1-20 of 31 results for subject:"Road traffic"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.281 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.009 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Road traffic"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Road traffic" OR subject_t:"Traffic congestion" OR subject_t:"Traffic forecasting" OR subject_ses:92864
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir Alec, not least because you have allowed me the privilege of speaking although I was a couple of minutes late. I was chairing the Justice Committee, but I did not want to miss this debate. Fortunately, I can be...
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir Alec, not least because you have allowed me the privilege of speaking although I was a couple of minutes late. I was chairing the Justice Committee, but I did not want to miss this debate. Fortunately, I can be...
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. More than a year ago I asked the then roads Minister, the hon. Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden), for a meeting to discuss the repair of Hammersmith bridge. I followed up that request on at least six occasions, but...
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. More than a year ago I asked the then roads Minister, the hon. Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden), for a meeting to discuss the repair of Hammersmith bridge. I followed up that request on at least six occasions, but...
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Elliott. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) for securing the debate. I agree with everything that she said, including about the toxic effects of Heathrow, which apply equally, if not more so, to my constituency...
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Elliott. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) for securing the debate. I agree with everything that she said, including about the toxic effects of Heathrow, which apply equally, if not more so, to my constituency...
That is a whole ’nother debate. Given that the Government will not fund major strategic infrastructure because it is in London—if it were anywhere else in the country, they would be paying 80% or 90%—and given how much they have dragged their feet for years on this project, the Minister...
That is a whole ’nother debate. Given that the Government will not fund major strategic infrastructure because it is in London—if it were anywhere else in the country, they would be paying 80% or 90%—and given how much they have dragged their feet for years on this project, the Minister...
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the number of vehicles using (a) the M4, (b) the M25, (c) the A4 and (d) the local road network to access Heathrow airport in each of the last two years.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the number of vehicles using (a) the M4, (b) the M25, (c) the A4 and (d) the local road network to access Heathrow airport in each of the last two years.
As part of the Departmentâs National Statistics series on Road Traffic, the Department produces annual estimates of the average daily flow of vehicles on the major roads near Heathrow airport. The Department does not know the destination of these vehicles.
The table below provides a breakdown of vehicle flow estimates on sections of (a) the M4, (b) the M25 and (c) the A4 close to Heathrow airport for 2016 and 2017 â the latest years available.
Average Daily Flow Estimates of motor vehicles on the M4, M25, and A4 near Heathrow Terminals â 2016 and 2017
For terminals 2 & 3 |
| Average Daily Flow | |
Road link by direction | Traffic count-point ID | 2016 | 2017 |
M4 westbound - before junction 4 | CP 6013 | 73,421 | 70,077 |
M4 eastbound - before junction 4 | CP 16012 | 72,498 | 74,388 |
M25 southbound - before junction 15 | CP 7902 | 97,584 | 101,256 |
M25 northbound - before junction 15 | CP 27923 | 105,827 | 103,287 |
A4 eastbound - before T2&3 | CP 56114 | 10,451 | 10,406 |
A4 westbound - before T2&3 | CP 16112 | 6,807 | 7,977 |
For terminals 4 & 5 |
| Average Daily Flow | |
Road link by direction | Traffic count-point ID | 2016 | 2017 |
M4 westbound - before junction 4b | CP 16012 | 74,344 | 79,547 |
M4 eastbound - before junction 4b | CP 48582 | 75,076 | 72,544 |
M25 northbound - before junction 14 | CP 47876 | 104,525 | 97,377 |
M25 southbound - before junction 15 | CP 27923 | 108,635 | 107,772 |
Vehicle counts are collected at a sample of locations on (d) the local road network. These can be accessed via the Departmentâs interactive map here:
https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/manualcountpoints
Contextual information can be found on the data.gov.uk website here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/road-traffic-statistics
The Secretary of State has mentioned the Piccadilly line upgrade, but he knows that that—and, indeed, Crossrail—is there to cope with existing and future passenger demand, and not Heathrow expansion. Given that we know that Heathrow, as always, will do nothing to cope with the problems that it causes, what will the Government do when there is this massive increase in passengers, a 50% increase in flights and no capacity on those lines to deal with those?
The Secretary of State has mentioned the Piccadilly line upgrade, but he knows that that—and, indeed, Crossrail—is there to cope with existing and future passenger demand, and not Heathrow expansion. Given that we know that Heathrow, as always, will do nothing to cope with the problems that it causes, what will the Government do when there is this massive increase in passengers, a 50% increase in flights and no capacity on those lines to deal with those?
Even an expanded Heathrow is forecast to need only 6% of capacity on the Piccadilly line and, as I said a moment ago, we are already moving ahead with western access and starting the process of southern access. I am making provision for a Chiltern route into Old Oak Common, connecting to Heathrow by Crossrail, and HS2 will come to Old Oak Common as part of the first phase of that project. I think we are doing rather a lot to prepare for surface access to Heathrow.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the expansion of Heathrow Airport on local road networks.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of the expansion of Heathrow Airport on local road networks.
The Airports National Policy Statement (NPS) was designated on 26 July 2018, paving the way for a development consent application. As part of the development of the Airports NPS, an Appraisal of Sustainability was undertaken which included analysis of surface impacts for all three options shortlisted by the Airports Commission.
As part of the surface access requirements in the Airports NPS, the Government has specified that any applicant for development consent must submit a surface access strategy as part of their application.
(5) what plans his Department has to conduct an assessment of the low value road traffic accident process for personal injury claims.
[139121]
Mr Slaughter:
(5) what plans his Department has to conduct an assessment of the low value road traffic accident process for personal injury claims.
[139121]
Mr Slaughter:
The information is as follows:
PQs 139117-139120
Neither the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), nor I had any specific meetings with either the insurance industry or claimant representatives immediately prior to the publication of this Department's proposals for the reduction of fixed recoverable fees in relation to the extended Road Traffic Accident Personal Injury scheme.
At present, there are no plans for us to meet, or have discussions with, either insurance or claimant representatives about these proposals before final rates are set. The Department has, however, received over 750 responses to the recent consultation on the proposals. These are currently being analysed and the views of both insurance and claimant respondents will be fully considered before final decisions are made.
PQ 139121
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Steve Rotheram) on 12 December 2012, Official Report, column 370W.
(5) how many and what proportion of claims for (a) road accidents, (b) employers' liability and (c) public liability dealt with in the (i) fast track and (ii) portal he estimates will be dealt with under the small claims system under his proposal to increase the limit for small claims...
(5) how many and what proportion of claims for (a) road accidents, (b) employers' liability and (c) public liability dealt with in the (i) fast track and (ii) portal he estimates will be dealt with under the small claims system under his proposal to increase the limit for small claims...
(1) The Government's announced its intention to extend the Pre-Action Protocol for low value personal injury claims in road traffic accidents (the RTA Protocol) on 9 February 2012. The extended scheme will be implemented by April 2013 and will include road traffic accident, employer's liability and public liability claims up to a value of £25.000. I met with members of the RTA Portal Company Board on 1 March 2012 to discuss issues arising from the extension in terms of the modification of the RTA Portal. On 22 March 2012, I hosted a roundtable meeting to discuss
issues relating to the extension with key stakeholders, including representatives of the RTA Portal Company.
I have not received any written representations on these issues directly from the RTA Portal Company, other than in connection with these meetings. However, I am aware of the company's concerns about the practicality of implementing modifications to the RTA Portal resulting from extension of the RTA Protocol by April 2013, and my officials are working with the company to address these concerns.
(2) The revision of the RTA Protocol and the supporting Civil Procedure Rules is being taken forward by a sub-committee of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee. It is not appropriate, therefore, for me to comment on the timing of the publication of any such revision. Any modification of the RTA Portal is a matter for the RTA Portal Company.
(3) The definition of a public liability personal injury claim for the purposes of the extended RTA personal injury scheme will be set out in the relevant Pre-Action Protocol.
(4) The RTA Portal is run by the RTA Portal Company, which is a privately owned and privately funded enterprise. Therefore, this Department does not hold the information requested. However, I understand from the RTA Portal Company that since its go-live date in April 2010:
the main reason for drop out at Stage 1 is timeout in the absence of a decision by the insurer with regard to liability (356,529), representing 26% of submitted claims; and
the predominant reason for drop out at Stage 2 is caused by a timeout for no response (34,335) which represents 2.5% of submitted claims.
The RTA Portal Company does not hold information about cases which have proceeded to Stage 3, as this is not a function of the RTA Portal.
(5) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on the number and proportion of RTA, employer's liability and public liability claims using the fast track and the RTA Protocol will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(6) I can confirm that a copy of Professor Fenn's report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses on publication.
(7) The RTA Pre-action Protocol allows unrepresented claimants to bring a personal injury claim. The operation of the RTA Portal in this regard is a matter for the RTA Portal Company. The use of the RTA Protocol and RTA Portal by such claimants in the event of an increase to the small claims PI limit will be reviewed in the light of the forthcoming consultation.
(8) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on use of the RTA Protocol (and, therefore, on use of the RTA Portal) will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(6) if he will place a copy of Professor Fenn's report on the Road Traffic Accident portal system in the Library;
[110633]
Mr Slaughter:
(6) if he will place a copy of Professor Fenn's report on the Road Traffic Accident portal system in the Library;
[110633]
Mr Slaughter:
(1) The Government's announced its intention to extend the Pre-Action Protocol for low value personal injury claims in road traffic accidents (the RTA Protocol) on 9 February 2012. The extended scheme will be implemented by April 2013 and will include road traffic accident, employer's liability and public liability claims up to a value of £25.000. I met with members of the RTA Portal Company Board on 1 March 2012 to discuss issues arising from the extension in terms of the modification of the RTA Portal. On 22 March 2012, I hosted a roundtable meeting to discuss
issues relating to the extension with key stakeholders, including representatives of the RTA Portal Company.
I have not received any written representations on these issues directly from the RTA Portal Company, other than in connection with these meetings. However, I am aware of the company's concerns about the practicality of implementing modifications to the RTA Portal resulting from extension of the RTA Protocol by April 2013, and my officials are working with the company to address these concerns.
(2) The revision of the RTA Protocol and the supporting Civil Procedure Rules is being taken forward by a sub-committee of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee. It is not appropriate, therefore, for me to comment on the timing of the publication of any such revision. Any modification of the RTA Portal is a matter for the RTA Portal Company.
(3) The definition of a public liability personal injury claim for the purposes of the extended RTA personal injury scheme will be set out in the relevant Pre-Action Protocol.
(4) The RTA Portal is run by the RTA Portal Company, which is a privately owned and privately funded enterprise. Therefore, this Department does not hold the information requested. However, I understand from the RTA Portal Company that since its go-live date in April 2010:
the main reason for drop out at Stage 1 is timeout in the absence of a decision by the insurer with regard to liability (356,529), representing 26% of submitted claims; and
the predominant reason for drop out at Stage 2 is caused by a timeout for no response (34,335) which represents 2.5% of submitted claims.
The RTA Portal Company does not hold information about cases which have proceeded to Stage 3, as this is not a function of the RTA Portal.
(5) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on the number and proportion of RTA, employer's liability and public liability claims using the fast track and the RTA Protocol will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(6) I can confirm that a copy of Professor Fenn's report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses on publication.
(7) The RTA Pre-action Protocol allows unrepresented claimants to bring a personal injury claim. The operation of the RTA Portal in this regard is a matter for the RTA Portal Company. The use of the RTA Protocol and RTA Portal by such claimants in the event of an increase to the small claims PI limit will be reviewed in the light of the forthcoming consultation.
(8) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on use of the RTA Protocol (and, therefore, on use of the RTA Portal) will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(7) what his policy is on the use of the Road Traffic Accident portal by unrepresented claimants when bringing a personal injury claim; and whether such claimants will be required to use the portal in the event of an increase in the small claims limit;
[110637]
Mr Slaughter:
(7) what his policy is on the use of the Road Traffic Accident portal by unrepresented claimants when bringing a personal injury claim; and whether such claimants will be required to use the portal in the event of an increase in the small claims limit;
[110637]
Mr Slaughter:
(1) The Government's announced its intention to extend the Pre-Action Protocol for low value personal injury claims in road traffic accidents (the RTA Protocol) on 9 February 2012. The extended scheme will be implemented by April 2013 and will include road traffic accident, employer's liability and public liability claims up to a value of £25.000. I met with members of the RTA Portal Company Board on 1 March 2012 to discuss issues arising from the extension in terms of the modification of the RTA Portal. On 22 March 2012, I hosted a roundtable meeting to discuss
issues relating to the extension with key stakeholders, including representatives of the RTA Portal Company.
I have not received any written representations on these issues directly from the RTA Portal Company, other than in connection with these meetings. However, I am aware of the company's concerns about the practicality of implementing modifications to the RTA Portal resulting from extension of the RTA Protocol by April 2013, and my officials are working with the company to address these concerns.
(2) The revision of the RTA Protocol and the supporting Civil Procedure Rules is being taken forward by a sub-committee of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee. It is not appropriate, therefore, for me to comment on the timing of the publication of any such revision. Any modification of the RTA Portal is a matter for the RTA Portal Company.
(3) The definition of a public liability personal injury claim for the purposes of the extended RTA personal injury scheme will be set out in the relevant Pre-Action Protocol.
(4) The RTA Portal is run by the RTA Portal Company, which is a privately owned and privately funded enterprise. Therefore, this Department does not hold the information requested. However, I understand from the RTA Portal Company that since its go-live date in April 2010:
the main reason for drop out at Stage 1 is timeout in the absence of a decision by the insurer with regard to liability (356,529), representing 26% of submitted claims; and
the predominant reason for drop out at Stage 2 is caused by a timeout for no response (34,335) which represents 2.5% of submitted claims.
The RTA Portal Company does not hold information about cases which have proceeded to Stage 3, as this is not a function of the RTA Portal.
(5) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on the number and proportion of RTA, employer's liability and public liability claims using the fast track and the RTA Protocol will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(6) I can confirm that a copy of Professor Fenn's report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses on publication.
(7) The RTA Pre-action Protocol allows unrepresented claimants to bring a personal injury claim. The operation of the RTA Portal in this regard is a matter for the RTA Portal Company. The use of the RTA Protocol and RTA Portal by such claimants in the event of an increase to the small claims PI limit will be reviewed in the light of the forthcoming consultation.
(8) The potential impact of increasing the small claims personal injury limit on use of the RTA Protocol (and, therefore, on use of the RTA Portal) will be assessed in the light of responses to the forthcoming consultation on increasing that limit.
(6) what additional resources he plans to make available to the Courts and Tribunals Service in respect of any increase in the number of claimants in person resulting from an increase in the small claims limit for personal injury claims to £5,000;
[110642]
Mr Slaughter:
(6) what additional resources he plans to make available to the Courts and Tribunals Service in respect of any increase in the number of claimants in person resulting from an increase in the small claims limit for personal injury claims to £5,000;
[110642]
Mr Slaughter:
The Prime Minister hosted an insurance summit on 14 February where the Government made a number of commitments designed to address the issue of the rising cost of motor insurance premiums.
Among other action already ongoing, we are planning to launch a consultation document this summer which will contain a number of questions designed to seek stakeholders' and members of the public's views on issues around personal injury claims for whiplash in road traffic accidents.
Through the consultation we will seek views on reducing the costs of challenging fraudulent cases in court by raising the small claims threshold for personal injury claims. We will also consider the use of independent medical panels to reduce fraudulent claims by tackling questionable medical evidence.
However work is ongoing and the outcome of the consultation cannot be predetermined.
Committee stage twelfth sitting (afternoon). Clauses 41 to 52 agreed to, one with amendments. Schedules 6 and 7 agreed to, one with an amendment.
Committee stage twelfth sitting (afternoon). Clauses 41 to 52 agreed to, one with amendments. Schedules 6 and 7 agreed to, one with an amendment.
I, too, shall try to be brief, Mr. Williams. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore) on securing this debate and giving his usual comprehensive account of the issue. Having tried previously to speak after him on a Friday, I am glad that he has left...
I, too, shall try to be brief, Mr. Williams. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore) on securing this debate and giving his usual comprehensive account of the issue. Having tried previously to speak after him on a Friday, I am glad that he has left...
It could now be third-region envy. My hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire is not here to bait, so I shall confine myself to saying that if Birmingham and the midlands wish to be Barcelona to our Madrid, they will have to improve the food and the football somewhat....
It could now be third-region envy. My hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire is not here to bait, so I shall confine myself to saying that if Birmingham and the midlands wish to be Barcelona to our Madrid, they will have to improve the food and the football somewhat....
That is an ingenious solution, but I fear that it is impractical on two counts: first, in relation to the collection of statistics and what constitutes the house part of a house plot; and, secondly, because there are many grey areas, such as to do with when parts of a...
That is an ingenious solution, but I fear that it is impractical on two counts: first, in relation to the collection of statistics and what constitutes the house part of a house plot; and, secondly, because there are many grey areas, such as to do with when parts of a...
I would love to but I have only three or four minutes left. The simplest answer to that question would probably be yes, but the Conservatives say:"““We want to see more affordable…homes.””" But they never say the number of affordable homes they want. It is always a vague aspiration that...
I would love to but I have only three or four minutes left. The simplest answer to that question would probably be yes, but the Conservatives say:"““We want to see more affordable…homes.””" But they never say the number of affordable homes they want. It is always a vague aspiration that...
I absolutely do not. I mock the remote attitude of the Conservative party. If I had detached properties on the market anywhere below £1 million in my constituency, I would like to find them. If the hon. Gentleman wants to buy a small three-bedroom terraced house in my constituency, he...
I absolutely do not. I mock the remote attitude of the Conservative party. If I had detached properties on the market anywhere below £1 million in my constituency, I would like to find them. If the hon. Gentleman wants to buy a small three-bedroom terraced house in my constituency, he...
The hon. Member for Meriden (Mrs. Spelman) began by saying that this issue went to the heart of the Government’s planning policy. I strongly disagree. PPS3, which has been mentioned many times today, has a number of broad aims. They include supporting the need for further housing, improving the design...
The hon. Member for Meriden (Mrs. Spelman) began by saying that this issue went to the heart of the Government’s planning policy. I strongly disagree. PPS3, which has been mentioned many times today, has a number of broad aims. They include supporting the need for further housing, improving the design...
I hear what the hon. Lady says, but her party is not without guilt on the issue. In the Opposition-day debate on 5 May 2004—it perhaps showed the Conservatives’ position even more clearly—they did recite the problems, which they believed related to affordability and overcrowding, but they ended up again...
I hear what the hon. Lady says, but her party is not without guilt on the issue. In the Opposition-day debate on 5 May 2004—it perhaps showed the Conservatives’ position even more clearly—they did recite the problems, which they believed related to affordability and overcrowding, but they ended up again...