|
Mr. Knight: I support my hon. Friend's comments. It is essential that an unnecessary bureaucracy is not created for those who undertake the tests. One complaint has been brought to my attention by a constituent who runs a haulage business. He told me that whenever a driver books in for a test, in addition to revealing the driver's details, which is understandable as the authorities need to know who they are testing, full details of the vehicle that the driver will be using for his test also have to be supplied.
My constituent finds that unnecessarily bureaucratic. Provided that the vehicle is roadworthy and of the relevant class, why do the authorities need to know the specific details of the vehicle that is to be involved in the test? That can create a problem for small businesses if the particular vehicle that they had previously nominated for the test is out on a run and is not back on time. Instead of allowing the test to go ahead with a substitute vehicle, they would have to reschedule the whole thing. That is unnecessarily bureaucratic.
John Thurso: I seek your guidance, Mr. Pike. I have a specific question to ask which relates to this clause, but it falls more properly into schedule 4. Would it be appropriate to ask that question of the Minister now and avoid speaking later?
The Chairman: We will come to schedule 4 in a couple of minutes.
Charlotte Atkins: The short answer is that the clause is about quality of instruction. It replaces the current one-size-fits-all scheme for car driving instructors with provisions that allow the introduction of flexible and effective standards of insurance for different types of professional instructors. The new provision will allow registration to be extended to professional instructors for any class of motor vehicle. That applies to various circumstances, such as emergency response, remedial training for drivers and HGV training.
The system has been in place for 40 years for car driving instructors. All we are doing is extending it to other classes of instructor. Given that people pay something like £1,500 for HGV training, they need to be assured that that driving instruction is competent and of a good quality. It is a lot of money to pay out and we want to ensure that there are assurances for the HGV driver applicant, just as there would be if our sons and daughters were having driving instruction from a driving instructor in a car.
I am told that the target waiting time for HGV tests is three weeks. I assume that vehicle details have to be given because we have to be sure that it is an appropriate vehicle in which to take the test. Given that the system has been in place for car driving instructors for 40 years, it makes sense for the regulation to be extended to other classes of driving instructor to ensure that quality prevails.
Mr. Chope: The Minister asserts that because we have had the system for 40 years for car drivers, we should to extend it without further argument. The counter-argument is that we have managed for 40 years without implementing the system for other
Column Number: 243
categories of vehicle. Have there been any complaints? Is there any reason to suppose that the market is not operating? I would have thought that it would be difficult to establish a business as an HGV driver trainer—most of the training would be for businesses—if one was not reasonably competent at it. What case are the Government putting forward, other than their obsession with increasing regulation?
Charlotte Atkins: We made it clear in our road safety strategy that we wanted to raise standards. The regulation is one way of doing it. We made a commitment to raising standards and raising the status and quality of professional driving instruction. The regulation is the way in which we want to do that.
Mr. Chope: We have heard much from the Minister today, but that was the weakest of her responses. Where is the justification? Where is the evidence that there is any shortage of good quality instruction? This is just another regulation that is being brought in to address some imaginary mischief. If she said that there is evidence that there are a lot of duff HGV driving instructors who are causing danger to others because of their level of incompetence, she might have a case.
Charlotte Atkins: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Chope: The Minister obviously has some more information.
Charlotte Atkins: It is simply that the industry itself—the road haulage industry, the bus industry, road transport organisations and certainly motorcycling interest groups—fully support the regulation. The hon. Gentleman is clearly out of step with the industry. He may well have evidence to the contrary, but we are responding to the industry by introducing the regulation. If he wants to oppose the interests of the industry, he may proceed. We are trying to ensure that we raise road safety standards. That is what the Bill is about and that is why we are introducing the regulation.
Mr. Chope: The Minister says that the industry is in favour of the regulation, but we have not seen any documentation to suggest that. She has just been given a briefing by her officials saying that it is in favour of it. Let us be clear about this: quite often providers are in favour of introducing restrictions on potential competition. My concern is that this is an activity in which an open market has effectively been operating, with all the flexibility that that entails. We need to get more HGV drivers trained. At the moment, there is no suggestion that anybody involved in the industry is not producing training to the right standard.
4.15 pm
One of the biggest constraints that I have heard about is the constraint on the time to get a test. The Minister says that the target waiting time is three weeks. Why is it so long? Why can somebody who has gone on one of these courses not take the test the
Column Number: 244
following week? Although three weeks is the target waiting time, what happens if the actual waiting time is much longer, as I understand it is in some test centres? Is the individual, who may be unemployed, expected to hang around waiting for this career move until he can get a time for his test? What happens when the tests are cancelled, as they often are, at short notice and must then be rescheduled, again introducing extra delay? Surely the problem with the heavy goods vehicle sector is that there is already too much regulation rather than too little. I am extremely suspicious of this regulation-making power and I am not encouraged in the knowledge that some of those who are already incumbents think that they will be able to use it to further their own interests in a monopoly.
Charlotte Atkins: The fact that only about 50 per cent. pass the HGV licence indicates that there is an issue over the quality of training. We want to ensure that the man or woman who is training as an HGV driver does not waste their £1,500. If someone is unemployed and wants to make that sort of career move, they can hardly afford to let £1,500 go down the drain. Therefore, we are interested in raising the quality of training to help trainees and employers and to ensure that we protect the safety of all road users.
Question put, That the clause stand part of the Bill—
The Committee divided: Ayes 10, Noes 4.
[Division No. 12]
AYES
Atkins, Charlotte
Byrne, Mr. Liam
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Heyes, Mr. David
Jamieson, Mr. David
Kidney, Mr. David
Mahmood, Mr. Khalid
Merron, Gillian
Stinchcombe, Mr. Paul
Thurso, John
NOES
Chope, Mr. Christopher
Flook, Mr. Adrian
Knight, Mr. Greg
Wilshire, Mr. David
Question accordingly agreed to.
Clause 32 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 4
Driving instruction
Amendments made: No. 32, in schedule 4, page 88, line 24, leave out '125A(3)' and insert '125A(7)'.
No. 33, in schedule 4, page 88, line 26, leave out '125ZA(7)' and insert '125ZA(3)'.—[Mr. Jamieson.]
Question proposed, That this schedule be the Fourth schedule to the Bill.
John Thurso: I am perfectly content with what is being proposed here, but I should be grateful if the Minister answered one question and perhaps put something on the record.
As Ministers know, I had considerable correspondence from advanced driving instructors earlier this year, which I think all worked out happily. However, one thing that I learnt from that
Column Number: 245
correspondence was the slight concern about what paid instruction is and, in particular, the allegation made at that time by a number of ADIs that unscrupulous people who were not registered were giving instruction to people in cars, and being paid for it. They were getting round the law by setting the transaction as the hire of the vehicle and giving the instruction for free. One or two ADIs said that that was a common way for rogue operators to get away with it. Will the Minister help me as to whether, first, that loophole exists? Are such people in contravention of the law as it stands? Secondly, if it is a loophole, is it closed by the Bill? Thirdly, if it is not being closed, will the Government consider closing it at a future date?
Charlotte Atkins: I do not believe that that loophole exists, although I am sure that any number of unscrupulous people will try to create a loophole. As far as I am aware, the Bill does not close that loophole that does not exist.
Mr. Chope: Will the Minister explain how the process will be introduced? At the moment, driving instruction for heavy goods vehicle drivers, bus drivers and the like is unregulated. If, in the future, all the people who can carry out paid instruction have to be subject to the conditions of the schedule, how will we ensure that they have passed the necessary exams and got the qualifications required under the regulations? What is the time scale for that procedure? What is likely to be the cost of undergoing the tests that will be a precursor to obtaining registration? When will a clear regulatory impact assessment with proper costs be produced so that we can assess the implications and the extent to which the measure is an additional burden on business?
| 
