|
Column Number: 3
Second Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation
Monday 14 June 2004
[Mr. Mike Hancock in the Chair]
Draft British Transport Police (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Order 2004
4.30 pm
The Chairman: Good afternoon. Before the Clerk reads the title of the order, may I warn Members to avoid using the Members' entrance, as the handle keeps coming off the Door? We could end up being locked in. It would be much easier if hon. Members were to go in and out through the public entrance, as that should make the Doorkeeper's job a little easier.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Tony McNulty): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft British Transport Police (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Order 2004.
I do not seek to delay the Committee and, despite its wonderful membership, certainly do not wish to be locked in with members of the Committee for the rest of the day, so I endorse your exhortation, Mr. Hancock, to use only the Door that works—just as all my officials pile in through the Door that does not.
The British Transport police authority will be established on 1 July under provisions of the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003. The authority will oversee and manage the British Transport police. It will replace the existing British Transport police committee, which was appointed by the Strategic Rail Authority and which currently oversees the running of the force. The new authority will also take over the SRA's responsibilities as the employer of the British Transport police.
The Government's guiding principle in setting up the new authority is to mirror for the British Transport police as far as possible the way in which the local police authorities are organised and governed under the Police Act 1996. The creation of the new authority is therefore a vital step in improving the public status and accountability of the BTP.
The purpose of the order is to provide for the transfer of staff, pension funds and property, rights and liabilities of the British Transport police from the SRA to the new authority. The first principal effect of the order is to ensure that arrangements are in place for the first meeting of the authority. The chairman of the authority, who has already been appointed, is required to convene the meeting and decide where it is to be held. The location of the meeting will be published, and the chairman must notify each member who is to attend. At the first meeting, the chairman will appoint a clerk to the authority and determine the procedures to be applied to meetings.
Column Number: 4
The order will enable a level of continuity to be maintained during the transition stage by allowing for the budget, objectives and policing plan already set by the BTP committee for 2004-05, together with the strategic plan for 2003-06, to be treated as having been set by the new authority. However, the order will not shackle the authority, which, if necessary, can make adjustments to the budget during the year.
The order also provides for the formal legal transfer of all BTP officers and civilian support staff from the SRA to the new authority. Similarly, it provides for the transfer of property, rights and liabilities relating to the BTP that are currently the SRA's legal responsibility.
We do not foresee any difficulty for the SRA and the authority in agreeing the detail of such transfers, but the order will put in place a mechanism for resolving any dispute that may arise. The mechanism will enable the authority and the SRA to appoint a person to determine the dispute. If they cannot agree on whom to appoint, they can ask the Secretary of State to appoint an appropriate person.
The order provides for the authority immediately to assume the SRA's powers, duties and obligations in respect of pension provision for police officers and support staff. It will ensure that the Secretary of State retains his current powers of consent on arrangements for support staff pensions when those staff members move from the British Rail section to the new BTP authority section of the railways pension scheme. The order will also introduce into the scheme documentation and a requirement for the Secretary of State to give prior consent to future benefit changes in police officer pensions.
The BTP is funded by the rail industry, using a series of contracts known as police services agreements. The order makes provision for the existing agreements to continue to have effect. It will ensure that existing agreements between the SRA and the BTP on rates of pay, hours of duty and conditions of service will continue to apply to the transferred staff. As special police constables are not employees of the force, the order also makes provision for the conditions under which they will serve in the BTP force. That will be excellent news for my hon. Friend who sits for a Scottish seat and for the Conservative MP who sits for a Kent seat, the names of which I cannot remember, who are both BTP special constables. They will be delighted by that provision. The order also makes transitional arrangements for the British Transport Police Federation, the BTP union.
Finally, the order makes consequential amendments to primary legislation so that references to the SRA or to the BTP committee are updated to reflect the transfer of the BTP to the new authority and are consistent with the terms of the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003. The order is a technical legal instrument essential for providing the authority with the staff and other assets that it needs to function properly. We want the new authority to function properly—that was what was legislated for in the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003.
Column Number: 5
I commend both the setting up of the authority and the transitional and consequential provisions contained in the order to the Committee.
4.35 pm
Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne) (Con): I start with an apology. Some members of the Committee—probably including you, Mr. Hancock—will have noticed that my party decided on a reshuffle today that affected the environment and transport team. There may be some in the Room who think that the effect of the reshuffle is to put me on the Front Bench as the spokesman. I am sorry to disappoint colleagues: to the best of my knowledge, I remain the Whip to that team.
I am here because my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight), who is still the spokesman who should be dealing with such issues, has broken down on the Finchley road. He is a fanatical collector of vintage cars. He assures me that they all work, but now we have proof that one, at least, does not. I apologise for being here in his place. I shall say what I think he would have said had he managed to get here.
I will certainly observe your request, Mr. Hancock, to use the other Door. I do not wish to be locked in with colleagues either, but I think that Labour Members might well have locked in their voters last Thursday and not let them out until they had voted Labour. That might have helped their party, but it is too late now.
I shall put the Government out of their misery. I have not the slightest intention of seeking to divide the Committee unless something transpires that I had not anticipated. However, I have several queries, and I should be grateful to the Minister if he helped us with them.
The explanatory memorandum refers to ''public consultation''. I gather that that has been of a technical nature mostly. Will the Minister tell us whether there has been any consultation with the great British public—as distinct from those directly involved—and, in particular, with the travelling public? I understand why most of the responses from people closely involved would be technical, but the explanatory memorandum details the fact that some textual amendments to the order were suggested. Will he tell us what those were and whether any was accepted and incorporated? I believe that consultation is important, and if the public were not consulted on the order, why not? If they were, how was the issue advertised and what opportunity did the public have to respond?
The issue that concerns me most is that of pension funds. I raise it so that the Minister can reassure the Committee and so that that reassurance can appear in Hansard. I will not discuss the generalities—Mr. Hancock, you would rule me out of order if I did so—but it is a sensitive issue and there have been problems. It would be helpful to those whose pensions are involved to have it on the record that the greatest of care has been taken, that the pension position will be safeguarded and that not one person involved in the transfer will suffer any problem with his or her pension. That issue must be cleared up.
Column Number: 6
Will the Minister tell us when the first meeting is likely to be? I should not like to think that we have held it up. It would be helpful to be reassured that no group of people has been waiting for us to deal with the issue.
I also note the question of disputes and the means of resolving them. Does the Minister have any reason to believe that there will be disputes, and, if so, what sort of dispute? Or is this a safeguard just in case? Is there anything contentious that could cause difficulties?
I notice from the explanatory memorandum that a regulatory impact assessment has not been produced for this statutory instrument. I can understand why, but what caught my eye was that the original estimate of the additional cost of the police authority is reported as £50,000 per annum, but we are now told that the additional administrative costs are estimated at £300,000 per annum. Why has that difference come about? Even taking into account the Government's record, I cannot believe that inflation is running at that sort of rate—if it is, they will lose even more votes and have to lock in a few more people. We need to know whether the £50,000 was just a shot in the dark—if so, somebody ought to be told that they should do better—or has a mistake been made? Alternatively, has somebody decided to gold-plate the arrangements, thus pushing the additional cost from £50,000 a year to £300,000 a year? That is a staggering increase. I hope that the Minister can reassure us on those points.
I now come to the principle behind the order. Given that Parliament and the Government have decided to make these changes within the British Transport police, the order is the next step. Provided that we get the detail right, the Opposition do not intend to object in principle.
4.41 pm
| 
