text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill - Clause 9 - Penalty Charges - Skips on London Highways
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  @ MP voted aye to enable penalty charges to be imposed where an owner of a skip placed on a London highway "does not take any reasonable steps to secure that" various requirements for permissions, marking and lighting are adhered to rather than "does not secure that" the requirements are complied with.
  
  @ MP voted no to enable penalty charges to be imposed where an owner of a skip placed on a London highway "does not secure that" various requirements for permissions, marking and lighting are adhered to rather than "does not take any reasonable steps to secure that" the requirements are complied with.
  
  The majority of MPs voted to enable penalty charges to be imposed where an owner of a skip placed on a London highway "does not secure that" various requirements for permissions, marking and lighting are adhered to rather than "does not take any reasonable steps to secure that" the requirements are complied with.
  
  
  MPs were considering the London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill[1]. The amendment rejected in this vote was:
  
  :Amendment 14, Clause 9,âpageâ8,âlineâ18âafter ânotâ, insert âtake any reasonable steps toâ.
  
  The element of the clause which the rejected amendment sought to change stated:
  
  :(3)	A penalty charge is payable to a relevant highway authority for the purposes of the said section 61 ifâ
  :(a)	a builder's skip is deposited on a highway without a permission granted under section 139 of the 1980 Act (control of builders' skips);
  :(b)	a builder's skip has been deposited on a highway in accordance with a permission granted under the said section 139 but the owner of the skip does not secure thatâ
  :(i)	the skip is properly lighted during the hours of darkness;
  :(ii)	the skip is marked or lighted in accordance with regulations made under the said section 139 requiring builders' skips to be so marked or lighted;
  :(iii)	the skip is clearly and indelibly marked with the owner's name and with his telephone number or address;
  :(iv)	the skip is removed as soon as practicable after it has been filled;
  :(v)	each of the conditions subject to which the permission was granted is complied with;
  
  The rejected amendment would have changed:
  
  :the owner of the skip does not secure thatâ
  to 
  :the owner of the skip does not take any reasonable steps to secure thatâ
  
  The clause relates to skips on the highway in London.
  
  
  
  
  ==
  
  * [1] [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/londonlocalauthoritiesandtransportforlondon.html Parliament's webpage on the London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill]
  * [2] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/privbill/201213/llatfl2/100085/12001--b.htm#9 Clause 9 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill as at the time of the vote]
  
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  