bill with a simple game that affects a great

:59:06. > :59:09.number of people. I welcome the fact it is easier for our local councils

:59:10. > :59:15.to sort their car parking, but I would like to talk about enabling

:59:16. > :59:22.them to have a sense of place. That is really important. The honourable

:59:23. > :59:25.member for Thirsk alluded to it, as did the honourable member for

:59:26. > :59:32.Halesowen when he said it was not a one size fits all solution. A sense

:59:33. > :59:36.of place is very much understanding your locality, your businesses, your

:59:37. > :59:41.residence, and those people who come to your town. Our towns are

:59:42. > :59:48.changing, which is why local authorities need flexibility. In

:59:49. > :59:51.Bury St Edmunds we have residents living alongside the businesses and

:59:52. > :59:59.the tourist attractions and a vast number of tourists come to our town.

:00:00. > :00:04.As I mentioned, we are getting towards 2 million parking slots in a

:00:05. > :00:11.town of 42,000 people per annum. That shows how popular we are, but

:00:12. > :00:15.it also shows we need to have local flexibility and local

:00:16. > :00:23.accountability. That is different to my town down the road at Stowmarket.

:00:24. > :00:26.They have a less vibrant centre and they will need to apply different

:00:27. > :00:31.measures to how they are going to accommodate their businesses and

:00:32. > :00:37.stimulate a vibrant economy that is right for them. As the honourable

:00:38. > :00:43.member for Faversham said, this is about building communities and about

:00:44. > :00:50.people having time to go in and actually enjoy where they live and

:00:51. > :00:55.actually... Of course. She makes a very good point about the different

:00:56. > :01:03.types of town she has in her constituency. Isn't that the point

:01:04. > :01:07.about this bill? It requires local authorities to work alongside

:01:08. > :01:11.businesses to develop the right strategies or parking to make sure

:01:12. > :01:17.they make the best of the opportunities whatever the different

:01:18. > :01:23.conurbation is? Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. It is actually

:01:24. > :01:27.the fact that in Bury St Edmunds I have a 6% occupancy rate in the

:01:28. > :01:35.town, which he will know for retail is very low. 50% of what the

:01:36. > :01:38.national average is. It won the award for having the best Christmas

:01:39. > :01:45.fare anywhere in the country this year. It has a plethora of things we

:01:46. > :01:50.can enjoy. It also has its own Cathedral. Tonight I will be

:01:51. > :01:54.hopefully attending at the Theatre Royal Northanger Abbey in one of the

:01:55. > :02:01.only Regency theatres in the country. It is fantastic. But I also

:02:02. > :02:07.have great things in Stowmarket, but it is different and we need to

:02:08. > :02:11.understand how this bill can facilitate that. One thing I would

:02:12. > :02:14.like to ask the Minister, and perhaps he could write to me if

:02:15. > :02:22.today is not the place for us to tease this out, is that in my

:02:23. > :02:26.particular area I have a County Council, a Borough Council, a

:02:27. > :02:30.District Council, three town councils, and very often it is only

:02:31. > :02:37.the good working of those councils together that facilitate solutions

:02:38. > :02:42.because some of the complexity of these different authorities owning

:02:43. > :02:48.different car parts and so on. When decisions want to be made, for

:02:49. > :02:53.example in Stowmarket, when the town council wanted to have a cheaper

:02:54. > :02:57.parking rate for two hours, that was a collaboration with the District

:02:58. > :03:02.Council and the town council. Sometimes in these multiple tiers we

:03:03. > :03:09.have a complexity that even a simple instrument like this bill perhaps

:03:10. > :03:13.does not address. It might be that there is a little more work to be

:03:14. > :03:20.done in order to facilitate those areas that are not as simple as a

:03:21. > :03:23.metropolitan area in order for them to have conversations to facilitate

:03:24. > :03:28.quicker than is possible at the moment changes in their local

:03:29. > :03:34.environment to their car parking, particularly permanent in an area

:03:35. > :03:39.like Bury where we have the Contra problem to a lot of towns. We very

:03:40. > :03:46.often do not have enough car parking spaces. It would be really good for

:03:47. > :03:51.us to perhaps address issues like funding multistorey car parks and so

:03:52. > :03:56.on and being able to drive initiatives like that which would

:03:57. > :04:01.allow us greater parking, so our town centres are sclerotic. When

:04:02. > :04:09.town centres are blocked, it is my residence who suffer. People park

:04:10. > :04:14.without thinking somewhere in the town and residents cannot access

:04:15. > :04:18.their houses. Permits are a good use, but that stops people parking

:04:19. > :04:23.for business, so that is what I mean about a whole environment. I agree

:04:24. > :04:27.with the honourable lady because I think there are issues with this

:04:28. > :04:32.bill. Perhaps it should not have come to the third Reading today and

:04:33. > :04:38.maybe we should have spent longer in committee ironing out some of these

:04:39. > :04:42.issues? I thank the honourable lady for her intervention. No, I think

:04:43. > :04:47.the beauty of this bill and why I would like to see it go through

:04:48. > :04:52.today is its simplicity. But we live in a very fast moving environment, a

:04:53. > :04:58.very fast paced environment, where things constantly change around us.

:04:59. > :05:01.My point is that where we have a complexity of local government with

:05:02. > :05:05.different authorities having responsibility over car parking,

:05:06. > :05:12.maybe this is something we should look to address as we go forward.

:05:13. > :05:16.Would she like me recall that there was a report stage on this bill

:05:17. > :05:20.earlier today and that would have been the opportunity if anyone had

:05:21. > :05:26.objections to the wording to make some changes, as I suggested myself?

:05:27. > :05:29.I could not agree more with the honourable member for Torbay. As

:05:30. > :05:34.there has been a plethora of people speaking on the bill today there has

:05:35. > :05:38.been somewhat of a dearth of those on the opposite side saying what

:05:39. > :05:44.benefits a simple bill like this could bring, but also perhaps

:05:45. > :05:50.challenging, as is appropriate, at that reading. I am listening to the

:05:51. > :05:56.honourable lady and I do think she is pushing her luck. A lot of us on

:05:57. > :06:01.this site are very angry about the fact that the bill is being talked

:06:02. > :06:06.out by her and her friends on the government backbenchers today. If

:06:07. > :06:13.she wants to do that, she can play games, but please do not criticise

:06:14. > :06:24.us. I do apologise. It was merely a statement of fact. However... Whilst

:06:25. > :06:31.we are considering this bill, it is as others have said, incumbent on us

:06:32. > :06:36.to look at where we are going in the future. As I conclude, I would like

:06:37. > :06:44.to mention my own town council in Bury St Edmunds who have usefully,

:06:45. > :06:48.in order to help ameliorate some of the problems around from the car

:06:49. > :06:59.parking situation in my town, they have actually recruited some PS oh,

:07:00. > :07:04.Emma Howell, to regain control over civil parking enforcement from the

:07:05. > :07:10.police. She has single-handedly authorised over 100 civil parking

:07:11. > :07:16.orders in her first few weeks, including the leader of the town

:07:17. > :07:21.council who recruited her! She is indeed delivering greater monitoring

:07:22. > :07:25.powers to local councils in order to exercise local management to which I

:07:26. > :07:32.do hope this bill will add as we go forward. Thank you, Madam Deputy

:07:33. > :07:37.Speaker. I am conscious of the time and what has been said already, so I

:07:38. > :07:43.will keep my remarks rather brief. When I withdrew my amendment, I

:07:44. > :07:49.still think this bill is right to go forward in the form it is in and it

:07:50. > :07:53.will give a valuable opportunity for local councils to vary charges

:07:54. > :08:00.downwards without going through the consultation process. It is rightly

:08:01. > :08:03.there, but it is somewhat bizarre that under current legislation the

:08:04. > :08:10.council has to spend money to try and do something that will cost it

:08:11. > :08:13.money. In terms of this, I think it will be very beneficial bill and

:08:14. > :08:18.will deal with some of the issues are used to encounter when I was in

:08:19. > :08:23.local government myself. I will not go through a whole list of the

:08:24. > :08:28.festivals and events in Torbay. I did that during the report states.

:08:29. > :08:34.But the key thing I would like to hear from the Minister is how when

:08:35. > :08:38.this bill goes forward, how they will be working with councils to

:08:39. > :08:43.make sure it is used. Sometimes in legislation on a Friday, legislation

:08:44. > :08:50.is not something to do for the fun of it, it is something to do that

:08:51. > :08:53.will have an impact. One is interested to see how the local

:08:54. > :08:59.authorities will use this power and how they promote it when it is

:09:00. > :09:04.brought into effect. I hope this bill gets a third reading, I hope we

:09:05. > :09:09.do not have to have a division to achieve that. I hope this is taken

:09:10. > :09:14.forward, it is a bill in the right form and it is perfectly acceptable

:09:15. > :09:20.and should achieve its third reading today. I am pleased to speak in

:09:21. > :09:26.support of the bill's third reading. I would like to start by

:09:27. > :09:30.congratulating my honourable friend and member for Bosworth who is

:09:31. > :09:38.bringing in this bill in his third year in this house. I wish him well

:09:39. > :09:44.today with getting this bill through to third reading, hopefully

:09:45. > :09:50.unopposed, and to the bill going down to the other place and

:09:51. > :09:53.hopefully not being amended. I also understand it is my honourable

:09:54. > :10:04.friend for Bosworth's first Private member's bill. As somebody who not

:10:05. > :10:08.too long ago was on the backbenches, I was never fortunate during that

:10:09. > :10:17.time to secure a private member's bill, generally because I never

:10:18. > :10:22.appeared far enough up the ballot. I never had the chance to bring

:10:23. > :10:27.forward such an important piece of legislation as my honourable friend

:10:28. > :10:31.has. So I congratulate him. As I indicated that the bill's second

:10:32. > :10:36.reading, parking remains an issue that is very familiar. My

:10:37. > :10:41.ministerial postbag remains very busy. The Royal Mail certainly

:10:42. > :10:48.continues to enjoy the rewards of the numerous missives that I receive

:10:49. > :10:53.on parking and in the three months since we started this process in

:10:54. > :10:57.November it certainly remains the case that I still am receiving a

:10:58. > :11:02.significant level of correspondence in this regard. High streets and

:11:03. > :11:08.town centres are essential parts of the fabric of our lives and are the

:11:09. > :11:13.social core of our communities. The need for affordable parking to

:11:14. > :11:17.access town centres is critical and to the continued growth of our high

:11:18. > :11:22.streets. The previous government recognised this in a number of

:11:23. > :11:26.reforms brought forward on parking facilities owned by councils. The

:11:27. > :11:30.previous government brought forward reforms to make it mandatory for

:11:31. > :11:34.local authorities to give ten minute grace periods for all on street

:11:35. > :11:41.parking bays and all off street parking bays. This gives town

:11:42. > :11:45.centres and consumers greater flexibility to allow them to

:11:46. > :11:50.complete their business in the town without having to worry about

:11:51. > :11:55.feeding the meter. The use of CCTV camera cars by local authorities

:11:56. > :12:00.that were being used as revenue generating devices was also a cause

:12:01. > :12:10.for concern, that is why an addition to grace periods was good.

:12:11. > :12:13.Individuals can have a degree of certainty that when they get a

:12:14. > :12:23.ticket they will know about it on the day.

:12:24. > :12:28.The government believes in town hall transparency and believes that the

:12:29. > :12:33.transparency, believes that transparency is the foundation of

:12:34. > :12:36.local accountability. It is the key that gives people the tools they

:12:37. > :12:43.need to hold their local councils to account. Since 2010, transparency

:12:44. > :12:48.and town halls has improved greatly. The Conservative led coalition

:12:49. > :12:51.government changed the rules on attending town hall meetings to

:12:52. > :12:57.enable the press and public to report on more meetings, including

:12:58. > :13:02.being able to film proceedings at council meetings. More than that, we

:13:03. > :13:07.have also changed the rules on what information local authorities must

:13:08. > :13:15.make public, because transparency is good for the health of democracy. In

:13:16. > :13:18.2011, the government issued a code of recommended practice for local

:13:19. > :13:22.authorities on data transparency come to place more power in

:13:23. > :13:25.citizens' hands, to increase democratic accountability and make

:13:26. > :13:31.it easier for people to contribute to local decision-making and help

:13:32. > :13:36.shape local public services. The scope and content of the 2011 code

:13:37. > :13:41.of recommended practice for local authorities on data transparency was

:13:42. > :13:48.reviewed in 2012. Was my department consulting on a proposed update of

:13:49. > :13:52.the code. As a result of the consultation, the government

:13:53. > :13:57.published a revised local government transparency code in 2014 and

:13:58. > :14:01.further updated the code in February 20 15. Since October 2014,

:14:02. > :14:07.compliance with part two of the code has been mandatory. The local

:14:08. > :14:10.government transparency code 2015 requires certain authorities to

:14:11. > :14:15.publish certain information, including about parking. We

:14:16. > :14:18.encourage local authorities to produce an annual report about their

:14:19. > :14:24.enforcement activities within six months of the end of each financial

:14:25. > :14:30.year. The report should cover financial statistical and other data

:14:31. > :14:33.reflecting the revenues received from car parking operations. The

:14:34. > :14:40.Department for Transport require data to help develop parking policy,

:14:41. > :14:44.but there is a concern that the data being supplied is not as

:14:45. > :14:48.comprehensive as it should be, and most local authorities do not feel

:14:49. > :14:52.obligated to do so. Accordingly, when we consulted last year about

:14:53. > :14:58.updates to the transparency code, we proposed that the requirements to

:14:59. > :15:01.publish data relating to the local authorities' parking counts be

:15:02. > :15:07.expanded to include greater detail about parking charges. We also

:15:08. > :15:11.propose that local authorities should publish statistics about the

:15:12. > :15:16.enforcement of parking restrictions by that particular local authority.

:15:17. > :15:23.Specifically, we propose that local authorities be required to provide

:15:24. > :15:28.data on total income and expenditure on parking account, kept under

:15:29. > :15:31.section 55 of the Road traffic regulation 1984, and off-street

:15:32. > :15:38.parking charges and penalty charges, which are not covered under section

:15:39. > :15:41.55 of the 1980 Four Rd traffic act regulation. In that particular point

:15:42. > :15:44.has been raised by a number of honourable members during this

:15:45. > :15:53.debate. We propose that local authorities be required to provide a

:15:54. > :15:58.breakdown of income, of on street parking charges come on street

:15:59. > :16:00.penalty charges, off Street car parking charges and off street

:16:01. > :16:09.penalty charges. The responses to this proposal were enlightening but

:16:10. > :16:12.not altogether surprising. They confirmed parking data is a great

:16:13. > :16:17.interest to the public and of course, why wouldn't it be? Because

:16:18. > :16:22.after council tax, parking charges are arguably one of the most visible

:16:23. > :16:31.ways that local authorities take money from the public. Now, turning

:16:32. > :16:37.to my honourable friend's bill and how it recognises that on the one

:16:38. > :16:41.hand councils need flexibility is, it also recognises the need to

:16:42. > :16:45.involve local communities in its decision-making process. The Parking

:16:46. > :16:51.Places (Variation of Charges) Bill offers a real opportunity for small

:16:52. > :16:55.but very sensible reforms to local authority car parks. The bill will

:16:56. > :16:58.give the government powers to scrap the bureaucratic requirements on

:16:59. > :17:01.local authorities if they wish to lower their parking charges. This

:17:02. > :17:08.offers real opportunity for councils to take a flexible approach in

:17:09. > :17:10.supporting their high streets. For example, by responding to be

:17:11. > :17:14.opportunity of town Centre festivals, of which a number have

:17:15. > :17:21.been referenced by honourable members this morning. One thing I

:17:22. > :17:26.have learned from my involvement with the great British high street

:17:27. > :17:31.competition in 2015 is the real passion that still exists in this

:17:32. > :17:37.country for high streets and town centres. But while there is a need

:17:38. > :17:40.for councils to offer flexibility is in respect of parking charges to

:17:41. > :17:45.support their town centres, it's important that we recognise the

:17:46. > :17:48.charging levels are quite often a significant concern for town centre

:17:49. > :17:52.businesses. The government therefore thinks it's fit and proper that

:17:53. > :17:59.councils are responsive to local concern before the King to increase

:18:00. > :18:02.charges. My honourable friend's bill provides for consultation and

:18:03. > :18:07.requirements but if councils want to raise their charges on an existing

:18:08. > :18:11.traffic order I believe it's sensible that this reform balances

:18:12. > :18:17.the needs of the local authority to set a fair pricing policy, but one

:18:18. > :18:23.that also takes into account the views, and quite rightly, as local

:18:24. > :18:27.people. So just to conclude, I appreciate the points that have been

:18:28. > :18:32.made today. I'm grateful for the way the House has handled the bill, and

:18:33. > :18:39.I want to thank the many colleagues who have made significant

:18:40. > :18:42.contributions, and as I said when we started this bill, the bill does

:18:43. > :18:48.represent a small but needed reform to help deliver a more effective

:18:49. > :18:51.parking model that is supportive of our great British high streets and

:18:52. > :18:54.town centres and I congratulate my honourable friend for Bosworth

:18:55. > :19:06.making it this far and hope this bill ultimately becomes an act of

:19:07. > :19:11.Parliament. Madame Dev disfigure, I welcome you to your place -- Madame

:19:12. > :19:18.Deputy Speaker. I'd like to thank all colleagues here today for

:19:19. > :19:23.contributing to the debate and wish this bill well on its travels to the

:19:24. > :19:28.other place, the House of Lords. And I'd like to if I may make this point

:19:29. > :19:34.to their noble lordships landlady ships. This bill passed the Commons

:19:35. > :19:40.unamended. There were no amendments that committee stage and there were

:19:41. > :19:45.discussions with the opposition and there was agreement, and I say to

:19:46. > :19:49.the honourable lady on the front bench opposite, who expressed some

:19:50. > :19:55.concerns just now, there were opportunities here to load this bill

:19:56. > :20:01.was a lot more material and it was kept very narrow because in my long

:20:02. > :20:06.experience of Fridays it was not going to proceed unless it was very

:20:07. > :20:10.narrow. Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may continue with an earlier play on

:20:11. > :20:15.words, I hope the noble Lords will get their ducks in a row. I hope

:20:16. > :20:23.they won't add to them. We've quite enough here. It would be instructive

:20:24. > :20:28.for councils up and down the land if they study this debate. There have

:20:29. > :20:32.been some wonderful contributions will stop I'd just like to become

:20:33. > :20:35.two or three points that have come up. My honourable friend for Thirsk

:20:36. > :20:41.and Malton spoke with the experience of starting and expanding a small

:20:42. > :20:48.business. I thought the point that he made about the power of one hour

:20:49. > :20:52.free parking and then an additional 60p per hour was very persuasive.

:20:53. > :20:56.Many councils up and down the land should notice that. The honourable

:20:57. > :21:05.lady for Faversham in Kent and my honourable friend and the honourable

:21:06. > :21:09.lady for Bury St Edmunds touched on festivals and the importance of

:21:10. > :21:16.having special events that draw people into towns was focused on in

:21:17. > :21:20.this debate, and of course that's where you need flexibility in

:21:21. > :21:25.parking. Madame Deputy Speaker, I thank the members of the committee

:21:26. > :21:28.for their help and members I've already thanked this afternoon. I'd

:21:29. > :21:34.like to thank the two ministers who have helped me, who have spoken, my

:21:35. > :21:40.honourable friend the member for Croydon Central for housing plan is

:21:41. > :21:43.to minister spoke -- the member spoke in committee, my honourable

:21:44. > :21:45.friend for local government, by political neighbour in

:21:46. > :21:51.Leicestershire, the member for Nuneaton has spoken today and as

:21:52. > :21:54.I've already said, I've had the support of the opposition. I'd also

:21:55. > :22:00.like to thank my honourable friend for Nuneaton for allowing the access

:22:01. > :22:02.to some of his officials. I know it's not normal to thank them, but

:22:03. > :22:05.I'm going to thank Philip Dunkley and Thomas Adams for their

:22:06. > :22:12.assistance and eight making sure that I was properly briefed so

:22:13. > :22:16.Madame Speaker it is with great happiness and surprise that I find

:22:17. > :22:21.myself in a situation that I have a private member's bill that can

:22:22. > :22:24.affect every town, every city and every large village in the country,

:22:25. > :22:33.and I hope it processes through the House of Lords. The question is the

:22:34. > :22:40.Bill be now read the third time. As many are of the opinion, say "aye".

:22:41. > :22:52.To the contrary, "no". The ayes have it. Not amended at the Public Bill

:22:53. > :22:58.Committee to be considered. We begin with amendment one, with which it

:22:59. > :23:12.will be convenient to consider amendments to three.

:23:13. > :23:20.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And if it's in order I would like to

:23:21. > :23:26.speak to both of my amendments, one after the other, because I do

:23:27. > :23:29.appreciate that time is marching on. But Madame Deputy Speaker, just to

:23:30. > :23:34.be clear, I have supported my honourable friend for Torbay's bill,

:23:35. > :23:38.I was at second reading. I was also at the Bill committee stage. But

:23:39. > :23:41.there were a couple of points that as I went through Bill committee and

:23:42. > :23:47.on reflection I felt were worthy of a little bit more probing, as the

:23:48. > :23:55.detail was not on the face of the bill. In reference to my first

:23:56. > :23:59.Amendment, regarding public consultation. This is a very

:24:00. > :24:03.important Bill will stop it stretches across many, many

:24:04. > :24:06.different facets, reaching into potentially many different

:24:07. > :24:09.communities. And the government at second reading indicated it will

:24:10. > :24:12.conduct a form of consultation and review with all the relevant

:24:13. > :24:19.stakeholders, on the technical details of this bill. But given the

:24:20. > :24:25.technical nature of the Bill, I am seeking some reassurances from the

:24:26. > :24:28.Minister, hence the insertion of, after public consultation. Because

:24:29. > :24:35.for some very small community radio stations that are often run by

:24:36. > :24:40.community volunteers, I really want to be certain, Madam Deputy Speaker,

:24:41. > :24:43.that they are part of this consultation process. It would be

:24:44. > :24:49.wrong if they were precluded and left out at the expense of the

:24:50. > :24:56.larger ones. And now, turning to my second amendment, again at Bill

:24:57. > :25:02.committee stages there were some concerns raised, in particular from

:25:03. > :25:08.the community media Association about the nature of the Bill. So in

:25:09. > :25:12.considering under my second amendment, I'm concerned that the

:25:13. > :25:17.provision in the draft order, subsection four, paragraph C, that

:25:18. > :25:21.the order may require a small-scale radio multiplex services to be

:25:22. > :25:25.provided on a non-commercial basis is not a sufficient guarantee that

:25:26. > :25:31.the services will be operated primarily for public and community

:25:32. > :25:34.benefit. Second reading, we had so much about the benefits of community

:25:35. > :25:38.radio and the way they can really get into some of those often very

:25:39. > :25:42.hard to reach communities that on both sides of the House we are all

:25:43. > :25:47.too familiar with, so that's what I'm seeking in this amendment.

:25:48. > :25:50.There's a high risk where a small-scale radio multiplex services

:25:51. > :25:55.run on a commercial basis that charges to small-scale and community

:25:56. > :26:00.radio content providers could remain excessive, and that opportunities to

:26:01. > :26:03.reduce the cost for small-scale and community radio operators through

:26:04. > :26:08.sale of spare capacity would be lost and this would be ashamed. A

:26:09. > :26:11.commercially operated small-scale radio multipacks operator may be

:26:12. > :26:18.inclined to populate available capacity with content from those

:26:19. > :26:21.providers prepared to pay the highest rate, rather than content of

:26:22. > :26:25.the greatest public value. For example, content providers that have

:26:26. > :26:26.very low fixed costs, such as those providing semiautomated

:26:27. > :26:34.predominantly music services may be better placed to afford high costs

:26:35. > :26:42.of transmission and content providers who invest in original

:26:43. > :26:45.local content including speech and local journalism. Again, those

:26:46. > :26:47.community stations that go to the heart of our communities. My

:26:48. > :26:50.amendments produce -- proposes it be required for public and community

:26:51. > :26:56.benefit rather than for commercial reasons, in order to favour existing

:26:57. > :26:58.community radio providers or consortia of small-scale local and

:26:59. > :27:05.community media to come together to operate the multiplex.

:27:06. > :27:13.This would not preclude a small-scale, local, commercial radio

:27:14. > :27:19.service to play a role to hold the multiplex licence and two operated

:27:20. > :27:24.on such a base that local services, including small-scale, radio

:27:25. > :27:37.services, are provided with a free cost base and any income generated

:27:38. > :27:42.will be there. I want to be really sure that we are making sure that we

:27:43. > :27:49.reach out to those parts of the community that really benefit from

:27:50. > :27:55.community radio. I have a speech I was going to do today which almost

:27:56. > :27:58.echoes exactly what she is saying. Can I say I wholeheartedly agree

:27:59. > :28:06.with the principles she is espousing. I will not do my speech

:28:07. > :28:10.in the hope that we will get to my honourable friend's speech later,

:28:11. > :28:15.but I wholeheartedly accept what she is saying. I am grateful, I was just

:28:16. > :28:23.about to sit down, be reassured. I am hoping my friend, the honourable

:28:24. > :28:25.member for Torbay, will give us the assurances we are looking for and

:28:26. > :28:34.hopefully I will be able to withdraw my amendment. Question is that

:28:35. > :28:44.amendment one be made. The question is that amendment one be made. I

:28:45. > :28:50.apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am a novice at this. I would like to

:28:51. > :28:55.also just very quickly add my amendment. I was here for the second

:28:56. > :29:02.reading and so for me this is episode two, a little similar to my

:29:03. > :29:06.honourable friend from Brownhill. I wish to probe a little bit further

:29:07. > :29:11.for community radio. I spoke about the importance of it and in

:29:12. > :29:15.particular the amendment, which is that the Secretary of State is not

:29:16. > :29:21.to make an order under this section in relation to small-scale radio

:29:22. > :29:25.multiplex services, with the exception of conditions to provide a

:29:26. > :29:32.small-scale capacity to provide services of a description set out in

:29:33. > :29:37.262. I want to know there is going to be enough space for community

:29:38. > :29:43.radio in the system, in layman's language. When Ofcom went out and

:29:44. > :29:50.did their trialling what was quite amazing was that you had within the

:29:51. > :29:57.pie chart existing local commercial radio 9.2%. Existing local community

:29:58. > :30:04.stations taking up 18.3%, but new format is made up a staggering

:30:05. > :30:09.72.5%, which showed there was a real appetite for community stations. I

:30:10. > :30:13.think this is something we have to look at and take into account with

:30:14. > :30:19.this bill to make sure that we have given adequate provision. What it

:30:20. > :30:26.tells us is there is a thirst from those people who want to serve their

:30:27. > :30:31.local community. Of course. On top of what she is saying, do the same

:30:32. > :30:37.report said that not only was there a real appetite for it, the report

:30:38. > :30:41.also said it was technically possible and also economically

:30:42. > :30:46.sustainable. There is evidence within the report to say that that

:30:47. > :30:49.is the case. I thank the honourable member for adding weight to my

:30:50. > :30:54.desire to probe further to see whether we can make sure that we

:30:55. > :31:00.have facilitated local community radio to have its place rightfully

:31:01. > :31:05.and vibrantly at the centre of its communities. We also know that

:31:06. > :31:11.Ofcom, who trialled this, are keen to deliver the provision. I want to

:31:12. > :31:16.know with this amendment to understand the access there will be

:31:17. > :31:21.to access the multiplexes specifically. In and around our

:31:22. > :31:26.communities things like forces radios, hugely important to a huge

:31:27. > :31:30.sector of the community, universities running radios that

:31:31. > :31:36.reach out to students, churches and cathedrals, but we also have new

:31:37. > :31:42.forms of media and local groups and enterprises that want to reach in

:31:43. > :31:47.and inform their local communities. They all work of minimal budgets,

:31:48. > :31:53.usually on a charitable status, and if they cannot get the space in

:31:54. > :32:02.order to access listeners, what is the point? My amendment is largely

:32:03. > :32:11.to probe and to ask that question. Surely we can ring fenced a little

:32:12. > :32:15.bit for the people who need it? Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, it

:32:16. > :32:21.is a pleasure to be speaking on report stage. I will be urging the

:32:22. > :32:28.two members to withdraw their amendments. Starting with amendment

:32:29. > :32:32.one, I appreciate the intention of this amendment and I also noted the

:32:33. > :32:37.comments from the honourable member for West Ham as well, to be sure

:32:38. > :32:40.that local communities can have their views heard when a licence

:32:41. > :32:45.application is made. I hope the honourable member will consider

:32:46. > :32:51.withdrawing it, bearing the whole intention of this bill is to create

:32:52. > :32:57.a lighter touch registration scheme for the smaller operators. This is

:32:58. > :33:03.about small, commercial stations and community groups being able to

:33:04. > :33:07.broadcast. Is it therefore important that these multiplexes are not

:33:08. > :33:12.dominated by large media companies, that we do not end up with

:33:13. > :33:17.monopolies, people holding several licenses, to make sure there is

:33:18. > :33:24.availability on those multiplexes for those stations, which is the

:33:25. > :33:29.basis of this bill? I will be coming on a bit later when I make comments

:33:30. > :33:35.on amendment number three and deal with that point in detail. The whole

:33:36. > :33:41.idea is to give community stations and ability to go on DA B.

:33:42. > :33:46.Theoretically there is an ability, but at the moment the scale is so

:33:47. > :33:53.large that very few operators in a community station would ever get to

:33:54. > :33:57.that scale. In London the local area is London, so a community station

:33:58. > :34:03.would find it extremely difficult because they would have to pay the

:34:04. > :34:07.cost of transmission to London. A sponsor in Croydon is unlikely to be

:34:08. > :34:14.of any great relevance to somebody living in Barking and Dagenham. This

:34:15. > :34:18.bill must be seen as the first part of a three stage process. The first

:34:19. > :34:24.is the bill, which allows the legal framework for the government to act

:34:25. > :34:28.and without it the DA B community sector will not exist. It will

:34:29. > :34:34.disappear. It also includes a very limited ability to amend primary

:34:35. > :34:40.legislation by the affirmative procedure and this reflects what was

:34:41. > :34:46.done with community radio in 2004 and local TV in 2012. Strikingly

:34:47. > :34:52.similar circumstances and purposes. We have to be careful in terms of

:34:53. > :34:56.those types of provision, but in this instance it is so strikingly

:34:57. > :35:02.similar to precedence parliaments have set before it makes sense to do

:35:03. > :35:07.it on this one. The next would be to create the structure and the third

:35:08. > :35:12.and final stage would be Ofcom issuing licences to the individual

:35:13. > :35:17.multiplex operators. In terms of the second stage and the amendment

:35:18. > :35:21.talking about adding consultation, the minister, the honourable member

:35:22. > :35:26.for West Suffolk, has already confirmed a second reading that the

:35:27. > :35:30.detail of how a licensing scheme should operate and it will be

:35:31. > :35:34.subject to a full consultation by the government. It will enable the

:35:35. > :35:38.government to take account of different views from community radio

:35:39. > :35:43.and commercial radio and ensure the right protections are in place, to

:35:44. > :35:53.ensure licenses are taken up. The position of community stations are

:35:54. > :35:56.protected. On the specific point of consultation, can I stress the

:35:57. > :36:01.importance of making sure that consultation process is sufficiently

:36:02. > :36:06.long enough to allow those radio stations to be able to feed in. I am

:36:07. > :36:11.not expecting a set time frame today, but I want to stress that

:36:12. > :36:18.point. My understanding is the government will have a suitable

:36:19. > :36:21.timescale and groups like the community media Association are

:36:22. > :36:25.already aware of the bill and its provisions and many operators will

:36:26. > :36:31.be starting to think about the type of comments you want to make in

:36:32. > :36:38.relation to the consultation. The honourable member is welcome to stop

:36:39. > :36:43.me again if I am wrong, but it applies to orders made under the

:36:44. > :36:46.bill rather than to require statutory consultation for an

:36:47. > :36:51.individual licence. I see percent from somebody in a sedentary

:36:52. > :36:58.position. Just for clarity, I confirm that. I therefore hope

:36:59. > :37:03.members will accept that if every order under this act was required by

:37:04. > :37:05.statute to be subject to a full consultation, this would strike at

:37:06. > :37:11.the very heart of the intention behind this bill. The intention is

:37:12. > :37:15.to create a legislator framework that would be adaptable and it may

:37:16. > :37:19.not always be appropriate for every order made to be preceded by a full

:37:20. > :37:25.public consultation. The government needs to have the flexibility to act

:37:26. > :37:29.quickly and correct deficiencies or make minor and technical changes

:37:30. > :37:35.without having to wait for the conclusion of a consultation, a

:37:36. > :37:44.consultation that would make little sense. Technology is moving on

:37:45. > :37:48.significantly. Internet stations are able to broadcast with no licence,

:37:49. > :37:54.but we have to bear in mind with technology moving on, it is right

:37:55. > :37:57.the government has an ability to reflect that, but more serious

:37:58. > :38:03.changes would need to be the subject of consultation. If we say any order

:38:04. > :38:13.under this power needs to have a consultation that could inhibit and

:38:14. > :38:17.they would be consultations that very few people would wish to engage

:38:18. > :38:24.with. Effectively it is about technical details. My understanding

:38:25. > :38:26.is that once the initial consultation is complete, the

:38:27. > :38:32.government was said out the details licensing arrangements that will be

:38:33. > :38:36.intense subject to debate by both houses of parliament before coming

:38:37. > :38:42.into effect. There is also parallel work with the government to do with

:38:43. > :38:47.Ofcom in relation to the functioning of the new regime. I hope that will

:38:48. > :38:51.give the honourable lady the explanation she needs as to what

:38:52. > :38:56.consultation will happen and I hope she agrees to withdraw her

:38:57. > :39:05.amendment. I fully appreciate the sentiment behind the second

:39:06. > :39:08.amendment. I hope for the reasons I am about to separate the honourable

:39:09. > :39:15.member will also agree to that amendment. It already enables the

:39:16. > :39:24.Secretary of State to allow small-scale, multiplex services to

:39:25. > :39:28.be supplied by non-commercial basis. It must seek to provide an

:39:29. > :39:35.infrastructure to an area. We must be clear that multiplex is about

:39:36. > :39:41.providing infrastructure for small-scale operations. It is not

:39:42. > :39:45.the individual services you would chew into, although you need the

:39:46. > :39:48.infrastructure for them to exist. Part of the objective behind the

:39:49. > :39:59.amendment is already provided for in the bill.

:40:00. > :40:06.I believe there are likely to be opposing views in future

:40:07. > :40:09.consultations as to whether services in multiplexes should include those

:40:10. > :40:13.being run on a commercial basis and I would not want to prejudge the

:40:14. > :40:20.consultation by closing off this option in the bill. Whilst it is not

:40:21. > :40:25.a specific aim, any future move to have a totally digital broadcast

:40:26. > :40:29.system for radio would require an option for small-scale, commercial

:40:30. > :40:33.stations to move onto DA B. The current system does not do that as

:40:34. > :40:39.is evidenced by the lack of growth we have seen of local stations going

:40:40. > :40:43.on to this currently existing multiplexes. The evidence from the

:40:44. > :40:55.trials indicates unique radio services being provided and the

:40:56. > :40:58.breakdown is where 18.3% for existing community stations, 9.2%

:40:59. > :41:03.for an existing commercial station, and new formats were 72.5%. I hope

:41:04. > :41:09.this will give the honourable ladies some comfort that stations are

:41:10. > :41:16.getting onto DA B when this type of structure is in place as we have

:41:17. > :41:20.seen in the trial schemes. As mentioned earlier, the detail of how

:41:21. > :41:28.the new regime should operate will be subject to full consultation and

:41:29. > :41:33.the details will be subject to both houses of parliament, giving an

:41:34. > :41:38.opportunity to members to ensure that these objectives are included.

:41:39. > :41:42.There are likely to be a number of areas that the government will need

:41:43. > :41:49.to receive views on, for example on the number of licences each person

:41:50. > :41:56.or organisation can hold. As was mentioned by the amendment that was

:41:57. > :42:00.not selected for debate, I recognise these are the issues that the

:42:01. > :42:15.community media Association has raised. They are important issues. I

:42:16. > :42:18.accept that. But at this stage it is right the government maintains an

:42:19. > :42:25.open mind and I would urge members to resist this amendment.

:42:26. > :42:32.When we're discussing this bill, it's the fact previous legislation

:42:33. > :42:35.is now up inflexible for an era when technology has moved on

:42:36. > :42:39.significantly. Turning to amendment number three, submitted by the

:42:40. > :42:43.honourable member for Bury St Edmunds, I again hope the member

:42:44. > :42:47.will consider withdrawing it for the reasons I will shortly set out. I

:42:48. > :42:51.can totally appreciate the intention behind it, reserving space for

:42:52. > :42:56.community stations, and I suspect this may be partly motivated by the

:42:57. > :42:59.superb work done by British forces broadcasting service at a number of

:43:00. > :43:03.bases around the UK, given the honourable member's Strong work in

:43:04. > :43:08.the Ministry of Defence. It would be natural that these stations should

:43:09. > :43:12.be able to migrate onto DAB if they choose to and I'm clear this is

:43:13. > :43:16.about choice in this bill, there is no compunction for anyone to use

:43:17. > :43:22.small-scale DAB multiplex rather than a traditional license. However,

:43:23. > :43:24.if we were going to open all digital solution we need to give them a

:43:25. > :43:28.practical opportunity to do that. The problem with this amendment is

:43:29. > :43:36.it would require the government by statute to disk up -- to adopt a

:43:37. > :43:38.position which would prejudge the consultation for preserving the

:43:39. > :43:43.capacity for community stations and I want to see this Bill retains the

:43:44. > :43:47.maximum flexibility in creating the new regime that will follow it. I

:43:48. > :43:51.think members have to have in mind there are hundreds of potential

:43:52. > :43:55.locations for small-scale multiplexes and some may not be

:43:56. > :44:00.viable, specifically reserved space, or there could be operations making

:44:01. > :44:06.it unnecessary in a particular multiplex's case. I want Ofcom to be

:44:07. > :44:09.a license small-scale multiplexes to operate under conditions appropriate

:44:10. > :44:13.for the localities they will cover. I'd also not once provision that

:44:14. > :44:18.creates a radio version of a Parliamentary train service, namely

:44:19. > :44:21.a small bit of capacity kept just to meet a statutory requirement, rather

:44:22. > :44:25.than deliver an actual real goal. Ultimately this issue will again be

:44:26. > :44:30.the subject of a full consultation that will follow this bill becoming

:44:31. > :44:36.law. But we can see the evidence from existing ones of what happens

:44:37. > :44:39.whether current Leeds suggests current system is brought forward

:44:40. > :44:44.and we see community stations going on. It's worth bearing in mind the

:44:45. > :44:47.whole impetus behind the small-scale trial that the Department of

:44:48. > :44:52.Culture, Media and Sport initiated in December 2013 was to ensure that

:44:53. > :44:56.small stations, community stations and commercial radio stations, had a

:44:57. > :45:01.digital option, especially if the strong shift in listening to digital

:45:02. > :45:05.radio continues. This needs to be a practical option. Particularly we

:45:06. > :45:08.are seeing the biggest change in the last few years, certainly since the

:45:09. > :45:14.previous piece of legislation, has been the expansion of DAB into a car

:45:15. > :45:18.radios. Not that long ago very, very few cars, perhaps the most expensive

:45:19. > :45:26.vehicles, had a DAB radio installed. Now, quite a number have a DAB radio

:45:27. > :45:29.install. It means when they switched to digital they find there is a

:45:30. > :45:34.selection there, it's more likely to be the national radio stations, it's

:45:35. > :45:38.almost certain to beat the syndicated regional ones, but they

:45:39. > :45:45.may find that even commercial radio stations that are not that small,

:45:46. > :45:52.for example there is an example Parisse FM, isn't actually on DAB.

:45:53. > :45:55.That is either going to the people just migrate to Consolidated media

:45:56. > :46:01.services, reducing choice and diversity are not all the actually

:46:02. > :46:06.people don't migrate onto DAB and stick with FM, which in the long run

:46:07. > :46:11.I suspect they will be a move to want to look at when radio could

:46:12. > :46:17.switch over. He makes a very good point about small community radio

:46:18. > :46:22.stations on FM rather than DAB. I've got one in my constituency, Vale

:46:23. > :46:29.radio, covering the Vale of York and Vale of Pickering, but currently not

:46:30. > :46:31.-- not on DAB because of costs and the licensing regime and this Bill

:46:32. > :46:38.is intended to help organisations such as that. I thank the honourable

:46:39. > :46:42.member for highlighting the whole purpose of this bill, which we can

:46:43. > :46:46.come onto a bit more in third reading. But it is about the fact

:46:47. > :46:50.that the current regulatory system that exists, if this bill doesn't

:46:51. > :46:56.survive today, or if it gets talked out, then what will happen is it the

:46:57. > :47:00.national and local multiplexes will continue, they'll still be there for

:47:01. > :47:04.the largest operators in radio, that's fine, that suits their needs,

:47:05. > :47:08.however, it will be the small community radio stations that are

:47:09. > :47:13.the ones that will take the hit and ultimately see less users, less

:47:14. > :47:17.choice and diversity, and also a regulatory system that would not

:47:18. > :47:21.reflect the advancing technology. On second reading I made the point that

:47:22. > :47:25.in the 1960s, the outcome of an outdated attitude to broadcasting

:47:26. > :47:30.regulation was ships that just off our shores. The reality on this is

:47:31. > :47:37.more radio stations would move onto the Internet, which myself and the

:47:38. > :47:41.honourable member could go and set up on Internet radio station in our

:47:42. > :47:44.office if we wanted to start broadcasting out. I'm not sure how

:47:45. > :47:48.money people would want to listen to it. But that's the point of how

:47:49. > :47:53.technology is moving on. In terms of giving people access to those

:47:54. > :47:56.services, I can see some knobs of ascent to the point that very few

:47:57. > :48:03.people might wish to listen to it, we can do that on Internet but it's

:48:04. > :48:08.not got the type of ease of access that traditional rodeo -- radio

:48:09. > :48:11.broadcasting mediums have. Yes, it's growing, and those who are tech

:48:12. > :48:15.savvy probably have apps on their foes to do it, but it's not as easy

:48:16. > :48:19.as having a simple digital radio that you can carry around that's

:48:20. > :48:24.effectively something that is portable and doesn't have the size

:48:25. > :48:27.of things like a laptop, and iPad or a smartphone. That's why I think

:48:28. > :48:34.it's so important that we look to progress and have the version of the

:48:35. > :48:36.bill unamended as it stands. That's where I'm quite clear, there needs

:48:37. > :48:41.to be flexible as you for the future. What I wouldn't want to find

:48:42. > :48:44.it in a year or two's time through well-intentioned reasons, we set up

:48:45. > :48:48.some restrictions on the bill and then finding a year or two's time

:48:49. > :48:54.that we are stunting growth and development in a rapidly moving

:48:55. > :48:58.forward technology. It's safe to say that our forefathers, 30 or 40 years

:48:59. > :49:04.ago, if we'd told them you could run broadcasting system for radio off

:49:05. > :49:07.laptop, about this big, they'd have sat there in amazement. Broadcasting

:49:08. > :49:14.station was a large room with a great tower on it. They'd have said,

:49:15. > :49:17.what is a laptop? It's the way technology is moving on and it needs

:49:18. > :49:19.to be flexible and adaptable, because there are so many different

:49:20. > :49:25.locations. We are not replicating this Bill the guarantee of BBC

:49:26. > :49:29.coverage, courage on the multiplex that is in the place for local and

:49:30. > :49:32.national multiplexes, that was relevant for that time and for the

:49:33. > :49:38.scale of the operations they were. I would be is to set a specific

:49:39. > :49:41.requirement in every single licence for guaranteeing community access,

:49:42. > :49:46.however, it's almost certain that Ofcom would want to consider how it

:49:47. > :49:49.keeps a diversity on a particular multiplex, or how it gives an

:49:50. > :49:53.opportunity, and the evidence from what we've seen is that actually

:49:54. > :49:57.community radio stations have benefited very well from the

:49:58. > :50:01.small-scale trials. But if we start to have a reservation or price

:50:02. > :50:08.control and again, that's another thing we could consider, it would

:50:09. > :50:12.get is into quite odd arguments as parliament into exactly where we set

:50:13. > :50:16.price controls on particular areas, and also is a very purpose of smalls

:50:17. > :50:21.scale multiplexes, there will be more of them which would bring costs

:50:22. > :50:25.down and competition. There's got to be an incentive for the multiplex

:50:26. > :50:32.owners to invest in this technology and equipment, and doesn't require a

:50:33. > :50:36.significant investment, and what kind of rate of return would they

:50:37. > :50:41.expect? That's obviously you need to create that incentive for this

:50:42. > :50:46.equipment to be established. Thank the honourable member for his

:50:47. > :50:49.intervention. It -- the bill gives provision for some of these to be

:50:50. > :50:53.run as not for profit, effectively as community, and there's some

:50:54. > :50:57.operations from a different stations come easily example I gave, was

:50:58. > :51:00.whether things like a University or local authority might wish to

:51:01. > :51:04.provide the infrastructure. We don't want to get into the game of local

:51:05. > :51:09.authorities running radio stations, but you could run the infrastructure

:51:10. > :51:13.under this license for not per for -- not purposes, but then the

:51:14. > :51:16.station is, a commercial station could make a profit, but the key

:51:17. > :51:20.issue is at the moment you can go from running an Internet radio

:51:21. > :51:26.station in your bedroom to running a very small scale FM operation, and

:51:27. > :51:30.build your business, build up your listeners to being a more

:51:31. > :51:34.significant company. In the instance of additional radio regulation, to

:51:35. > :51:38.go on to it you in some areas need to go to accompany turning over ?1

:51:39. > :51:42.million a year to pay the broadcast fees as part of that turnover.

:51:43. > :51:51.That's why this is so important. I'm conscious of time. So I will wind

:51:52. > :51:55.up, particularly by urging the two honourable members to withdraw their

:51:56. > :51:58.amendments, and I'd urge the community media Association, who's

:51:59. > :52:03.been very active with can -- contacting members, I've welcomed

:52:04. > :52:07.that, and groups such as radio Centre, who have been in contact, to

:52:08. > :52:10.work with the government through the consultation to deliver the

:52:11. > :52:15.objectives I've outlined above. This is about opening up an opportunity,

:52:16. > :52:19.giving community stations a chance to go digital and helping stimulate

:52:20. > :52:24.creativity as we've seen and attend trial areas. I'll say more on third

:52:25. > :52:27.reading but I hope the honourable two members have received the

:52:28. > :52:37.assurances they need and withdraw these amendments. Thank you, I have,

:52:38. > :52:44.I'm very grateful to my honourable friend, am I doing this right? Yes,

:52:45. > :52:48.for his explanation, and he's gone a long way to reassure me, give me the

:52:49. > :52:54.reassurances I need and explained the work of the trials, the way that

:52:55. > :53:00.I see this is the start of the process and for that reason and the

:53:01. > :53:06.need I believe to keep this Bill flexible with the leave of the House

:53:07. > :53:10.IBEC to withdraw my amendments. Is at your pleasure the amendment be

:53:11. > :53:19.withdrawn? Amendment by leaves withdrawn. Amendment withdrawn.

:53:20. > :53:25.Consideration completed. Third reading, what day? Now. The question

:53:26. > :53:33.is the bill be read in the third time. Thank you, Madam Deputy

:53:34. > :53:36.Speaker. It's a pleasure to move the bill be read a third time and to

:53:37. > :53:40.thank honourable members for the contributions that have been made

:53:41. > :53:44.today, and to those who served on the bill committee. I don't intend

:53:45. > :53:49.to detain the house hugely, in terms of this third reading, but I do want

:53:50. > :53:52.to set out the wider purposes of this Bill and why I believe it's

:53:53. > :53:57.right that it's now receives its final approval from this House

:53:58. > :54:01.today. The whole purpose of the bill is to tackle a hole in the

:54:02. > :54:08.legislation that currently exists around broadcasting. There are three

:54:09. > :54:13.levels of radio, national, regional and larger local, and community. At

:54:14. > :54:17.the moment, three of them exist on the analogue frequencies. Two of

:54:18. > :54:22.them exist on the digital frequencies. And that's why it's now

:54:23. > :54:26.important to create an opportunity via the framework to have community

:54:27. > :54:32.stations to go onto digital. I very clear this Bill is not about forcing

:54:33. > :54:36.any station to go onto digital platform. If they wish to stay on

:54:37. > :54:39.the analogue platform. During the passage of this bill through this

:54:40. > :54:44.House and in committee we've had comments around future moves to have

:54:45. > :54:48.a switchover in the same way as we had with television some years ago,

:54:49. > :54:52.but that is not the intention of this bill, and those requirements

:54:53. > :54:58.are not in this Bill. I'd also be clear we do need to keep a

:54:59. > :55:01.flexibility in this Bill to allow the hundreds of different

:55:02. > :55:04.circumstances to be taken into account during the issue of

:55:05. > :55:11.individual licences. It would clearly be rather bizarre to say, as

:55:12. > :55:15.we don't do in any other community licence, that the idea of what might

:55:16. > :55:20.be an appropriate restriction to cover Croydon, which is almost the

:55:21. > :55:23.size of commentary -- Coventry but is an individual community in

:55:24. > :55:28.London, will be the same requirement in Whitehaven in Cumbria, where is

:55:29. > :55:32.actually the start I think the first place to switchover to digital TV,

:55:33. > :55:36.it would not be appropriate in that community to put in the same sort of

:55:37. > :55:41.restrictions we might think would be sensible and reasonable for a large

:55:42. > :55:45.suburban part of London. It's also worth noting that and I firmly

:55:46. > :55:48.believe is out there are because one of the points that has been made a

:55:49. > :55:53.few times during the process of this Bill is, is there a demand for this?

:55:54. > :55:56.It's all very well to sit here and legislate and say that we should

:55:57. > :56:01.have this. I'll come to the honourable member in a moment. Is

:56:02. > :56:06.there a demand? What we see from the ten small-scale trials as they are

:56:07. > :56:10.simple to operate and there is a demand and new choices are created.

:56:11. > :56:14.I give way. On that very point about digital technology, my honourable

:56:15. > :56:20.friend from Thirsk and Malton alluded to it earlier, in the Calder

:56:21. > :56:25.Valley we really do struggle with reception, so to allow community

:56:26. > :56:28.radios and small radio stations move onto digital, surely we have to have

:56:29. > :56:33.the technology in place first of all for them to do that. Thank you, I

:56:34. > :56:39.thank the honourable member for that intervention, and he's right. The

:56:40. > :56:43.thing is the technology actually exists. It's their, you can have

:56:44. > :56:50.small-scale broadcasting, particularly looking at for example

:56:51. > :56:53.the use of high buildings. If you put the transmission equipment on a

:56:54. > :56:57.tall building it takes out the cost of maintaining a large radio mast,

:56:58. > :57:03.the traditional type of broadcasting system we might think of. The

:57:04. > :57:10.technology exists, but ability to license it does not.

:57:11. > :57:17.What happens to the trial stations in the ten areas if we do not get on

:57:18. > :57:22.and legislate? They will end up closing. A trial system is not the

:57:23. > :57:27.proper way of regulating broadcasting in the long term. Yes,

:57:28. > :57:32.it can be used to create the trial areas and the feedback is it has

:57:33. > :57:37.gone down very well, but that cannot go on for ever. It needs to be

:57:38. > :57:43.brought to an end. I totally and utterly agree with that sentiment. I

:57:44. > :57:47.thank the honourable member for that statement. Sometimes in this chamber

:57:48. > :57:54.we are exchanging comments to each other that are not normally quite so

:57:55. > :57:57.supportive, so it is welcome. Thinking of the many diverse

:57:58. > :58:00.communities in east London who in reality are not going to go on to a

:58:01. > :58:08.London wide multiplex, they cannot do that. They will be able to get

:58:09. > :58:12.small-scale licences and provide competition to larger operations and

:58:13. > :58:16.they will be unique services with individual choice. I am delightful

:58:17. > :58:22.and delighted to have the support of the honourable member for this bill.

:58:23. > :58:28.I suspect we will be moving on to the third reading vote and I hope

:58:29. > :58:43.she will be shouting iMac in her usual style. There is an issue

:58:44. > :58:48.around could somebody own more than one small-scale multiplex? The

:58:49. > :58:52.suggestion was brought up by the honourable member for Cardiff West

:58:53. > :58:57.and the specific point on that would be if we restricted it to them only

:58:58. > :59:04.having one, we could tap bizarre outcomes. For example, in an area

:59:05. > :59:13.where more than one is needed, I would think in London one might be a

:59:14. > :59:20.good restriction. But for the British forces services, do we do

:59:21. > :59:25.that for one station, it would clearly be better for them to allow

:59:26. > :59:30.them to have more than one across the country in particular military

:59:31. > :59:39.bases. If you put restrictions in, we could see bizarre things

:59:40. > :59:47.happening like having to put in a structure that allows somebody to

:59:48. > :59:54.get around it. I am interested to hear the minister's thoughts on this

:59:55. > :00:00.point as well, how we stop it from being local and national media

:00:01. > :00:04.multiplex systems. If we were too strict on the bill, we would end up

:00:05. > :00:14.with having a situation where there would be some quite outcomes that

:00:15. > :00:19.were never intended. I hope when the bill heads to the other players,

:00:20. > :00:23.their Lordships will recognise that as well, why there is a specific

:00:24. > :00:28.reason why we have not put that restriction in on this bill. If ever

:00:29. > :00:32.in the future we decided to go for a switchover, we need to provide an

:00:33. > :00:37.option for companies who are not large-scale media conglomerates, but

:00:38. > :00:44.who do have more than one station. I hope in considering today's third

:00:45. > :00:49.reading that is taken into consideration. I look for the list

:00:50. > :00:53.of community radio stations that are out there who will get the first

:00:54. > :00:58.real chance to go onto DAB and there are so many of them and they are

:00:59. > :01:03.very diverse. They are in communities that struggle to get

:01:04. > :01:08.their voices heard. I hope when the bill gets the third reading they

:01:09. > :01:13.will see that as an encouragement to continue and a real positive for the

:01:14. > :01:17.future. That is why I am proud to have brought this bill to the floor

:01:18. > :01:20.of the House and I am hopeful today the House will agree to give its

:01:21. > :01:32.third reading and sent it on its way. Thank you very much, I will be

:01:33. > :01:37.short and pithy to give my fellow members a chance to speak to move

:01:38. > :01:41.the business on. I would like to thank the honourable member for

:01:42. > :01:46.Torbay for his expansive reason as to why he did not think my amendment

:01:47. > :01:51.was going to give any greater clarity to the bill. I have followed

:01:52. > :01:57.this with interest and I would like to think there is space for a

:01:58. > :02:02.community radio to have its full place and, like he said, to allow

:02:03. > :02:08.those such as the British forces, ethnic music to have its place

:02:09. > :02:15.within its community, so they can have a voice as well. There is an

:02:16. > :02:18.enthusiasm for small and commercial, independent stations to broadcast on

:02:19. > :02:25.DAB and I would like to hope they can do that without cost being a

:02:26. > :02:30.factor in why they do not and I hope this bill would enable this to

:02:31. > :02:39.happen. I would like to say that he has my support. I rise to support

:02:40. > :02:42.the reading of this bill and to congratulate the honourable member

:02:43. > :02:48.for Torbay for introducing this bill. It seems to me to be a bill

:02:49. > :02:52.which is very much on the cusp of very important new developments in

:02:53. > :02:59.the world of digital radio, helping to open up the market to community

:03:00. > :03:11.radio stations that want to broadcast on DAB. I particularly

:03:12. > :03:15.wanted to refer to a community radio station which is broadcasting to my

:03:16. > :03:22.constituency, the Black Country radio. As the honourable member for

:03:23. > :03:28.Torbay may know, the Black Country radio has been one of the smaller

:03:29. > :03:35.radio stations which has been taking part in the local DAV trial. They

:03:36. > :03:41.speak very positively of the benefits of the trial and they tell

:03:42. > :03:44.me that if they had wanted to broadcast over DAB before the trial

:03:45. > :03:53.had been introduced, it would have cost them thousands of pounds, that

:03:54. > :03:56.is an to that radio station. Now the Black Country community radio

:03:57. > :04:01.station is beginning to position itself as a vital source of local

:04:02. > :04:09.community news for the Black Country area, covering local politics and

:04:10. > :04:14.local community events. I am very hopeful that once this bill has

:04:15. > :04:18.passed through the other place and hopefully gets its third reading

:04:19. > :04:26.today, that the trial will be extended and this will allow the

:04:27. > :04:33.Black Country radio to continue to extend its reach as a very effective

:04:34. > :04:39.local community radio station. I think my honourable friend's bill is

:04:40. > :04:43.going to be a major contributing factor in enhancing the offer of the

:04:44. > :04:49.Black Country community radio station. As my honourable friend for

:04:50. > :04:56.Torbay pointed out, digital radio is a large growth market and there has

:04:57. > :05:03.been a proliferation of local radio stations which I want to tap into

:05:04. > :05:09.and I think this bill will be a very effective mechanism of stimulating

:05:10. > :05:14.that market. In the second quarter of 2016, we saw a large set of

:05:15. > :05:19.digital stations posting results for the first time and it showed that

:05:20. > :05:28.digital radio listening had reached a new high of 45.3%. We have seen

:05:29. > :05:35.considerable annual growth in audiences for digital radio, I

:05:36. > :05:41.growth of 4.5% over the last year. This bill allows small radio

:05:42. > :05:47.stations to take full advantage of the growth in this sector and I have

:05:48. > :05:52.already cited the example of the Black Country radio station. It will

:05:53. > :05:57.bring growth and prosperity to small radio stations and this will benefit

:05:58. > :06:02.the local community. The aim of this bill is ably articulated by the

:06:03. > :06:08.honourable member for Torbay is to create a system of radio and

:06:09. > :06:12.multiplexes. National multiplexes for UK wide transmission, local

:06:13. > :06:18.radio multiplexes and small-scale radio multiplexes for sub county

:06:19. > :06:21.level transmission. These three tier system with a lighter touch

:06:22. > :06:26.regulatory framework will open the market and bring with it the

:06:27. > :06:34.when it comes to the deregulation of when it comes to the deregulation of

:06:35. > :06:38.the industry. This bill also puts in place a provision which excludes

:06:39. > :06:44.larger radio stations, such as the BBC who have existing licences in

:06:45. > :06:50.either national or local radio multiplex services, from holding a

:06:51. > :06:56.small-scale multiplex licence. This helps to make sure that these new

:06:57. > :07:00.multiplex sites will not be abused by larger radio stations and ensures

:07:01. > :07:05.they can be used for the purposes they were intended, to let smaller

:07:06. > :07:12.radio stations see the benefits of using the DAB format. I would like

:07:13. > :07:16.to congratulate the honourable member for Torbay for steering this

:07:17. > :07:22.bill through to its third reading stage. I think it represents a very

:07:23. > :07:27.important modernisation of the existing licensing regime that will

:07:28. > :07:33.take into account the different needs of local radio stations,

:07:34. > :07:38.facilitating this creation of a richer market and a better

:07:39. > :07:45.broadcasting experience for the consumer. I think we would all agree

:07:46. > :07:49.that the current broadcasting act of 1996 has failed to keep pace with

:07:50. > :07:54.the recent technological developments and market changes we

:07:55. > :07:59.have seen and this bill is very important contribution to the of

:08:00. > :08:08.digital radio and I very much support the third reading of this

:08:09. > :08:12.bill. I would just like to congratulate my honourable friend

:08:13. > :08:17.from Torbay for bringing this legislation forward and for his deep

:08:18. > :08:19.understanding of the technologies that lie behind these fantastic

:08:20. > :08:28.evolutions in our broadcasting abilities. I will support this bill

:08:29. > :08:33.and particularly his reference to it creating more competition in the

:08:34. > :08:38.market. More commercial operators. It can be dominated by quite large

:08:39. > :08:45.national change even though they present themselves as local

:08:46. > :08:50.operators. If those operators do compete with those larger stations

:08:51. > :08:54.or networks for revenue from advertising, that can only be good

:08:55. > :09:01.for opportunities for local people and for more business people. But of

:09:02. > :09:08.course also community operators. I have an excellent community operator

:09:09. > :09:13.in my constituency called Valle Radio, who have a deep understanding

:09:14. > :09:21.of the local area. They are local people themselves and they regularly

:09:22. > :09:26.do slots on the local MP. They came down to see what happened on a

:09:27. > :09:31.typical MP's day. That local connection is incredibly important.

:09:32. > :09:34.To facilitate these smaller operators you need more affordable

:09:35. > :09:43.access and this is exactly what this is about, breaking down larger DAV

:09:44. > :09:47.areas into areas 60% smaller than the typical schemes available at the

:09:48. > :09:55.moment, which means it should be cheaper and more accessible. Putting

:09:56. > :10:02.bandwidth aside specifically for the small commercial operators and for

:10:03. > :10:08.community stations. As my honourable friend alluded to, these actual

:10:09. > :10:13.schemes, the equipment and the multiplexes themselves, can be

:10:14. > :10:17.provided by not for profit operators, which again will mean the

:10:18. > :10:26.accessibility and cost of access is more suitable for local community

:10:27. > :10:30.operators. They can have niche channels, but it very much relates

:10:31. > :10:34.to the local area in terms of content of their programmes and in

:10:35. > :10:41.terms of their local insights. Clearly there is demand, Madame

:10:42. > :10:49.Deputy Speaker, for these towels and for this spectrum. There are 444

:10:50. > :10:56.small commercial stations that would like to get onto DAB and do not have

:10:57. > :11:00.any access at the moment and this is a growing part of the broadcasting

:11:01. > :11:06.market, 45% of listeners today listen on digital. That will go to

:11:07. > :11:11.50% by the end of this year. It certainly is very significant in

:11:12. > :11:16.terms of its access to the market and its future in terms of how

:11:17. > :11:24.people will listen to radio in the future. One thing I would like to

:11:25. > :11:30.question to my honourable friend and the Minister is around the actual

:11:31. > :11:35.multiplex operators. Just in terms of the numbers of licences they can

:11:36. > :11:39.own, and I referred to this earlier in my intervention, to making sure

:11:40. > :11:44.we do not end up in a situation where you have a monopolistic

:11:45. > :11:50.situation with a media company who owns lots of these multiplexes and

:11:51. > :11:53.then has control over pricing, which is absolutely vital, making sure

:11:54. > :11:59.there is a restriction on the numbers of multiplexes that one

:12:00. > :12:06.licence holder can hold. At the same time we need to balance that with

:12:07. > :12:09.the need for investment. There is investment in terms of technology,

:12:10. > :12:15.equipment and staffing and you have to balance the two to make sure it

:12:16. > :12:18.delivers a solution and both the roll-out of these multiplexes,

:12:19. > :12:25.whilst making sure the community operators and the small commercial

:12:26. > :12:30.I'll keep this intervention fairly short. I'm conscious the front

:12:31. > :12:38.benches want to say something. In terms of reassure Hing Hing, look at

:12:39. > :12:42.subsection B, Ofcom will make provision as to the gullibility

:12:43. > :12:47.ability of eight small-scale license including persons holding national

:12:48. > :12:53.and local, if they felt a monopoly was emerging in an area used powers,

:12:54. > :12:56.but that's one for the detailed consultation on this point and

:12:57. > :13:03.reorder, rather than the bill itself. Yes, he makes a good point.

:13:04. > :13:07.Perhaps monopoly is too strong a word. Nevertheless, you could get in

:13:08. > :13:11.a situation of a hinterland, Weverton operator of these multiplex

:13:12. > :13:18.licences who has too strong a control, particularly in a given

:13:19. > :13:21.area. Just to put some protections in place to make sure that

:13:22. > :13:24.affordability of access remains. Whilst as I say, retaining an

:13:25. > :13:29.incentive for a commercial operator, because they may we be commercial

:13:30. > :13:32.operators who have the not-for-profit operators have still

:13:33. > :13:39.got that incentive to invest. I'd like to say and congratulate the

:13:40. > :13:44.Department for their foresight in starting this trial in 2014 and

:13:45. > :13:51.putting that time and investment in this new technology, which is

:13:52. > :13:54.leading to this potential roll-out and this new opportunity for a lot

:13:55. > :14:00.of commercial stations and for community operators, but just to

:14:01. > :14:03.conclude by really congratulate in a game my honourable friend for his

:14:04. > :14:08.deep understanding of the process of Parliament to get this far and he is

:14:09. > :14:12.nearly over the finishing line, but also his understanding of the

:14:13. > :14:18.technology. His work will help many, many operators and many commutative

:14:19. > :14:24.going forward. -- community is going forward. Thank you very much and my

:14:25. > :14:27.remarks at third reading today will also be fairly brief, since we've

:14:28. > :14:32.quite extensively discussed the Berlin committee and there's been a

:14:33. > :14:35.very good debate today, at report stage, and at third reading, and I

:14:36. > :14:40.know the honourable member and the government are as keen as we are by

:14:41. > :14:46.2pm to hear from my honourable friend. Therefore my remarks won't

:14:47. > :14:50.be overly extensive. The honourable gentleman for Torbay am I did

:14:51. > :14:55.congratulate him at the committee stage and I do again today, for

:14:56. > :14:58.bringing forward the bill and along its parliamentary journey. He said

:14:59. > :15:02.earlier on should those amendments have been accepted by the House

:15:03. > :15:06.there would be no chance to do anything about it later. That is not

:15:07. > :15:09.technically correct because his bill makes it down the other end of the

:15:10. > :15:12.building and they may have a different view and might have wanted

:15:13. > :15:15.to take out something we put in at this end of the building, but

:15:16. > :15:20.nevertheless they were amendments that were discussed, similar ones,

:15:21. > :15:23.at committee stage, and it will now before the other place to decide

:15:24. > :15:25.about the reassurances he's been able to give with regard to those

:15:26. > :15:34.amendments which are subsequently withdrawn. I do congratulate the

:15:35. > :15:36.honourable member for the bill. It was a noncontroversial hand-out bill

:15:37. > :15:41.from the government, but you still have to carry it effectively through

:15:42. > :15:44.its parliamentary stages and he indeed has done that, although it

:15:45. > :15:49.might possibly be not unfair to observe that there is a bill at

:15:50. > :15:54.committee stage in the other place right now, the Digital economy Bill,

:15:55. > :15:58.bit which it might have been a suitable part of, had it been ready

:15:59. > :16:03.in time for the government bill. We support this bill. We championed

:16:04. > :16:10.community radio whilst we were in government. We created the community

:16:11. > :16:14.radio order in 2004, establishing the community radio fund, and the

:16:15. > :16:17.bill continues that work by updating the infrastructure available to

:16:18. > :16:22.community radio stations and facilitating affordable access to

:16:23. > :16:27.digital frequencies. I'm sure most members of a House, particularly as

:16:28. > :16:31.we heard at second reading, have a community radio in their own

:16:32. > :16:37.constituency in mind throughout the debate, and I will, like others,

:16:38. > :16:40.paid tribute to my local radio station, Radio Cardiff. But

:16:41. > :16:46.community radio stations are agents for social good, they involve

:16:47. > :16:49.volunteers, engage listeners and contribute to social cohesion and

:16:50. > :16:53.any measure which supports these stations in extending their reach

:16:54. > :16:58.and expanding their impact is very welcome. So from this side of a

:16:59. > :17:05.House, we give our welcome to the bill and we will support it at third

:17:06. > :17:09.reading and hopefully send it on its way to a bright future in the other

:17:10. > :17:16.place and hopefully without too much further delay into law, so it makes

:17:17. > :17:25.the impact that undoubtedly will do at a local level in our

:17:26. > :17:30.constituencies. The minister. Thank you, and thank you for calling me on

:17:31. > :17:34.this important occasion. First, let me begin by taking this opportunity

:17:35. > :17:38.to congratulate my honourable friend. It's the first chance I've

:17:39. > :17:42.had the opportunity to soak for getting the broadcasting services

:17:43. > :17:46.bill through to this stage, through to third reading, and he has done an

:17:47. > :17:50.extremely detailed and thorough job with the bill. It's a great credit

:17:51. > :17:54.to him that this bill looks like it's going to pass into law without

:17:55. > :17:58.taking anything for granted in the other place of course. The

:17:59. > :18:03.government supports this bill, because it will enable the creation

:18:04. > :18:07.of an appropriate and low-cost licensing regime for the

:18:08. > :18:12.transmission of digital radio on a small scale. It will give small

:18:13. > :18:17.commercial and community stations a platform to broadcast on digital,

:18:18. > :18:23.which is currently beyond their reach, due to costs and constraints

:18:24. > :18:27.of the existing statutory re-theme. The detailed -- regime. The detail

:18:28. > :18:30.of how the new licensing regime will operate will be subject to full

:18:31. > :18:35.consultation that has been referred to earlier in the debate. But I

:18:36. > :18:37.would like to thank all the honourable members and my honourable

:18:38. > :18:42.friends for their very thoughtful contributions to the debate on this

:18:43. > :18:47.bill today and also in the previous sessions that we've had, in

:18:48. > :18:51.particular the honourable members for Aldridge-Brownhills, Thirsk and

:18:52. > :18:58.Malton, Calder Valley and Halesowen and Raleigh Regis. With your

:18:59. > :19:02.forbearance, there were some questions that have been raised that

:19:03. > :19:07.I just want to quickly try and deal with before we move on. My

:19:08. > :19:12.honourable friend the member for Bury St Edmunds asks the question

:19:13. > :19:17.about access for small community radio stations. I just wanted to

:19:18. > :19:21.reassure my honourable friend the aim is to provide a means for all

:19:22. > :19:25.small stations, especially community stations, to go digital. The

:19:26. > :19:29.builders allow us to put in protection to reserve capacity and

:19:30. > :19:37.exclude large operators, however this is done needs a very flexible

:19:38. > :19:41.approach. -- the bill does allow us. My honourable member the member for

:19:42. > :19:46.Thirsk and Malton asks a similar question. I can confirm to him the

:19:47. > :19:50.bill already gives Ofcom the power to exclude holders of existing local

:19:51. > :19:54.and national multiplex licence holders from taking licenses in

:19:55. > :19:59.small-scale digital radio multiplexes. This will stop large

:20:00. > :20:01.groups, particularly large media organisations, which operates

:20:02. > :20:05.digital radio multiplexes on a larger scale from holding small

:20:06. > :20:09.radio multiplexes. This will have the benefit of keeping down the cost

:20:10. > :20:13.of carriage on small-scale multiplexes because they will not be

:20:14. > :20:18.open to existing large scale commercial radio multiplex

:20:19. > :20:23.operators. The final question, which was raised by the honourable member

:20:24. > :20:28.for Cardiff West, was about why is this not in the Digital economy

:20:29. > :20:33.Bill. This has been dealt with before by my honourable friend the

:20:34. > :20:37.member for West Suffolk. He has said that DSM -- DC MS needed to see the

:20:38. > :20:44.conclusions of the Ofcom trials before we move to legislation. Ofcom

:20:45. > :20:48.didn't publish that evaluation until September 2016, which was several

:20:49. > :20:52.months after the introduction of the Digital economy Bill, which I think

:20:53. > :20:58.the honourable member knew anyway, but we'll move on from there. This

:20:59. > :21:05.must have repeatedly said how important local radio is to them --

:21:06. > :21:10.listeners have repeatedly said. We search in 2015 indicates 45% of

:21:11. > :21:14.local commercial radio listeners valued the local news on it and 35%

:21:15. > :21:21.value it for local travel and weather information. It's clear that

:21:22. > :21:26.radio remains a very popular medium, with industry figures indicating 90%

:21:27. > :21:30.of adult population listened to the radio each week and that overall

:21:31. > :21:34.listening to radio remained strong, with over 1 billion hours being

:21:35. > :21:41.consumed by adults in the UK each week. Although radio's popularity,

:21:42. > :21:45.measured by its reach and audience hours, have been stable over recent

:21:46. > :21:52.years, radio is changing. Listening on analogue is falling back, as DAB

:21:53. > :21:58.listening on platforms only continue to grow steadily. Currently, digital

:21:59. > :22:03.radio's share is 45.5%, as my friend for Torbay said, of all radio

:22:04. > :22:12.listening, and almost 60% of homes are now owning ADA DAB radio. The

:22:13. > :22:15.radio industry can't think this will continue and this means Digital will

:22:16. > :22:20.overtake analogue as the default listening mode in the near future.

:22:21. > :22:25.One of the drivers, almost literally, of this change, is new

:22:26. > :22:30.cars. Around 85% of new cars sold according to the Society of Motor

:22:31. > :22:36.Manufacturers and Traders, now have DAB radio is installed as standard

:22:37. > :22:40.and according to digital radio UK, one quarter of all in car radio

:22:41. > :22:45.listening is digital. This is behind total listening growing at 39% a

:22:46. > :22:50.year. I'd also endorse what might honourable friends and said about

:22:51. > :22:54.the important role played by local radio stations. Small commercial and

:22:55. > :22:58.community radio stations continue to provide an important means of

:22:59. > :23:02.informing and engaging with their communities, as well as providing

:23:03. > :23:05.entertaining, popular and lively programming. So government

:23:06. > :23:10.recognises the importance of smaller stations to their local communities,

:23:11. > :23:14.and we have been aware for some time of the desire for small commercial

:23:15. > :23:18.and community radio stations to have a route to broadcast on a digital

:23:19. > :23:22.platform, which meets their needs. This is the objective behind this

:23:23. > :23:27.bill, to give smaller stations the ability to broadcast on digital. A

:23:28. > :23:32.key success of the small-scale multiplex trials, set up by Ofcom,

:23:33. > :23:34.has been the strong support from smaller stations, including

:23:35. > :23:40.community radio and the way that they've all worked together. The

:23:41. > :23:44.majority of trial small-scale multiplexes are full, or nearly

:23:45. > :23:49.full. The development of a lair of small-scale multiplexes will provide

:23:50. > :23:53.the answer in most cases for how to provide the 400 small commercial and

:23:54. > :23:59.community radio stations currently transmitting to their local areas on

:24:00. > :24:03.FM or medium wave, with the opportunity to broadcast cost

:24:04. > :24:07.effectively on a digital platform. The development of a tier of

:24:08. > :24:11.small-scale DAB networks across the country could also attract new

:24:12. > :24:15.entrants to launch radio services. Some with successful programme

:24:16. > :24:21.formats from prior experience of broadcasting via the Internet.

:24:22. > :24:25.Overall we think the development is likely to result in a wider

:24:26. > :24:30.selection of stations and programme content for listeners, which I think

:24:31. > :24:35.we will all agree can only be a really positive thing. This will

:24:36. > :24:41.create new audiences for advertisers and sponsors, facilitating growth in

:24:42. > :24:50.the sector. The government welcomes this bill. And supports it, as it

:24:51. > :24:55.moves to the other place. It's had a very strong airing in this place and

:24:56. > :24:59.we hope the other place will give the bill a fair wind, given its

:25:00. > :25:04.limited but extremely targeted scope. The cross-party support,

:25:05. > :25:08.including all honourable members here today, and the reassurances

:25:09. > :25:15.that have been given by me and the honourable member for Torbay today,

:25:16. > :25:19.thank you. With the leave of the House can I thank those members who

:25:20. > :25:23.spoken and particularly the support that has just been received from the

:25:24. > :25:27.government to this bill. I think this is a welcome measure that will

:25:28. > :25:30.make a difference to so many communities across the country, and

:25:31. > :25:33.I'm pleased it will be going up with cross-party support, not least given

:25:34. > :25:36.the position in terms of the balance in the other place. This is a bill

:25:37. > :25:39.that will have an impact across the whole of the United Kingdom. The

:25:40. > :25:45.bill we've just finished discussing is one that will cover the whole UK

:25:46. > :25:51.and will bring a real benefit of listening, creativity and diversity

:25:52. > :25:54.and ultimately jobs to all parts of the United Kingdom. But I'm

:25:55. > :25:59.conscious that time is marching on. There's another bill that I'm keen

:26:00. > :26:03.to hear in a minute and to make some supportive remarks on, so with that

:26:04. > :26:09.I'll thank all members who have spoken and allow the question to be

:26:10. > :26:12.put. The question is that the Bill be now read the third time. As many

:26:13. > :26:27.are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". I think the ayes

:26:28. > :26:36.have it, the ayes have it. Order. Child Poverty in the UK (Target for

:26:37. > :26:38.Reduction) Bill second reading. Child Poverty in the UK (Target for

:26:39. > :26:50.Reduction) Bill, Mr Jarvis. I beg to move that the bill be read

:26:51. > :26:54.a second time. It is a privilege to have the opportunity to debate my