??ࡱ?>?? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? @ ???Sbjbj??? s???oK????????hhhhhhh$??,?,?,P(-d?-<?XJ2?.(?.($/$/$/?/?/?/?I?I?I?I?I?I?I$?KR?M??Ih 3?/?/ 3 3?Ihh$/$/?J':':': 3?h$/h$/?I': 3?I':':VB\hh?B$/?. ?&?QnF??,?5?kB KE?(J0XJwBx?Nm7V?N?B??hhhh?Nh?B\?/??0r':1\m1??/?/?/?I?I?d?$!%??9d??%Name of respondentJonathan Bray/Steve DavenportOrganisation (if applicable)Passenger Transport Executive Group (pteg)Interest (eg bus operator; local authority; passenger representative; trade union)Passenger Transport Executive RepresentationQ1. Do you agree with the proposals contained in the qcs board regulations, and why (or why not)?pteg supports the Regulations and the timescales set out therein as it is important to include a timetable for the QCS Board to undertake its role. It is important that the QCS Board is fully established/constituted during the statutory consultation period and the timescales will help ensure that happens. pteg would however, advocate, designating people to serve on QCS boards who have a broad perspective and critical appreciation of the role of bus services within city-regions (or other areas as appropriate). This will facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the public interest being considered, rather being focused on a perspective informed by the bus industry or transport economics. Given that ITAs, for example, are now statutorily obliged to consider environmental considerations, any QCS panel must also be suitably constituted such that it is capable of adopting an appropriately broad perspective so as to be able to judge whether the promoting authority has met the public interest criteria. Specifically, the reference in Regulation 6 (4) a to ?appropriate range of expertise? and para 21, second bullet, of the draft guidance should be widened such that panel members appointed by the Secretary of State can include people with an informed knowledge of urban and social policy and regeneration. This would then provide for the establishment of appropriately skilled QCS Boards who are able to assess the public interest in terms beyond transport economics, bearing in mind the qualitative judgements that will be required to assess four of the five criteria.Q2. Do you agree with the proposals contained in the registration regulations, and why (or why not)?pteg identifies the transitional period as an area of risk in delivering a QCS and therefore welcomes and fully supports initiatives to mitigate the risks that arise in this period. Extending the cancellation period for services that presently operate to 112 days is very helpful and important in order to give the travelling public protection by allowing an LTA time to secure alternative provision. In respect of Regulation 6 (Variation of registration) the move to 112 days is again fully supported. We would however suggest that the traffic commissioners discretion not to require 112 days should be subject to the relevant LTA (who are implementing the QC) approval. This extra time is needed in the circumstances where the LTA intend to secure any services lost by the variation. pteg would request the ability for the 112 days to be increased, at the Traffic Commissioners? discretion, when a complex or large QC is being promoted be incorporated in to the Regulations.Q3. [for interested parties in wales:] should the proposals in part 2 of the registration regulations also apply in wales? N/AQ4. Do you agree with the proposals contained in the tendering regulations, and why (or why not)? pteg agrees with the proposals in the tendering regulations. These regulations are one of the steps proposed that will assist to mitigate the risks involved in introducing a QCS that arise in the transitional period. The relaxation in respect of having to seek tenders may assist in ensuring that passengers are not inconvenienced. The limits on the use of the relaxations should be sufficient to ensure there is no abuse and that they are only used for legitimate purposes. Q5. Do you agree with the proposals contained in the application of tupe regulations, and why (or why not)?pteg has promoted and supported the application of TUPE in a QC scenario and therefore welcomes both the provisions of the 2008 Act and the proposed Regulations. As the guidance acknowledges this is a complicated area. The comments pteg would make in respect of the Regulations are:-(1) Principally Connected ? whilst pteg understands where the two thirds figure used in Regulation 3 came from, it may be that for the bus industry this figure is too high. pteg would have thought that the figure would be better expressed as ?over 50% of their working time?.(2) Allocation Arrangements ? thought needs to be given about whether the arrangements would allow the current number of employees to be correctly allocated to individual contracts. This is not an issue where a single contract is proposed but could be where there are 2 or more contracts. The concern is that on the present drafting all of an organised grouping or class of relevant employees would be assigned to a specific contract (Regulation 8(2)(b)). It may be that some of that organised grouping or class need to be allocated to one contract and some to another. This concern could probably be addressed by adding the words ?(or part thereof)? after ?organised grouping of employees? in line 1 of 8(2)(b), and after ?class of relevant employees? in line 2. For example, if a class of employee was engineering staff you may not want all such staff transferring to one contract.pteg fully supports and agrees with the provisions relating to information provision. It is important that information is available to make TUPE operate and allow the LTA and potential bidders to understand the implications of TUPE applying.Q6. Do you agree with the proposals contained in the pension protection regulations, and why (or why not)?pteg supports provisions that provide pension protection to transferring employees. pteg is however concerned that the duties in Regulation 3 are onerous and may establish a right for employees of private operators to make claims against the LTA if the new employer does not provide broadly comparable pension provision, in particular, pteg are concerned about how Regulation 3(2)(c) would work. The Regulation should establish the requirement upon the new employer to secure pension protection and allow the transferring employee to enforce that obligation. Q7. Do you agree that the guidance is helpful, and that it should be issued as statutory guidance to ltas, qcs boards and the senior traffic commissioner?Subject to the specific comments given in Q8 below pteg welcomes the guidance and believes it to be helpful. It is set out in a logical sequence and is generally set at the correct level of detail.In respect of whether the guidance should be statutory or not, pteg is ambivalent as it feels most of the process is explicitly set out in the 2008 Act and the proposed Regulations. Most of the guidance is an explanation of the Act and the Regulations, and accordingly, as drafted pteg has no objection to it being statutory guidance.Q8. Do you have any specific comments on the draft guidance? When commenting, please indicate which paragraph numbers your comments relate to.pteg specific comments on the guidance are as follows:- Paragraph NoCommentPara 55Para 55 is not helpful. We are concerned that the effect of this paragraph of guidance would be to minimise the extent to which lower fares resulting from an integrated ticketing policy could be recognised in terms of establishing the public interest. 64 second bullet and 72 fifth bulletpteg is concerned to ensure that the guidance does not effectively close down procurement options that, for good reasons, utilise a single contract option. The effect on operators in a particular geographical area depends on many factors. It may be, for example, that in a proposed QCS area there is one dominant operator and very little, if any, on road competition. Any smaller operators in that area being restricted to some tender work, schools contracts and services that the dominant operator is not concerned about. A single contract QCS may well have no detrimental effect on such small operators and may well open up opportunities that are presently denied where there is a very strong incumbent. pteg feels it is too simplistic and, as this is to be statutory guidance, potentially restrictive to the delivery options to infer that a single contract QCS may mean that it is less likely to be proportionate. The proportionality can only be judged when the procurement strategy is put forward and it is judged in light of the existing market in the QCS area. Proportionality will be judged by balancing the benefits to parties (including potential opportunities to operators) against the dis-benefits to other parties. It may be for example that a single QCS contract is more efficient/effective and that makes it more proportionate, when compared to a multi contract proposal. Matters such as contract management, depot facilities etc may be better delivered under a single QCS contract. These factors coupled with sub contracting opportunities, excluded services, schools work etc may make a single contract strategy more proportionate than a multi contract strategy. It also has to be considered that opening up the market to competition may give operators who have been effectively marginalised by the way the market presently operates a genuine opportunity to compete, off road, for the right to run services. This includes the opportunity for consortia of smaller operators to compete.pteg feels that a better approach in the guidance would to remove references to the number of contracts being a relevant factor (it may or may not be relevant) and instead leave it to the promoter to demonstrate proportionality based on it procurement strategy and existing local market conditions. To an extent the guidance assumes that operations in an area will be undertaken by existing operators in the local market, whether this be the existing dominant operator or existing small operators. This may not be the case as there is a significant opportunity, particularly where vehicles and depots are being provided by the LTA, that other operators or companies in the service industry may compete.Para 64 ? 67 generallyWe note that in the sections relating to the proportionality of adverse effects on operators, no allowance is made for the extent to which a QC could well have positive impacts for the industry and these ought to be allowed to be balanced against any negative effects within this criterion. For example, satisfying the first criterion of increasing patronage will have a positive impact across all operators, which should be permitted to count in any assessment of proportionality. And the extent to which qcs will provide a stable business and operating environment for operators, particularly smaller ones, again should be permitted to account as a positive output of a QC regime. The relative balance across all operators, before and after, should be the appropriate measure in this regard, and we would argue that this should be permitted to be identified in the ?scale? or impacts (Third bullet, para 64). The extent to which one operator might lose their business entirely should they fail to secure any qcs because they, for example, overprice their bids in a QC environment ought not to be a significant, material factor to be taken into account in determining the public interest. That outcome would simply be the result of an open, transparent and competitive process. Further, we would reiterate our comments above regarding the use of transport appraisal with regard to this criterion (para 67) and we would recommend that this emphasis be reduced.67pteg does not consider that the use of transport appraisal techniques are generally suitable for the assessment of Quality Contracts Schemes. It should not be a preassumption that use of such techniques is needed to prepare a ?high quality and persuasive case? and no such assumption should be made by a QCS Board.89In response to the question about a ?Transitional Period? code of practice, pteg would be interested to explore the potential for such a code and in particular how it could be given some binding status (should the code be referenced in the Regulations dealing with registration periods and /or the guidance). A code could usefully set out the behaviours expected of both incumbent operators and LTAs once a Scheme has been made, with the overriding objective of protecting the passenger interest. It could deal with the opening up of and maintenance of communication lines, TUPE, registrations, obligations to work together to look at ways of making the incumbents withdrawal from the market smoother etc.At present pteg would advocate referencing a code of conduct in the guidance (such code being as from time to time issued by the Department), and the establishment of a small working group to look at the opportunities for such a code. We would not wish to see the Regulations or guidance delayed by this issue.Finally on para 89 there appeared to be some missing words from the end of the last paragraph.92pteg welcomes the proposals for extending the registration period to 112 days as this will be a significant protection for passengers during the transitional period. In respect of variations to registrations, as set out above, pteg would have preferred to see any discretion of the Traffic Commissioner not to require 112 days being made subject to LTA approval, perhaps using a similar process to the Clearance Certificate. At the very least we think the Regulations should mirror the Guidance in requiring the Traffic Commissioner to seek and take account of the LTA?s views.100 pteg would fully support the proposal that the relaxation afforded to tendering for deregistered services within 12 months of the QCS becoming operational be extended similarly to subsidised service agreements that come to an end within 12 months of the QCS becoming operational. This would provide flexibility and prevent the costly process of tendering when there is only a limited time of service operation required. Q9. Bearing in mind the objectives mentioned in paragraph 47 of the consultation document, which tier of the new, unified tribunal system should hear appeals relating to qcss, and why?In respect of the issue relating to the appropriate tribunal level, I attach a copy letter submitted by pteg in January 2009.In summary, pteg is keen to limit the number of challenge levels to prevent opportunities for objectors to a QCS to delay its implementation. Appeals to the Upper Tribunal only provides operators protection to their legitimate interests whilst avoiding unnecessary delay, cost and complexity. Clearly a long winded appeal process would extend the period of uncertainty for all parties and passengers. Incorporating a right of appeal is clearly the correct thing to do to protect legitimate interests. To allow a second appeal within the tribunal system seems excessive and potentially damaging to the interests of passengers and local ratepayers and will have the potential to discourage LTA?s from promoting a QCS.Q10. What criteria should be used for the appointment of the panel of prospective qcs board members?In respect of the criteria that should be used for the appointment of the panel of QCS Board Members pteg?s comments are:-Thought needs to be given to the appointment process to ensure that panel appointees do not have pre-existing bias. In the bus industry this may not be easily achieved. Certainly bus industry related appointees need to be carefully considered to determine if appropriate.DfT needs to review decisions of QCS Boards to ensure consistent decision making and that individual panel members act impartially.There is an argument for a passenger representative to be QCS Board Members as passengers are really the focus of running bus services. Persons with a wider social, urban regeneration experience should be considered to ensure transport is considered in a wider context.Thought also need to be given to either appointing persons with the necessary understanding of the policy and legal framework of the bus industry or ensuring proper training is given.Q11. Do you have any comments on the impact assessment, including any quantitative evidence regarding likely costs and benefits?None.A Microsoft Word version of this pro-forma is available for download at  HYPERLINK "http://www.dft.gov.uk/localtransportbill" www.dft.gov.uk/localtransportact, or on request from  HYPERLINK "mailto:LocalTransportBill@dft.gsi.gov.uk" LocalTransportAct@dft.gsi.gov.uk.  30th January 2009 Mr M Tyler Dft  SCD/KW Steve Davenport 0114 2211353 steve.davenport@sypte.co.ukDear MattRe: Tribunal Service Consultation on Changes to the Transport TribunalI refer to the Tribunal Service letter of 15th January 2009, and in particular the request for any initial thoughts on the level of the Tribunal any appeals to an LTA decision to make a QCS should go to.As you will be aware, pteg believes that any such appeal should go to the Upper Tribunal only. We are concerned to ensure that the appeals process is not unduly delayed, particularly as, by that time, the LTA will probably have commenced the invitation to tender stage (the 2008 Act specifically allows for such a step to proceed during the appeal process, (see clause 27 of the 2008 Act). Further, any delay in dealing with appeals could have a detrimental impact on bus services in an area subject to a disputed QCS due to incumbent operators not investing during that period. There is also significant protection without two Tribunal levels. By the time any appeal gets to the Tribunal the Scheme will already have been scrutinized by the QCS Board and their position in respect of the LTA scheme will have been published together with a response by the LTA and as we understand it, even after the matter has been dealt with by the Tribunal, there would be a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal. In addition, having only one tier of appeal in the Tribunal system mirrors, to an extent, what would have happened had the LTA?s decision been susceptible to judicial review, in such a case any judicial review would have been heard in the High Court with that decision being open to appeal, to the Court of Appeal. It is right that there should be a role for a Tribunal in ensuring that a Local Transport Authority has followed due process in reaching a decision on a QCS and to provide for a degree of independent scrutiny of decisions which might have adverse implications for those affected. However, to have two tiers of Tribunal would be excessive and would risk tipping the balance of the determination of a QCS service away from locally accountable transport authorities and towards non-accountable bodies. We believe that this would not reflect the will or intent of Parliament in the Local Transport Act on the importance of the local determination of Quality Contract SchemesPlease contact me if you require any further information in respect of this issue.Kind regardsYours sincerelyS C DAVENPORTON BEHALF OF pteg CONSULTATION RESPONSE PRO-FORMA FILENAME \p F:\Steve\Consultation Response document.& answers doc.docIX. PAGE 802Otuxy{????????] ^ _ b q z ? J h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? P Q  / ??????ɹ??????֌?ɹ???uɹukukakakh?zCJ^JaJh? ?CJ^JaJh?cCJ^JaJh*-hB|tCJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h+??5?6?CJ^JaJh*-hb *5?6?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJh*-hs?CJ^JaJh*-h?]5?6?CJ^JaJ&12Oz??}??tkd$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd+??oS?S??z{???}}?x?x$Ifgd+??tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la???^ ??}p?x?x$Ifgd+???x?x$Ifgdb *tkd0$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la????????}pccV?x?x$Ifgd? ??x?x$IfgdB|t?x?x$Ifgd+???x?x$Ifgdb *tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la????????9Xhn??kx?????7;TUrs~???????ɼ??????󼯼?????????Ɂw?m?m?m?w?h?zCJ^JaJh?*CJ^JaJh? ?CJ^JaJhV8?CJ^JaJh*-hD%CJ^JaJh*-h^<CJ^JaJh*-hB|tCJ^JaJh*-hV8?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJ%???RSVX?????n|???  ??????+AJNYw????????????濯̢????濯?{?戯?m???{?{?`?h?t?5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h?"?5?CJ^JaJh*-hD%CJ^JaJh*-h?"?CJ^JaJh*-hB|tCJ^JaJh*-h,"CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h^<CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJh*-h? ?CJ^JaJ%??SW?}p?x?x$Ifgd+???x?x$Ifgdb *tkd`$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?WX???}p?x?x$IfgdB|t?x?x$Ifgdb *tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?????'=????{{{{{{?x?x$Ifgd+??tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la??AX???????????RjknqfjrF H ????????󴤗?}???pfY?fp?pL?h*-hngCJ^JaJh?t?5?6?CJ^JaJh?zCJ^JaJh*-h8 >CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJh*-h? ?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJha?CJ^JaJh*-h+CJ^JaJh*-hD%CJ^JaJh*-h?"?5?CJ^JaJh*-h?"?CJ^JaJ??G ?}}?x?x$Ifgd+??tkd($$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?G H J ? ?!?"??{{n?x?x$Ifgd?v??x?x$Ifgd+??tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?H J ? ? !!?!?!?!?!?"?"?"?"?"?"?"?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?$?$?$%%???̼??̼̯?̯?٢???????zpzcz??Vh*-h?8?CJ^JaJha?ha?CJ^JaJha?CJ^JaJh*-ha?CJ^JaJh*-h~@?5?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h~@?CJ^JaJh*-h?v?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h?1?CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-hb *CJ^JaJ ?"?"?#?#?}}?x?x$Ifgd+??tkdX$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la??#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?zzzztttttt$If?x?x$Ifgd+??xkd?$$If?l4??9?0??&6`??"???? t??0????????????????????????4? la? ?#?#?#?#?#?#?A444?x?x$Ifgd+???kd?$$If?l4??O?r??&??36 ?`??????D`????? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??#?$?$?$?$??4'?x?x$Ifgd+???kd?$$If?l4????r??&??36 ? ??????????D ? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd?<1?$?$%?,.?/?/???????x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd?<1?x?x$Ifgd+??%%%%9'A'?'?'?'?'}(~(9*',?,?,?,?,O-..?/?/?/?/?/?/c2e2?2???ɼɼ?ּ??????ֈ{?{?ndndWdWha?ha?CJ^JaJha?CJ^JaJh*-ha?CJ^JaJh*-hR]?CJ^JaJh*-h?8?CJ^JaJh*-h~@?CJ^JaJh*-h??CJ^JaJh*-h??CJ^JaJh*-h?<1CJ^JaJh*-h?v?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-hO% CJ^JaJ?/?/?/?/?/x5NAAA4?x?x$Ifgda??x?x$Ifgd+???kd?$$If?l4????r??&??36 ? ??????????D ? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??2?2?2?2?3?3y5{5}5?5?5?5?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6?6777?9?9?9?9?9?:?:;;";#;??????ö????Ь??u?uhuh??h?h?h[h[?[?h*-h&j?CJ^JaJh*-hznCJ^JaJh*-hR]?CJ^JaJh*-h~@?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh<`?CJ^JaJh*-h<`?CJ^JaJh*-ha?CJ^JaJh?*CJ^JaJha?CJ^JaJha?ha?CJ^JaJha?ha?5?CJ^JaJ#x5y5z5{5|5??4'?x?x$Ifgd+???kd? $$If?l4????r??&??36 ???????????D ? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd?<1|5}5?5?6?6?????x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgda??x?x$Ifgd+???6?6?6?6?6?9?:;NAAAAAA?x?x$Ifgd+???kd? $$If?l4????r??&??36 ???????????D ? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la?;;;;;";?A444?x?x$Ifgd+???kd? $$If?l4??>?r??&??36 ?`??????????D ? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@?#;&;<< <b=c=f=?=?=?=4?6?????W@[@_@f@l@m@y@}@1AZABBC?C?C?CD DD????????𿲥??????????t??g??Z??g?gh*-hb *CJ^JaJh*-hx?CJ^JaJh*-h+CJ^JaJh<`?CJ^JaJh*-hO% CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h?[?CJ^JaJh*-h*-CJ^JaJh*-CJ^JaJh w5?6?CJ^JaJh*-h&j?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJ#";d=e=f=g=h=??4???kd? $$If?l4????r??&??36 ? ??D ? t??0?????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd+??h=?=*?+?,?-????4??kd?$$If?l4??? ?r??&??36 ? ??????D ????? t??0???????????????????????????????????????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd+??-?.?/?0?1?2?3???\????kdL$$If?l4????F??&6 ? ?????` "???? t??0????????? ???? ??????? ???? ??????4? la??x?x$Ifgd~@??x?x$Ifgd+??3?4?6???m@=Cvtggg?x?x$Ifgd+???kdC$$If?l4????F??&6 ? ?????  "???? t??0????????? ???? ??????? ???? ??????4? la?=C>C?CD0E?E>F?F|G?}}lllll & F?x?x$Ifgdx??x?x$Ifgd+??tkd:$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?DD?D/E?E?EFF/F=F>F?F?F{G|G}G?G?GHHHOHPH?H?H?H?H????????????????󡔁s]?Nh*-h?O?0JCJ^JaJ*?jh*-h?O?>*CJU^JaJh*-h?O?>*CJ^JaJ$jh*-h?O?>*CJU^JaJh*-h?O?CJ^JaJh*-h? ?CJ^JaJh?*CJ^JaJh*-h6F;CJ^JaJh*-h<`?CJ^JaJhQCJ^JaJh<`?CJ^JaJh*-hx?CJ^JaJh*-h?]CJ^JaJ|G}G?GH?}}?x?x$Ifgd+??tkd?$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la?HHHH?HIIII I!I"I#I$I%I&I???????????????tkdx$$If?l??0??&6??" t??0?????????????????????4? la??H?H?H?H?H?H?H?HI IIIIII>I?ITIUIWI]I_IaIpI????Ѭ????я?yod\dXoJ=h?2?hx?CJ^JaJh?2?hx?CJH*^JaJhx?hx?CJaJh?2?hx?CJaJhx?CJ^JaJhx?6?CJ^JaJh?O?6?CJ^JaJh*-h?O?6?CJ^JaJh*-h?O?0JCJ^JaJ'?jh*-h?O?CJU^JaJ!jh*-h?O?CJU^JaJh*-h?O?CJ^JaJ$jh*-h?O?>*CJU^JaJh*-hb *0JCJ^JaJ&I'I(I)I*I+I,I-I.I/I0I1I2I3I4I5I6I7I8I9I:I;II?I@IAI???????????????????????????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>AIBICIDIEIFI?????okd&$$If?l4?5?F????? ` `R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la?$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>FIGIHIIIJI????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd?$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la?JIKILIMINI????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd?$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la?NIOIPIQIRI????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd?$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la?RISITIUIVIWIpIqI}I?I?I?I???????ssss$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>$a$gdx?gdx?okdJ$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la? pIqI?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I:JfJhJK!K'S4S5SFSJSXSeSiSjSkSnSoSpSrSsSuSvSxSyS????????????ѷѩ??ѝ??t???f^Z^Z^Z^h?o0jh?o0Uh*-hx?6?CJ^JaJh wh w5?6?CJ^JaJhx?5?CJ^JaJh??hx?5?CJ^JaJh??hx?5?CJaJh??hx?5?6?CJaJh??hx?CJH*aJh??hx?5?>*CJaJh??hx?CJaJh?2?hx?CJaJhx?CJaJh??hx?CJ^JaJhx?#?I?I?I?I?I????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd$$If?l4?5?F????? ` `R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la??I?I?I?I?I????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd?$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la??I?I?I?I?I?I?I??????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okd?$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la??I?I?I?I?I????$??&`#$/??Ifgd=>okdn$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la??I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I?I???????????????$a$gdx?gdx?okd7$$If?l4???F?????   R? t?6`?????6?? ???? ???? ???? ?????4?4? la??I?I?I?I?I9J:JKKNMOM?R?R&S'S4S5SESFSGSHSISJSXSkSlSmSnS???????????????????????????gdx?? gdx?$a$gdx?nSoSqSrStSuSwSxSzS{S?S?S?S?S?S?S??????????????? $?9ta$gd?FT$a$gdb *yS{S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S?S????????غ????????h*-hx?6?CJ^JaJh?t?0JmHnHujh?t?0JU h?t?0Jh?t?0JCJmHnHuh?FTh?t?0JCJjh?FTh?t?0JCJUh?t?h+??h?t?6?CJh?t?6?CJh?o09&P 1?h0:p+????A ??.!??"??#??$??%????? ??6&P 1?h:px???. ??A!??"??#??$??%????? ???$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l4?9 t??0????????+?5??5??"/? ????????/? ?4?$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?O t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ????????/? ?/? ????????4??$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ????????4??$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ????????4??$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ????????4??$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ????????4?&$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?> t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/?  ?/? ?/? ????????/? ?4?$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/?  ?/? ?/? ?4?P$$If?!vh5??5??5??5?D5??#v?#v?#v?#vD#v?:V ?l4?? t??0????????+?+?+?5??5??5??5?D5??/? ?/? ?/? ????????/? ?/? ?/? ????????/? ?4??$$If?!vh5??5??5?"#v?#v?#v":V ?l4?? t??0???????+?+?+?5??5??5? "/?  ????????/? ????????/? ????????/? ?4??$$If?!vh5??5??5?"#v?#v?#v":V ?l4?? t??0???????+?+?+?5??5??5? "/?  ????????/? ????????/? ????????/? ?4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"/? ?4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4??$$If?!vh5??5??"#v?#v?":V ?l t??0????????5??5??"4? D???y??????K? "www.dft.gov.uk/localtransportbill???y??????K? Rhttp://www.dft.gov.uk/localtransportbill D???y??????K? "LocalTransportBill@dft.gsi.gov.uk???y??????K? Rmailto:LocalTransportBill@dft.gsi.gov.uk?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?5 t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?5 t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?$$If?!vh5? 5?R5?? #v #vR#v? :V?l4?? t?6`?????0???????6??+?+?,?5? 5?R5?? ?D@??D ?]NormalCJOJQJ_HmH sH tH DA@???D Default Paragraph FontRi@???R  Table Normal?4? l4?a? (k???(No List 4@?4 +??Header?9r 4 @4 +??Footer?9r .)@?. +?? Page Number6U@?!6 ?O? Hyperlink >*B*ph?~?O~ b * QCS QUESTION9$ & F???????|??x??]?^??`?|?a$5?6?^JaJtH p?O1Bp b *QCS QUESTION (ANNEX)' & F??????y??x^??`?y?5?6?j?@?Sj x? Table Grid7:V?0??????UA?K?????;?????kKnK?K?@0??ظ8? @086?????R? ?12Oz{???^????  ? ? ? S W X ? ????'=???GHJ????????????????????????????$&?'?'?'?'?'?'x-y-z-{-|-}-?-?.?.?.?.?.?.?1?233333"3d5e5f5g5h5?5*7+7,7-7.7/7071727374767?7m8=;>;?;<0=?=>>?>|?}???@@@@?@AAAA A!A"A#A$A%A&A'A(A)A*A+A,A-A.A/A0A1A2A3A4A5A6A7A8A9A:A;AA?A@AAABACADAEAFAGAHAIAJAKALAMANAOAPAQARASATAUAVAWApAqA}A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A9B:BCCNEOE?J?J&K'K4K5KEKFKGKHKIKJKXKkKlKmKnKoKqKtKwKzK?K?K?K?K?K?0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0???? 0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0???? 0???? 0????0????0???? 0????0???? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0????0????0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ? 0????0????0????0????0???? 0????0???? 0????0????0????0???? 0????0???? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ?0????0????0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ? 0???? 0????0????0???? 0????0???? 0???? 0????0????0???? 0????0???? 0???? 0????0????0???? 0???? 0???? 0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0????0???? 0???? 0??? 0??? 0??? 0?? ?0?? ?0?? ?0?? ?0?? ?0???0??0?0??@?0??@?0??@?0??@?0??@?0??@?0????0??@?0??@?0?? ??0?? ??0?? ??0????0????0??@?0????0?? ??0????0?? ??0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0????0????0??(?0??(?0????0????0????0??@?0????0??? ?0??? ?0??? ?0??? ? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ?0???0???0???0???0???0???0???@0??? ?@0??? ?@0??? ?0?? ? 0?? ?`0??? ?@0??? ?0?? ? 0?? ?`0??? ?@0??? ?0?? ? 0?? ?`0??? ?0???0???0?? ?0?? ? 0??? ? 0??? ?0??? ?0??? ?0???0????0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0?? ??0????0???0?? ??0???0????0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0???0??H?0???0???0??????P??@0????@0????@0?? ??@0?? ??@0?????@0?????@0?????@0??H?0? e5f5g5h5?5*7+7,7@AAABACADAEAFAGAHAIAJAKALAMANAOAPAQARASATAVAWApAqA?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?AIKJKXKkKlKmKnK?K@00? ? ?0?@00?@00?0?@00?@00? ? ?0 C?0  ?C0 ?C0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?C0  ?C0  ?C0  ?C0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ? @3\?8? ? @3\?8? ? @3\?8? ? @3\?8? ? @3\?8? ? @3\?8? ?C?0  ?C0 ?C0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?C?0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?CY0 ?C0  ?C0  ?C0  ?C0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ?C?0  ?@0?  @3\?8? ?Z@0 0??;X@0 0X@0 0?@0????C?0  ? @3\?8? ??@0??X?????R? ? --?????????????H %?2#;D?HpIyS?S*0158>@EKNU]z???W??G ?"?#?#?#?$?/x5|5?6;";h=-?3?=C|GH&IAIFIJINIRI?I?I?I?I?I?InS?S+-./234679:;<=?ABCDFGHIJLMOPQRSTVWXYZ[\?S,O@?@?@?@?@A?KX??X??-;uy??????!????8?@???????????0?( ? ??B ?S ???? ???? ?A~?m?A~$?!?A~<[=?A~tb@?A~? ??A~???A~???A~:?A~d *?urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags ?PersonName? ?1?15?2009?30?Day?Month?Year   tx??14^b??,0???  ? ? K P ? ? ?? ??JN????jnfj?????????????!?!?$?$?)?)H+L+?+?+9-=-?-?-//N0R0?1?1?2?2"3&34 4?5?5?7?7W8[8y8}8?;?;<<0=3=}A?AC!CeKiKoKoKqKqKrKrKtKuKwKxKzK{K?K?K^b6?  ? ? ? ?  p|????jn????"/"?$?$?&?&\'e'?-?-"3&3?5?5?8'9?@?@+H2HoKoKqKqKrKrKtKuKwKxKzK{K?K?K333333333333333333333333333Otx??^b???  S X ? ?  ??JN????jnfj???????????$?$?'?'}-?-?-?.?.//?1?13"3&34 4h5?5?5W8[8y8}8< <??@]A?AXKeKiKnKoKoKqKqKrKrKtKuKwKxKzK{K?K?K?K?K?KjnoKoKqKqKrKrKtKuKwKxKzK{K?K?K?(h????????????[K?H?x????????????T?@?'?????????h ?h????h^?h`????h?H.h ?8????8^?8`????h?H.h???????^??`???OJQJo(?h?H???? ????? ^?? `???o(()?h ?? ????? ^?? `????h?H.?h ?x?L??x^?x`?L??h?H.?h ?H????H^?H`????h?H.?h ?????^?`????h?H.?h ???L???^??`?L??h?H.h???????^??`???o(?h?HQ.? ???????^??`????h?H.? ?p?L??p^?p`?L??h?H.? ?@ ????@ ^?@ `????h?H.? ?????^?`????h?H.? ???L???^??`?L??h?H.? ???????^??`????h?H.? ???????^??`????h?H.? ?P?L??P^?P`?L??h?H.h???????^??`???OJQJo(?h?H???h???????^??`???OJQJ^Jo(?h?Ho?h?p????p^?p`???OJQJo(?h?H???h?@ ????@ ^?@ `???OJQJo(?h?H???h?????^?`???OJQJ^Jo(?h?Ho?h???????^??`???OJQJo(?h?H???h???????^??`???OJQJo(?h?H???h???????^??`???OJQJ^Jo(?h?Ho?h?P????P^?P`???OJQJo(?h?H???([K?H[K?H?X???T????????????Z???????????????? ̂?????????????????????                 ????cQ+yO% ?)?]?*ic,"?%zn?c=>?F|V YC!?q!?I"D%V)%?p'y(b * f*+?6,*-YA.?!/?U/?o0?<1oV1?77?_7?7?E9$ ;6F;^<?y<?I=8 >Q_?)E@?qB?GFP/H?VH?[J2GK?L?sLQMo.O?JOujP?R?ZS?FT?IV?]/q]G=`KengDl?_l)xl?xmH/s?CsB|t w&w?z?;?;|?}???@@A>A@AAABACADAEAFAGAHAIAJAKALAMANAOAPAQARASAqA?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?A?K???????????????????????????????????@?kk??Ekk?KP@??Unknown????????????G??z ??Times New Roman5??Symbol3&? ?z ??Arial?5? ?z ??Courier New;??Wingdings"1???h?2?F?2?Fu چB -@&?B -@&?!???9???4dIKIK0?q???HX ??????????????????????????Z???ANNEX FConsultation response pro-formaDepartment for TransportSailaA   ???????Oh??+'??0?????? , H T `lx????ANNEX F Consultation response pro-formaDepartment for TransportNormalSailaA3Microsoft Word 10.0@???@???tB?@v!$nF?@??GnF?B -@????՜.??+,??D??՜.??+,??D hp???? ????? ??Central Government?&IK? ANNEX F Title? X4<X`l??? ? _PID_HLINKS_AdHocReviewCycleID_NewReviewCycle_EmailSubject_AuthorEmail_AuthorEmailDisplayName_PreviousAdHocReviewCycleID _ReviewingToolsShownOnce?A Fn)mailto:LocalTransportBill@dft.gsi.gov.ukA)http://www.dft.gov.uk/localtransportbill??V7$Pteg response to QC consultationSteve.Davenport@sypte.co.ukSteve Davenport;??l  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^????`abcdefghijklm????opqrstuvwxyz{|}~?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Root Entry???????? ?F???QnF???Data ????????????_1Table????n?NWordDocument????s?SummaryInformation(?????????????DocumentSummaryInformation8?????????CompObj????????????j?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???? ?FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8?9?q