| Description | The Scottish Government’s Transport directorate carried out a consultation exercise on its proposals for secondary legislation in support of the Transport and Works (Scotland) Act 2007. That Act places the Scottish Ministers at the heart of an order-making procedure for the authorisation of guided transport schemes and the construction and operation of inland waterways. |
|---|
| ISBN | (Web Only) |
|---|
| Official Print Publication Date | |
|---|
| Website Publication Date | September 27, 2007 |
|---|
HERITAGE RAILWAY ASSOCIATION CONSULTATION RESPONSE
TRANSPORT & WORKS (SCOTLAND) ACT 2007
HRA RESPONSE to SECONDARY LEGISLATION CONSULTATION
(A) Introduction
The Heritage Railway Association (HRA) is the co-ordinating body for heritage railways and tramways, museums with significant railway collections, steam centres and other railway heritage organisations throughout the U.K. and Eire and currently has 246 member organisations that between them operate 126 heritage railways and tramways. The Association has 11 member organisations in Scotland, operating 7 heritage railways, 2 museums and 4 locomotive owning groups.
When first made aware of the proposals for what is now the Transport & Works (Scotland) Act 2007, the Association's view was that - at least for the specific purpose of authorising new heritage railways and extensions to existing heritage railways - the provisions under the former Light Railway Acts were still "fit for purpose" and formed an effective and reasonably economical mechanism. We now recognise that it was not practical to retain the Light Railway Act procedures solely for heritage railway applications.
Having recently had the opportunity to peruse the draft secondary legislation to implement the new order-making powers under the Transport & Works (Scotland) Act 2007, we confirm that our primary concern is the financial burden on the promoters of heritage railway projects of obtaining statutory powers under the new system proposed.
(B) Annex A : T&W (Sc) Act - Applications and Objections Procedure Rules 2007
Response to Question A 2
The Association welcomes the commitment given in the last Parliament that organisations seeking an order for a railway heritage project should not pay a fee greater than the cost of applying for a Private Bill. We understand that this reflected the fact that almost all railway heritage projects are undertaken by "not for profit" organisations.
Comment (1) - In the narrative of Question A 2, we note that reference is made specifically to charitable organisations in this context. In practice, the legal entities which promote and subsequently operate most heritage railways are companies limited by guarantee or by shares but are not registered charities. They are nevertheless companies which operate "for the public benefit", in many cases with 'locked in' provisions under their Articles of Association preventing disposal of assets to private individuals and bodies in the event of winding up of the company and preventing payment of dividends to shareholders.
It would be inappropriate for any specific provision to limit the financial burden on the costs of obtaining a Transport & Works Order for a heritage railway project to be applicable only to charities registered with the Office of the Scottish Charities Regulator (or the Charity Commission in England). We would welcome the opportunity for further dialogue with the Scottish Executive on wording to provide an appropriate definition of heritage railway organisations who would be entitled to benefit from any "capping" of the fees for applications.
Comment (2) - An effective method of minimising costs would be to follow the example of the existing regulation under the Transport & Works Act 1992 in England and Wales which provides for a "two tier" structure for fees for applications:-
Higher Fees Scale where the applicants seeks compulsory purchase powers for land in the application.
Lower Fees Scale where compulsory purchase powers are not sought.
Experience in England and Wales has shown that compulsory purchase powers have rarely, if ever, been sought for a Transport and Works Order for a heritage railway project. We would accordingly strongly urge the adoption of the same, or very similar, two tier structure for fees for applications in Scotland.
(C) General Observation : Undertaking to Review Operation of System
We would propose that the Applications and Orders Procedure Rules might usefully include provision of an undertaking to review the operation of the system after a specific period of time, for example 2 years. We suggest this would be a useful safeguard for all categories of applicants, not merely heritage railways.
Peter Ovenstone, Chairman
HRA Scottish Committee