Mr.
Goodwill: The Minister referred to my point about
interest. It is set out in the order that a rate of interest is to be
paid on a deposit that is refunded to the driver. My point is about
costs associated with making a refund through an international money
transfer. A refund could be refunded fairly cheaply to a credit card
account, but with a cash payment it may be necessary to make an
international money transfer to the person’s account. Will the
cost of the transfer be carried by the driver whether he is acquitted
or not, or by the UK court system? If he is acquitted, he could argue
that he should not carry any
costs.
Jim
Fitzpatrick: The hon. Gentleman did indeed raise that
point and I am sure that I will get to an answer before the end of my
remarks. In fact, I can answer him now as that is the sensible way to
proceed. The straightforward answer is that the cost must be picked up
by the Government if there is unfair levying on individuals who do not
contravene regulations. In such circumstances, fairness and common
sense will apply.
I think that I
have answered the point raised by the right hon. Member for East
Yorkshire on reasonable addresses. He also asked what form
immobilisation will take. The immobilisation device used by VOSA will
be a steel cable lashed through the driving wheels. Vehicles on busy
roads will not be immobilised, which he asked about quite
appropriately; they will be moved to other locations, usually to a
compound if it is likely that the vehicle will be immobilised for a
long period. The charges involved for obtaining a vehicle that is taken
to a compound will be prescribed in the regulations that will follow in
due
course.
Mr.
Knight: Does the Minister anticipate that when a
motorist is acquitted, which may be an unusual circumstance when a
vehicle is immobilised, they will not have to pay any compound
charges?
Jim
Fitzpatrick: I fully anticipate that if an innocent person
is unfairly accused of an offence, it will be for the authorities to
make reparation. The right hon. Gentleman is asking a legitimate
question, but with the greatest of respect, I would be very surprised
if road traffic officers or VOSA enforcement officers were to make a
mistake, given their experience. However, it is possible to make
mistakes and in such instances the authorities would have to make
reparation. The
right hon. Gentleman also raised the matter of mistakes being made.
VOSA and the police will deal with cases on their merits, but the
regulations ultimately provide for dispute resolution. Nobody should
end up paying charges for which they are not liable. The dispute
resolution procedure enables direct financial losses, such as
immobilisation charges, to be repaid if the rules were not complied
with. The
right hon. Gentleman asked about guidance. The Department will sign off
guidance and Ministers will be involved in that process. They will be
responsible for its publication, as is the case with any Department for
Transport guidance. It is quite a common process, where, for example,
the existing guidance documents on prohibitions and prosecutions, and
fixed penalties and deposits, will be provided and produced in the
usual way. The hon.
Member for Bosworth asked whether the DFT can increase fixed penalties
without coming back to the Committee. Fixed penalty levels
and immobilisation fees are prescribed by order, and any increase must
be authorised by statutory instrument—I know that he was
expressing his dissatisfaction with that procedure, but it means that
the order has to come back to the House. We would consult on any
proposals, which will, in any event, be subject to the negative
resolution procedures. Deposit levels will be subject to an affirmative
resolution procedure, and we will also consult on such
proposals. The
hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby asked why it took so long to
implement the procedures. They are both new and complex, and required
considerable work on the IT systems in the courts, the police, the DVLA
and VOSA. We held an
initial consultation on the principles of the scheme in the summer of
2007 as part of the Road Safety Act 2006. In the summer of 2008, there
was a detailed consultation on draft statutory instruments, of
which there are eight or nine—forgive me; I cannot remember
exactly—and we have been working hard to ensure that the scheme
will be workable and effective. In
conclusion, the measure is important, and I am grateful for the welcome
given to it by the Committee. It will provide more assurance that we
are doing all that
we can to make our roads safer, and on that basis, I commend the order
to the
Committee. Question
put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That the
Committee has considered the draft Road Safety (Financial Penalty
Deposit) (Appropriate Amount) Order
2009. 11.17
am Committee
rose.
| 
