National Policy Statements (NPS) are a key component of the new planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects, introduced by the Planning Act 2008. The Act stipulates that a proposal for a National Policy Statement will be subject to public consultation and allows for parliamentary scrutiny before designation as national policy by the Secretary of State. The draft Ports National Policy Statement (Department for Transport, 2009) has been welcomed by many organisations as a good start which can be built upon. The Committee has recommended a number of modifications and expects the Department will improve the draft as a result of the consultation and scrutiny processes. The Committee has reservations regarding the Government's 2007 policy for ports and the lack of guidance on location for port development in the NPS but this, of itself, does not make the NPS unfit for purpose. But the Committee cannot recommend designation at this stage on two counts. Firstly, a key, related policy statement - the National Networks NPS - has yet to be published. Secondly, the organisation likely to be one of the principal decision-makers for port development - the Marine Management Organisation - has yet to be established and so has been unable to comment on guidance that will be of great importance to its role. These are fundamental flaws in the consultation process and the Ports NPS should not be designated until they are rectified.

proposals for national policy statements on Energy : Third report of session 2009-10, Vol. 1: Report, together with formal Minutes

The National Policy Statement on National Networks, published in draft for consultation (ISBN 9780108560071), sets out the policy against which decisions will be made on applications for development consent for nationally significant infrastructure projects on the strategic road and rail networks. The Committee has a number of detailed recommendations to improve the draft. The NPS should specify more types of transport scheme which the Government thinks are needed, such as enhancements to the rail network to promote east-west connectivity; better road and rail connections to ports and airports and to parts of the country which are currently not well served by those networks; and schemes to promote regional economic development. Criticisms of the DfT's road and rail demand forecasts should be addressed. Estimates of the impact on UK carbon emissions of building more road infrastructure are needed. Adverse impacts of major transport schemes on localities should be set out. The NPS should make explicit reference to the desirability of connecting HS2 to the classic rail network. Promoters of roads schemes must look to improve road safety (including for cyclists and pedestrians). The Government is seeking to accommodate increasing demand for roads by building more infrastructure rather than seeking to manage demand. Investment in the road network will require new funding streams, a challenge that must be addressed. However, a consensus would be required to introduce any road user charging scheme across the strategic road network as an alternative to road taxation.

In this report the Transport Committee calls on the Government to publish a White Paper on its transport strategy, explaining in particular how spending on transport will deliver economic growth and development. Such a strategy must set objectives for all transport spending and explain the criteria Ministers will use to decide between different claims on limited financial resources. The report welcomes the commitment to undertake transport investment that will deliver sustainable growth and enterprise, including 'green' industries, balanced across all sectors and in a manner that will reduce regional disparities. Ministers must however ensure that this vision for transport investment is backed up by a pro-active and fully integrated economic development strategy. This is so far absent. The current Government has swept away the regional tier of planning and many institutions that played a key role in the development of strategic priorities for transport spending in support of economic development. This has created a vacuum that has left regions without the institutions and arrangements they need to plan and prioritise sub-national transport schemes and other significant transport infrastructure. The Coalition also needs a much stronger strategy for developing the UK's major ports and airports. The Government must also do more to correct regional disparities in transport investment. The Department for Transport's 'New Approach To Appraisal' process, which plays such a major role in deciding which transport schemes get Government funding, is highly controversial. Small schemes, including sustainable transport projects, may be cut disproportionately under new transport funding arrangements.

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

The Marine Bill was designed to establish a new UK-wide strategic system of marine planning to balance conservation, energy and resource needs, based on the principle of sustainable development and working with the devolved administrations. The Committee reports here reservations about the framework nature of the draft Bill. It was felt that too much of its policy is contained in secondary legislation or guidance. That there are significant areas of confusion of responsibility - between UK and international, especially EU, obligations; between devolved administrations; the many agencies and other bodies who will be involved in delivering the proposals in the Bill.

The Government's motoring agencies are undergoing reorganisation and are introducing digital services; both changes have potential to bring welcome improvements. The Government has a mixed approach to organisational change in the agencies with different emphasis on efficiency savings, restructuring, and private sector involvement across the agencies. It needs to do more to explain the future direction for all the motoring agencies and how it will create a more unified service. The agencies could do more to recognise and respond to the needs of business users. There are a number of specific areas that require action by the Government and its motoring agencies: the driver Certificate of Professional Competence may not be delivering all the benefits expected of it and the Government should negotiate changes at a European level; the agencies need to have effective assisted digital strategies in place to help those who cannot or are unwilling to use the internet to access services; the agencies need to work with the Government Digital Service and others to address the problem of misleading copycat websites; the DVLA needs to do more to explain how it is required to share personal data with private parking companies and the safeguards that are in place to protect such data; the DVLA needs to adjust it's fees to ensure costs are covered and do more to explain it's calculations; and data sharing needs to be effective, if revenue collection, action on safety and work by enforcement agencies are to be effective, and new services need to be planned with data sharing in mind

Update on the London Underground and the public-private (PPP) partnership Agreements : Seventh report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal minutes, oral and written Evidence

In this report that follows up the Government's response (5th special report, HC 1466, ISBN 9780215561299) to the Committee's earlier report on the cost of motor insurance (HC 591, ISBN 9780215556776), the Transport Committee warns that the spiralling cost of motor insurance is primarily the result of market dysfunction and, in particular, the escalation of uncontested claims for whiplash injury. The Committee also concludes that the rise in personal injury claims is the main reason for the rise in premiums, and questions the effectiveness of the Government's recent decision to ban referral fees relating to personal injury cases. Numerous factors combine to affect the cost of motor insurance and that tackling any in isolation will not deliver a significant or lasting reduction in premiums. The report calls on the Government to: review how well the 'pre-action protocol' and 'online portal' established to handle low value insurance claims have operated since their introduction in 2010, results to be published within six months; establish a cross-departmental ministerial committee on reducing the cost of motor insurance and publish a plan to address each aspect of the problem; send a clear message to the insurance industry that it expects 2008 data protection legislation to be fully respected and impose stricter penalties for any breach; initiate an investigation of cold calling undertaken to generate personal injury claims and then examine the legal and regulatory options for curtailing this activity.