2 Service delivery
Effect
of structural reorganisation on service users
4. The motoring agencies are introducing digital
services and undergoing a period of organisational change.[6]
These changes have the potential to affect the services that the
agencies provide to the public, businesses and enforcement agencies.
5. The DVLA is required by the Treasury to reduce
its operating costs by £100 million a year by the end of
2014-15 against a 2010-11 baseline. It is committed to achieving
significant cost savings through the increased digitisation of
services, and the closure of local offices and a move towards
a centralised operation. By March 2014 over £70m had been
realised and the DVLA is confident it will meet the target, which
will represent a real cost reduction of more than 20%.[7]
Oliver Morley, Chief Executive of the DVLA, told us that the organisation
had made considerable expenditure reductions, both by reducing
the local office network and also in some initial savings on the
non-staff cost areas.[8]
He was confident the DVLA could maintain the quality of the services
it provided despite a reduction in expenditure. The then Minister
told us that the DVLA was embarking on a major programme of IT
transformation to deliver new and better services online. He added
that the DVLA was committed to achieving £160 million of
net savings on 2013-14 by the end of 2016-17, a figure he described
as "a 30% efficiency saving over the next three years".[9]
The DfT has recently published a review of the DVLA, prepared
by Mary Reilly, a non-executive Director of the DfT. This recommended
an acceleration and expansion of the DVLA's digital transformation
in order to cut costs further and improve services.[10]
6. The DVSA was established in April 2014, following
the merger of the DSA and VOSA.[11]
The agency plans to recruit a permanent board in 2014 and will
move to a single headquarters.[12]
Alistair Peoples, Chief Executive of the DVSA, said that the DVSA
had maintained front-line service delivery throughout the reorganisation
and had taken 'great pains' to ensure merger issues were not visible
to customers.[13] The
changes have been broadly welcomed. Leon Daniels, Managing Director
of Surface Transport for Transport for London (TfL), thought the
merger of DSA and VOSA had much promise and would improve communication,
leading to a better relationship for TfL with the DVSA.[14]
Stephen Smith, Operations Director, Confederation of Passenger
Transport, said some benefits from the mergera change of
attitude and policywere already visible.[15]
The DVSA has started conducting annual roadworthiness testing
of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) at Authorised Testing Facilities
(ATFs) rather than at government-owned sites. The DfT recognised
this change could reduce fuel costs and lost time for vehicle
operators.[16] Alistair
Peoples explained how the DVSA was working with the industry to
forecast future volumes of tests and what facilities would be
needed.[17] The DfT expects
the DVSA to look at a similar model of authorised facilities for
driving tests.
7. The VCA operates in a commercially competitive
environment and offers its services as an approval authority overseas.
It also offers management systems certificationquality
assurance for automotive companies.[18]
As well as its operations in the UK the VCA has a network of offices
overseas. For example, the office in Italy provides type approval
certification services to multi-national automotive companies
and to smaller supply chain companies in Southern Europe, particularly
in Spain, Portugal and Turkey. The VCA is looking to set up an
office in Brazil.[19]
The DfT is exploring options for the VCA to operate under a new
commercial model and is looking for a private sector partner to
help run and develop the VCA.[20]
Stephen Hammond, the then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
for Transport, told us the Vehicle Certification Agency had an
international reputation for its work on certifying vehicles and
that a private sector partner would help the VCA to realise opportunities
to work in other countries more quickly.[21]
The DfT had intended to begin this process by issuing an OJEU
notice in autumn 2013[22]
but this was not issued until March 2014.[23]
8. Not all those submitting evidence supported the
changes. The Confederation of Passenger Transport explained how
the closure of local DVLA offices had a potentially costly impact
on bus and coach operators.[24]
The AA, while generally supportive of the changes, was concerned
about losing the skills and experience of DVLA staff when local
branches close.[25] John
Lepine, General Manager, Motor Schools Association of Great Britain,
told us that there were 'not many DSA staff left at director level
[in the DVSA]; they are all VOSA people'.[26]
9. Several witnesses called on the Government to
go further and to create, in effect, a 'one stop shop' to improve
service and avoid unnecessary costs and duplication. Karen Dee,
from the Freight Transport Association, said more could be done
to overcome a lack of joined up thinking. She thought the system
as a whole was not coherent, and the lack of coherence imposed
unnecessary costs.[27]
Her evidence reinforced similar points made in the written evidence
we received from the BRVLA, which called for:
· a
review of the responsibilities of the Government motoring agencies
to remove duplication;
· a move to electronic
services as a priority for all aspects of motor vehicle administration;
· the introducing
the ability to purchase VED for multiple years;
· a wholesale
review of HGV testing to ensure that Authorised Testing Facilities
are a long term success;
· a review of
access to MOT test data and wider distinction of vehicle type
to improve road safety and provide greater data transparency;
· measures to
ensure that the impact of cutting costs within Government was
a win for businesses as well as for the taxpayer.[28]
10. The Department for Transport explained the structure
of the motoring services agencies was guided by the principles
of putting customers and businesses at the heart of what they
do.[29] The Department
wants to reduce the number of agencies with which customers have
to deal and wants to make their approaches more uniform and consistent.[30]
The Department would also like to see greater sharing and less
duplication of functions across the agencies. It told us it believes
that "the customer experience should be streamlined wherever
possible"; for example through sharing estate and back office
services to reduce overheads and benefit customers.[31]
However, DfT did not offer any broader vision for the delivery
of motoring services or the involvement of the private sector
in the delivery of such services. For example, there are areas
of DVLA's responsibilities that may make an attractive business
for the private sectorthe sale of registration plates being
an obvious one.
11. The Government's mixed approach to reforming
the motoring agencies is clearly aimed at improving the customer
experience and targeting specific inefficiencies in individual
agencies. This is laudable and it is important that the Government
monitors the outcomes of reform of the motoring agencies to ensure
the expected benefits are realised. We see little evidence
of a holistic long-term strategy, however, and it is not clear,
for example why organisational change is the DVSA's focus, while
efficiency savings are the order of the day at DVLA, and VCA is
undertaking a complex procurement to find a private sector partner.
Nor is it clear how this mix of different approaches in the agencies
will allow a common approach to back office services through the
shared services programme and a common approach to digital services
for end users. We recommend that the Government make clear its
long term agenda for change by setting out clearly its overall
strategy for provision of motoring services. This should cover
all its motoring agencies, demonstrate how the strategy will make
services more unified and deliver efficiencies and cost savings,
and set out a timeline for the further changes needed to bring
about a more unified approach. It should also justify the different
approaches it is promoting for the three agencies and explain
the impact the Department's work on shared services will have
on the agencies. The Department should consider whether it needs
three separate agencies to achieve the streamlined, largely electronic
services it provides. We would like the Government to expand on
its plans for private sector involvement in the provision of motoring
services and how it sees the long term future for its agencies
as monopoly public service providers. The Government should also
make clear the extent to which efficiency savings will benefit
both the users of services through reduced costs and fees, and
the general taxpayer in the form of savings to the Exchequer.
12. The DVSA should provide us with a reassurance
that the wealth of experience built up by its vehicle inspectors,
examiners and other staff is not being lost in the course of the
merger and the changes it is making to authorised testing facilities.
Similarly, the DVLA should provide us with a reassurance that
it is managing the risks around the loss of knowledge and experience
as it closes local branches.
13. We are concerned about the six-month delay
in issuing the OJEU notice for the VCA's private sector partner
and seek assurances from the Government that a partner will be
announced on schedule in January 2015. If there are any
further delays to plans to recruit a private sector partner for
the VCA, we would expect the Government to write to us.
Support for businesses
14. The DVLA and DVSA provide services to both individuals
and businesses. The Freight Transport Association (FTA) told us
that the agencies' focus on delivering effective services to individuals
often created difficulties for business users, fleet operators
and those who employ drivers.[32]
Further, there is no incentive to improve matters because commercial
road fleet operators are a relatively small part of the DVLA's
customer base.[33] Specific
concerns included:
· agencies
not understanding how their systems create inefficiencies for
fleet businesses;
· delays caused
by the requirement to register and tax vehicles through the DVLA
rather than through the dealership, as previously possible; and
· difficulties
for bus owners arising from the time it takes DVLA to re-instate
driving licences.[34]
Karen Dee told us that if a company was trying to
relicense 500 vehicles it would need to do them one at a time,
incurring a £2.50 charge for each one. The lack of support
for bulk transaction imposes financial and time costs on businesses.[35]
She also pointed out that DVSA systems with the vehicle test data
needed for relicensing was in a separate system.
15. The FTA recommended some solutions to help tackle
these issues, to prevent further problems arising in the future
and to anticipate difficulties before they arose. These included:
· establishing
a cross-agency champion for business and fleet users;
· establishing
a long-term plan for a 'one-stop-shop' for driver and vehicle
information and services; and
· developing
a consolidated plan for world standard e-services 'on a par with
online retail providers'.[36]
16. The DfT said its agencies continually monitored
service delivery and regularly sought customer insight.[37]
The DVLA and DVSA respond effectively to the needs of individuals,
who usually undertake only two or three transactions each year
but account for the bulk of the agencies' business. However, on
the basis of the evidence we received they do not adequately meet
the needs of businesses, some of whom undertake hundreds of vehicle
or driver transactions in each year. The agencies need to develop
a better understanding of the needs of their business users, particularly
small fleet owners and operators who play an important part in
economic prosperity. We recommend that DVLA and DVSA develop
specific strategies for responding to the needs of business customers.
In setting out a longer-term strategy for the future of its motoring
agencies, the Government should consider the needs of business
users as well as those of individual motorists.
DRIVER TRAINING
17. Anyone wishing to drive a heavy goods vehicle
HGV for a living needs to hold an HGV licence and pass the Driver
Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC). The CPC for professional
drivers was introduced as a result of European Directive 2003/59/EC,[38]
which was intended to:
... improve road safety, to improve the professionalism
and the quality of service offered by professional drivers and
to facilitate the free movement of workers.[39]
All new professional HGV drivers must pass an initial
qualification, and all existing professional HGV drivers must
take periodic training on a five-yearly cycle. The requirements
to pass an initial qualification were introduced on 10 September
2009 and existing drivers will have to have undertaken the first
round of training by 9 September 2014.[40]
18. Several witnesses doubted the Driver CPC was
delivering the benefits expected of it. Beverley Bell, Senior
Traffic Commissioner for Great Britain, told us that the quality
of training of a "small percentage" of companies was
poor and failed to engage drivers.[41]
Leon Daniels, from TFL, told us
I could have got my driver CPC by going to the
same course in the same office on five consecutive days and sitting
through the same syllabus [
] It is entirely inappropriate
that there is a shortcut that allows people to get their driver
CPC in that way.[42]
19. Adrian Jones, National Officer for Road Transport,
Commercial, Logistics and Retail Distribution, Unite the Union,
made the same point in his evidence and added this was of "no
benefit to the driver, the employer or the industry".[43]
He also said the training was sometimes little more than attendance
at an event and little engagement in the content of the course
was required.[44] TfL
called for greater transparency so that transport managers could
view the modules taken by each of their drivers. They argued that
this would encourage drivers to make less arbitrary choices on
which training modules to take, while also increasing professionalism
in the industry. They said the Safe Urban Driving coursea
TfL-developed course aimed at drivers operating in or passing
through London and intended to lower the risk to vulnerable road
users, including cyclistsshould be mandatory.[45]
In our inquiry on cycling safety, British Cycling called for cycle
awareness training to be made a mandatory part of the CPC.[46]
20. The then Minister told us he was aware of the
concerns that the CPC might allow a repetition of the same training
every year but argued that responsible hauliers would understand
the need to ensure their drivers maintained their professional
competence. He said the Department was in the process of reviewing
the CPC regulations; this included whether there should be a safety
element within the driver CPC.[47]
21. If businesses and drivers must commit time
and resource to mandatory training then that training must be
worthwhile and effective. At the present time this is not the
case. We welcomed the proposals made by the Government in
November 2013 when it reported to the European Commission on the
effectiveness of the CPC and called for more flexibility and for
the training to take account of other road users, particularly
cyclists.[48] But under
the current regulations the Government could not add modules on
vulnerable road users to the Driver CPC or compel drivers to select
them. If the Government unilaterally amended regulations to make
such modules compulsory drivers from other countries using roads
in the UK would not have equivalent training. For that reason,
we recommend that the Government lobby the European Commission
to introduce an amending Directive to require the inclusion of
a compulsory new training module in the Driver CPC focused on
vulnerable road users.
6 Department for Transport (GMA0010) Back
7
DVLA, DVLA's annual report 2013 to 2014 June 2014 [accessed 1 September
2014] Back
8
Q111 Back
9
Q173 Back
10
Department for Transport, A review of DVLA, January 2014
[accessed 1 September 2014] Back
11
In Northern Ireland, the Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) remains
responsible for services provide elsewhere by the DVSA. Back
12
Q129 Back
13
Q115 Back
14
Q82 [Leon Daniels] Back
15
Q32 Back
16
Department for Transport (GMA0010) Back
17
Q129 Back
18
VCA, Management systems certification [accessed 1 September
2014] Back
19
Q187 Back
20
Q188 Back
21
Q187 Back
22
VCA, Vehicle Certification Agency new commercial models prior information notice,
July 2013 [accessed 1 September 2014] Back
23
DfT and VCA, VCA new commercial models: OJEU notice, March 2014
[accessed 1 September 2014] Back
24
Q39 Back
25
Automobile Association (GMA0006), para 3.3 Back
26
Q33 and Q34 Back
27
Q6 Back
28
BVRLA (GMA0007) Back
29
Department for Transport (GMA0010) Back
30
Department for Transport (GMA0010) Back
31
Department for Transport (GMA0010), para 31 Back
32
Freight Transport Association (GMA0015) Back
33
Q13 [Karen Dee] Back
34
Q37 [Mr Parmar], also see Q7 [Ms Dee];Q38; and Unite the Union
(GMA0009) Back
35
Q7 Back
36
Freight Transport Association (GMA0015) Back
37
Department for Transport (GMA0010) Back
38
European Directive 2003/59/EC which was brought into effect
by the Vehicle Drivers (Certificates of Professional Competence)
Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/605) Back
39
DSA, Certificates of Professional Competence for professional
lorry and bus drivers - partial RIA, November 2005,
para 2.1.1 Back
40
For bus and coach (PSV) drivers these dates were 10 September
2008 and 9 September 2013 respectively Back
41
Q101 Back
42
Q98 Back
43
Q25 Back
44
Q26 Back
45
Transport for London (GMA0017) Back
46
Transport Committee, Third Report of Session 2014-15, Cycling safety,
HC 286, para 17 Back
47
Q181 Back
48
Department for Transport, UK Government response to the European Commission's call for evidence and review of Directive 2003/59/EC on the initial qualification and period training of drivers of certain road vehicles for the carriage of goods or passengers,
20 November 2013 [accessed 1 September 2014] Back
|