Stephen
Hammond: I beg to move amendment No. 86, in page 47, line
29, leave out ‘, understanding'.
I shall try to be faster, Sir
Nicholas, but you were going at such a speed, it hardly gave us a
chance to speak. I shall rise to my feet a little quicker in future. We
seem to have sped through our proceedings.
Dr.
Ladyman: The hon. Gentleman needs to lose a pound or
two.
Stephen
Hammond: That is the problem with the recess, of course. I
am sure that it applies to everyone in Committee.
Our concern is simple. We
understand entirely the need for approved test assistants, although we
want to ensure that they are subject to proper scrutiny. Had I risen to
my feet a little quicker, I would have liked to raise a number of
issues about test assistants and some of the tables in schedule 5 that
relate to them.
Amendment No. 86 is quite
specific. It deals with subsection (2) and some of the circumstances in
which a test assistant may be used. We have little difficulty with
support being given to those who have difficulty hearing, but we are
considerably concerned about the word “understanding”. If
someone does not understand what is said to them, does that mean that
they might fail to understand road signs, or various other instructions
that may be given?
The amendment is a probing one.
We want the Minister to explain the Government’s thinking in
referring to someone who may have difficulty understanding questions or
instructions in the relevant tests—factors that will clearly be
applicable on the road as well. Is what is meant a lack of
understanding of language, learning difficulties or mental impairment?
We seek clarification from the Minister on exactly which circumstances
someone’s lack of or difficulty in understanding would be
warranted. I look forward to his response.
Dr.
Ladyman: I, at least, appreciate the speed with which you
go through the amendments, Sir Nicholas.
I hope that I can give the hon.
Member for Wimbledon the assurance he seeks. When one is sitting the
driving test, there are a number of instructions that the person
setting the test has to give about the test itself. It is only right,
in our view, that a person should have any assistance they need in
order to understand those instructions. If they are hearing impaired,
they need to have those instructions relayed in such a way that they
can understand them, so someone who understands sign language would
need to be made available. Equally, if a person does not speak English
or Welsh—the languages in which we can provide the driving
test—it may be necessary to have a translator.
The lack of comprehension that
a person is allowed relates to the instructions for the test itself,
not the content of the test or the nature of road signs. It is not
possible to have an assistant translate a road sign; one needs to be
able to understand a road sign oneself and act accordingly. The
assistant will be present to help the individual only with the
mechanism of the test, not with the skills on which one is being
tested. I hope that with that explanation the hon. Gentleman will be
happy to withdraw the amendment.
Stephen
Hammond: With the Minister’s
clarification—as helpful as ever—about the mechanism of
the test, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave,
withdrawn.
Clause 41 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause
42Enforcement
authorities Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Owen Paterson (North Shropshire) (Con): Sir Nicholas, I am
also pleased to see that you have obviously had a restful Easter and
returned supercharged.
I shall not delay the Committee
with debate on this clause, but I should just like some clarification.
The clause seems sensible, but I should like the Minister to clarify
who is in charge. What is the order of command between the DVLA,
district councils, and county councils, which have now been brought in
where there are two-tier authorities? The measure is sensible, but I am
not clear about how it will work in practice. I would be grateful if
the Minister could clarify the matter.
Dr.
Ladyman: I assure the hon. Gentleman that the DVLA will
not replace the police and trading standards officers. The idea is that
in future the DVLA will work with them as a joint enforcement team. As
he suggests, it is a sensible measure. It removes a burden on the
police; it will allow the DVLA to take enforcement action in its own
right, rather than reporting matters to the police for them to take
action on its behalf; and it will resolve an anomaly whereby trading
standards officers possess the power of enforcement if they are
employed by district councils, but do not if they are employed by
county councils. In future, officers employed by county councils will
possess the power, too. The intention is that all three—the
police, the DVLA and trading standards officers—will work
jointly.
Mr.
Paterson: Where there are two tiers—a county
council and a district council—which will be the lead authority
dealing with the DVLA?
Dr.
Ladyman: I shall have to write to the hon. Gentleman. My
assumption is that it will be the senior tier, the county council, but
I shall write to him to clarify that.
Question put and agreed
to. Clause 42
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause
43Registration
plates Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Paterson: Again, we do not have any great disagreement
with this clause, but I should like the Minister to declare what
constitutes a legal number plate, what qualifies as a number plate and
what marks are allowed. There has been much press controversy about
European Union flags being allowed, but not Union jacks and crosses of
St. George—relevant to next week. What constitutes a legal
number plate? Will the Minister have any discretion over this matter,
or will it become entirely a Commission
responsibility?
The
Chairman: The Chairman is interested
too.
Dr.
Ladyman: I have no doubt that the Chairman is interested
in all parts of the Bill.
All technical matters—the
typeface, colour, dimensions, spacing and so on—to do with the
appearance of number plates are set out in a British standard, and I
would be happy to make that information available to the hon.
Gentleman. I am not certain about who decides whether an EU flag or
some other symbol can be on a number plate, but I shall write to the
Committee and give chapter and verse on who has responsibility for
that. To my horror, I
discovered that some people like to hang gimmick number plates on their
bedroom wall. I have absolutely no idea why anybody would want a
gimmick number plate under any circumstances or why they would want to
display it, but apparently there is some trade in such things. I
suspect the truth is that people have a number plate that conforms to
the British standard when they have their MOT test, but replace it
immediately afterwards with a gimmick number plate that uses different
typefaces and spacing and therefore spells
something. The purpose
of the clause is to insist that in future when people buy a gimmick
number plate it is clearly marked as such and therefore cannot be used
as a substitute for a real one when the person thinks nobody is
watching. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about flags and other
markings. Mr.
Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk) (Con): We have all
seen gimmicky number plates, which are becoming more prevalent. I noted
four in the past month: L4RRY, B4RRY, D3GSY and S3XY—or Larry,
Barry, Degsy and Sexy. As the Minister says, people use different
typefaces, put in a black dot for the screw and turn numbers into
letters. It brings a certain amount of pleasure and amusement to quite
a few people, but I would not dream of having such a number plate, as
it would be more likely to attract the attention of the police or
someone else like that. What will the Minister do about people who have
such number plates? Will the police be empowered to stop them? Will
traffic wardens be empowered to report them? What measures will be
taken?
Dr.
Ladyman: The police already have powers to stop
individuals who have changed their number plate in such a way that it
no longer conforms to the standard. I would not for one second want to
discourage people from having personalised number plates. Indeed, the
DVLA makes a good deal of money for the taxpayer from auctioning them,
and if anybody named Mr. Singh or Dr. Singh is listening to our debate,
I can tell them that the forthcoming DVLA auction will include the
number plate 51NGH and various extensions of that. I hope that it will
raise a great deal of money for the British
taxpayer. However, the
numbers must look like numbers, and the spacing needs to be such that
it is clear which part of the plate is numbers and which part is
letters. If anybody has played around with their number plate in such a
way as to make it difficult to read, or if it is in any way not obvious
what the original number plate was, the police should take enforcement
action against
them. Question put
and agreed to.
Clause 43 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause 44 ordered to stand
part of the Bill.
Clause
45Particulars
to be included in vehicles
register Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
5
pm
Mr.
Paterson: I understand that the intention is to tighten up
on various practices, particularly fiddling with odometers, or
clocking, which obviously is a serious problem. The Conservatives
support the Government’s attempts to ensure accurate data for
people who are purchasing a motor
car. The clause raises
the question of the accuracy of DVLA data, and I do not envy the DVLA
in its task. It wrote to a member of the public giving information from
its database in March last year. It holds in excess of 36 million
vehicle records and 47 million driver records, and reckons that 68 per
cent. of those records are correct in every detail and that 22 per
cent. contain spelling mistakes in name, address, details or postcode.
It considers those to be minor errors which do not prevent mail from
being delivered or prevent the police or manufacturers from tracing
vehicles. It reckons that that amounted to a 90 per cent. traceability
level from the information on the vehicle database. It made the point
that it is totally dependent on the motoring public for much of its
information. It is
not difficult to work out that with 36 million vehicle records, 47
million driver records and its best accuracy level of 97.5 per cent.,
900,000 vehicle records and 1.175 million driver records must be
inaccurate. With a perfect record rate of 68 per cent., 11.52 million
vehicle records and 15.04 million driver records are not perfect. With
a 90 per cent. traceability rate the figures are even easier to work
out: 3.6 million vehicle records and 4.7 million driver records are not
traceable. I do not
envy the DVLA in trying to keep track of those records, but I should
like to know the Minister’s thoughts on how the system can be
tightened up because there are press reports of people deliberately
driving around with inaccurate number plates. One of my constituents
was the proud possessor of an ancient series 1 Cortina which, on a good
day when it was warmed up, might have got as far as
Shrewsbury—perhaps I am being rude about the car. He was clocked
three times for breach of the congestion charge and I had to take the
matter to the Mayor because it was obvious that someone had used his
registration number. There are anecdotal records of a substantial
number of people driving around deliberately using illegal and
inaccurate number plates to avoid the congestion charge, speeding fines
and so on. That seems to be a growing trend, although I have no figures
on it. What is the
Minister’s opinion on the lessons that could be learned from
other countries? I was recently in Germany where there is a tight
system under which the number plate follows the owner. When people buy
a new car, they must hand over the documents for their insurance and
for their equivalent of the council tax, which is a local tax showing
their domicile, which then attracts the three letters—one letter
in large towns—
showing where the owner lives. That may be bad luck on the Singhs who
are looking forward to buying a number plate at auction, because that
system wipes out personalised number plates. Also, importantly, there
is the MOT test—in Germany it is a TUV—when the vehicle
is three years or more old. When the vehicle is sold the number is
surrendered and a new number is created for the new owner. A similar
system operates in America, which I have not yet inspected, where each
number plate includes an insurance sticker and an annual sticker and is
handed out by the state
authority. Our current
system, as the lady from the DVLA said, depends entirely on the
motoring public for information and is not 100 per cent. accurate. I
repeat that I do not envy the DVLA its job, but if we are to have
proper enforcement and to clamp down on the hard core of really bad
drivers we must have an accurate database, and there are lessons to be
learned from the German and American systems. I was in Sweden recently
where the road pricing scheme in Stockholm is similar to that in
Germany. It simply cannot work without accurate data.
The Government are all over the
shop on road pricing and if we are ever to have a new road pricing
scheme it must have a cast iron, accurate database. We fully support
the Government’s aim to clamp down on the hard core, but that
seems to be extremely difficult when the current system is not as
watertight as it might be and as I am told it is in other countries. I
should like to hear the Minister’s comments on that, but in
general we support the clause and its attempt to tighten up on
inaccurate mileage on second-hand
cars.
| 
