(Con):...Since we
are dealing with a crisis in which people are in pain, suffering
every day, we should grab any help at all that is available. The
Mayor of London and the other Metro Mayors are eager to help.
If the London councils can do the work, great; but if they cannot,
and if the department is still not happy with the situation in two
years’ time, it should have the power to let others do the work. We
should not despair that some grand panjandrum will not permit
changes to the Bill, but help these patients get clean
air...
(CB):...Cities are integral to this. Enabling cities
and Metro Mayors to play a bigger part in
this would help to match what China is currently doing so
successfully. I want to give the example of Shenzhen, which has
just passed new regulations stating that, by 1 May, all new
light-duty trucks will be electric vehicles, by 1 July, only EVs
will be allowed to be registered as ride-hailing vehicles and, by
31 December, all remaining taxis will be EVs. That is the luxury
of a slightly non-democratically planned economy, so I am not
suggesting that we go there, but as we take back sovereignty, we
ought to put it to good use. This is an attempt to look at the
role that Metro Mayors can play. Urban areas are
specifically well suited to this. They suffer the most from air
pollution and they have the densest urban geography, which
enables electric vehicles to work very well for residents.
Amendment 75 is intended to ensure that Metro Mayors are given the power they
need to enable this transition. I know that this has been led by
TfL and the Mayor of London, but other Metro Mayorsfully support these powers, as
they all face similar challenges...
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department
for Transport (Baroness Sugg) (Con):... Amendment
75 is an interesting amendment to enable Metro Mayors to designate premises under
Clause 10, which would allow them to use powers in their local
area at a timetable of their choosing. In our conversations
with Metro Mayors it was a priority ask of
theirs. As the noble Baroness, Lady Worthington, said, cities and
regions play a hugely important role in local environmental
strategies and dealing with the air quality challenges they face.
Of course, charging infrastructure will need to be part of these
strategies. There are some considerations around such an
amendment and we need to give it due care and attention. We want
to ensure that any regulations or requirements that are
introduced receive the proper scrutiny of Parliament. We will be
defining large fuel retailers and setting out appropriate
circumstances for charge point installation in future
regulations. Of course, those regulations will be subject to
parliamentary scrutiny; we want to ensure that any powers
afforded to mayors or combined authorities in this area can only
be exercised within those clear definitions and a defined remit.
Given that these powers are not UK-wide but region-specific there
is a possibility that imposing this requirement could encourage
the relocation of petrol stations outside of the mayoral area
should the requirement be disproportionate. As the noble
Baroness, Lady Randerson, said, we also need to make sure that it
will not mean that areas that do not have Metro
Mayors lose out. As noble Lords will be
aware, Metro Mayors have different devolution
deals—that is also something we will need to consider further. We
will also need to consider others in the area with transport
responsibilities, such as boroughs and local highways
authorities, but we think there is merit in considering aspects
of this approach. We would not want it to be wider in scope than
the locations as currently defined in Clause 10— I was pleased to
hear the noble Baroness, Lady Worthington, mention that. Local
authorities have voiced concern about powers being widened to
include locations managed by them, but I commit to taking this
issue away and considering it before Report. On that basis, I
hope the noble Baroness feels able to withdraw her
amendment..
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
