The objective of the legislative review is to identify the role of compulsion in the provision and functioning of urban consolidation centres. This section of the report provides an analysis on whether under existing legal powers, a scheme could be introduced to ban delivery vehicles from collecting from and delivering to a city centre and compel them to deliver instead to a compulsory urban consolidation centre (CUCC) in which the relevant delivery company's shipments for delivery into the city centre would be combined with those of other delivery companies and made by a single delivery company to their final destination within the city centre. This section of the report also analyses the implementation of such a scheme in a hypothetical location within England but outside London and further legal analyses would need to be undertaken prior to drawing conclusions as to the ability to implement such a scheme in any particular identified location (including within England but outside London).

Under the Road Traffic Regulations 1984 (RTRs), a local authority has the power to implement a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) if expedient for a range of reasons including:

(although these are not necessarily the only potentially pertinent reasons of application in this case).

TROs may prohibit, restrict, or regulate the use of a road by vehicles (or a class of vehicles) in general or subject to exceptions. The power is widely drafted and can apply at such times, on such days and subjects to such exceptions as are considered desirable. TROs are subject to certain restrictions under section 3 RTRs (TRO Restrictions), which include, preventing for more than eight hours in any 24-hour period access for vehicles of any class to any premises situated on or adjacent to the road. The TRO Restrictions will apply unless the authority gains consent from the Secretary of State pursuant to paragraph 1 of part 2 of schedule 9 of the RTRs, or the authority making the order is satisfied that it is requisite that such restriction should not apply for one of several reasons including for preventing damage to the road or buildings on or near it (section 3 RTRs). Such a TRO could be used to prohibit entry of all light or heavy commercial vehicles. This could then be subject to an exemption for vehicles being used in the area other than for provision of services for the transport of goods. However, this approach is likely to be difficult and costly to enforce, as it would be a subjective exception compared to a blanket ban on certain types of vehicles, which could be enforced through cameras and number-plate recognition technology.

The legislation enabling TROs is drafted for TROs to apply to all vehicles or to a class of vehicles only. It does not provide for a TRO that discriminates in terms of whether or not the vehicle is being used by a delivery company or the type of goods being carried. Any such effect would need to be introduced via an exception such as 'all heavy and light commercial vehicles other than those being used for the provision of a service for the transport of goods'. While such a broad exclusion would be necessary to ensure that other users of delivery type vehicles, such as tradespersons, were not subject to the restrictions, its broad nature leaves it somewhat exposed to challenge. Authorities may expect challenges at two levels: 1) road users arguing they are not providing services for the transport of goods (for instance, a tradesperson conveying parts sold to a client within the area covered by the TRO in order that he/she can install them as part of a wider service); and 2) as discussed below in more detail, arguments that certain items should be excluded from any restrictions, for example certain medicines. Such an exemption could be introduced by reference to harmonised tariff codes, although this would not eliminate the opportunity for road users to select how they classify their goods in order to take advantage of exclusions.

Furthermore, in practice, unless the Secretary of State's consent were obtained, or it could be argued that the TRO Restrictions should not apply, which given the applicable reasons would appear likely to only be sustainable in a limited number of cases, the eight hours in any 24-hour period restriction on the operation of

Page 15