Select Committee on European Scrutiny Twenty-Second Report


19 Drivers' hours

(25119)

15688/03

COM(03) 628

Draft Directive on minimum conditions for implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC and Council Regulations (EEC) Nos. 3820/85 and 3821/85 concerning social legislation relating to road transport activities

Legal baseArticle 71 EC; co-decision; QMV
DepartmentTransport
Basis of considerationMinister's letter of 24 May 2004
Previous Committee ReportHC 42-ix (2003-04), para 9 (4 February 2004)
To be discussed in Council10-11 June 2004
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionCleared

Background

19.1 Regulation (EEC) 3820/85 sets maximum limits on driving time and minimum requirements for breaks and rest periods which apply to most heavy goods vehicle drivers and about half the bus and coach drivers operating in the UK. Enforcement is facilitated through Regulation (EEC) 3821/85, which requires most drivers to use a tachograph to record their daily activities. Directive 88/599/EEC is concerned with standard checking procedures for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) 3820/85. This legislation is concerned with hours driven and was motivated primarily by road safety considerations. Directive 2002/15/EC, the Road Working Time Directive (RTD), is sector-specific legislation concerned with hours worked and originally was motivated primarily by other social considerations.

19.2 In February 2004 we considered a draft Directive which would repeal Directive 88/599/EEC and replace it with one designed to raise the quantity and quality of enforcement checks, to encourage greater co-operation between enforcement authorities, and to harmonise certain sanctions. It would triple the level of drivers' hours enforcement, currently 1% of days worked, to 3% and bring the RTD into the systematic tachograph-based enforcement regime. We applauded the Government's intention to oppose a move to a higher than 3% level of enforcement before there is significant use of digital tachographs and, on subsidiarity grounds, the inclusion of the RTD in the proposed Directive. But before considering the matter further we asked for an explicit statement of the Government's view of the proposed move from a 1% to a 3% level of paper-based enforcement and a comment as to why the Government believes the benefits of the proposal would outweigh its costs.

The Minister's letter

19.3 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Transport (Mr David Jamieson) now tells us:

"I can confirm that the Government is opposed to any increase in paper-based drivers' hours enforcement. Our view (as set out in paragraphs 9-12 of the EM [of 15 January 2004]) is that any increase(s) in drivers' hours enforcement should be specifically related to the arrival of digital tachographs which will not start to be fitted to new vehicles before mid-2005. Following discussion by the Council working group, the text has now been amended so that the increase in the enforcement level from the current 1% to 2%, and then to 3%, would not take place until 2008 and 2010 respectively. In the Government's view this is acceptable."

19.4 On costs and benefits the Minister continues:

"On the basis that the increased enforcement level is related to the arrival of digital tachographs, we would not expect it to lead to a significant increase in the cost of enforcement. On the other hand, a twofold and, later, threefold increase in amount of drivers' hours enforcement should result in fewer and less serious road accidents. On the basis of the Commission's estimates, the proposals could help to achieve a 25% reduction in road fatalities and serious injuries across the EU. Even if this is an over-estimate, it is difficult not to conclude that the proposal would reduce fatalities and serious injuries."

19.5 The Minister also says that, in line with the Government's negotiating objectives, the scope of the current text has been amended so as to exclude the RTD.

19.6 The Minister goes on to report the outcome of the European Parliament's first reading of the proposal on 20 April 2004, when it adopted 38 amendments. The Commission has given no detailed reasoning for its position on these amendments. The adopted amendments include:

  • extending the scope of the present Directive to include provisions on the "training of drivers" and on the "driver attestation from third countries" and including a definition of "driver" in the draft Directive. These amendments have been rejected by the Commission;
  • allowing the minimum percentage of inspections to be increased by the Commission, but only following approval by the European Parliament and on condition that carriers have a digital tachograph. This amendment has also been rejected by the Commission. But the Government agrees that any increases should be conditional on widespread fitment and use of digital tachographs;
  • a reduced level of roadside inspections (at least 15% instead of the 30% proposed by the Commission) and at least 50% of inspections on premises of undertakings to be carried out in smaller firms of not more than three vehicles. The Commission has not accepted a lower rate of roadside checks, but it could accept the 50% of checks in smaller firms. The Council (including the UK) would be opposed to the targeting of small firms;
  • changes in the conduct of roadside checks. The Commission has accepted specification of when checks can be carried out on stationary vehicles, but has rejected preventing officers discriminating according to the type of tachograph being used. The Council is unlikely to agree to the former, but the latest Council text includes a non-discrimination clause regarding the type of tachograph being used;
  • penalties for allowing drivers to work more than 10% above the maximum weekly working time of 60 hours. The Commission has accepted this amendment, but it is unlikely to be acceptable to the Council; and
  • Member States to notify to the Commission one year after the Directive takes effect the sanctions planned for infringements. On the basis of this information, three years after the Directive enters into force the Commission is to present a report and a draft Directive to harmonise penalties. The Commission has accepted the obligation for Member States to notify the Commission of its penalty regime within one year. The Council could probably accept this. The Commission has rejected the idea of a new Directive on harmonised penalties and a more uniform interpretation on Regulations (EEC) 3820/85/EC and 3821/85/EC, but accepted an amendment to publish statistical data and that sanctions be non-discriminatory. Sanctions is a contentious issue for the Council and the Government expects some of the European Parliament text to be transferred into the proposal to replace Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 on drivers' hours. Depending on the text, the Council (including the UK) could probably accept this.

19.7 Finally the Minister tells us it is likely that a political agreement will be sought on this proposal at the Transport Council on 11 June 2004. He says that, given that the Government's two main concerns — the timing of higher levels of enforcement and the attempt to extend this proposal to the RTD — are addressed in the current text and that any European Parliament inspired changes are likely to be minor in nature, the Government is now satisfied that these proposals pose no real problems.

Conclusion

19.8 We are grateful to the Minister for this information and particularly note the improvement in the draft Directive in relation to the timing of higher levels of enforcement and the attempt to extend this proposal to the Road Working Time Directive. We clear the document.





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 24 June 2004