House of Lords
Tuesday, 28th January 1997.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers--Read by the Lord Bishop of Oxford.
Vehicle Registration System
Lord Campbell of Croy asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When the consultation period on a future system of registration for motor vehicles and associated identifying plates is likely to be concluded.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen): My Lords, the consultation period ends on 21st March this year.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for his reply. As a new system will be needed by the year 2004, when the usable alphabet will have been exhausted, is there a programme in place for decisions and adequate time for preparations bearing in mind that any changes will cost money and that manufacturers and traders are hoping to receive as much notice as possible?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, clearly it is important to give the maximum possible period of notice. The consultation exercise was embarked on following representations from the motor industry which was concerned about the peak in sales of motor cars and new registrations around August. We certainly shall want to give the maximum possible notice.
Lord Brabazon of Tara: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the sale of personalised number plates has been an enormous success and is popular with the public? How much money has been raised by the Government during the nine or 10 years that the system has been in action?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, it clearly has been a great success. The demand for cherished or personalised numbers has exceeded all expectations. I understand that over £240 million has been received as a result of sales of such numbers.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, does the Minister agree that legislative action on this issue is certainly overdue? Does he also agree that there are two essential common denominators here: first, the one he identified, namely, that a quarter of all car sales are crammed into the month of August, which is wholly unsatisfactory; and, secondly, that any new form of number plates must be easy to remember to help in the fight against crime and to ensure that costs for car buyers are cut as well as being in the interests of the motor industry as a whole?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord. Certainly, the month of August is heavily biased in terms of the number of car sales that occur then. For example, in August 1996 541,000 cars out of a total of 2.4 million were registered. That causes major problems for the motor industry, and that is why we have embarked on the consultation. Certainly, having a system which enables people to remember car number plates aids the police considerably. We also want to ensure that costs are kept low.
Lord Brougham and Vaux: My Lords, will my noble friend and his colleagues in the department consider that although number plates should be easily remembered, car crime in England is high? The noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, referred to crime. Will the Government consider the Swedish integrated information system which is readily accessible to their police and enables them to check whether a car has road tax and an MoT certificate, and whether it is insured?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, that would appear to be a valuable response to the consultation exercise. It sounds as if people will send in details of that system, and it will be taken into account during our analysis of the responses.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, is not an important consideration the one already mentioned; namely, to try to avoid the inefficient concentration of sales in one short period of the year? In future will more emphasis be given in the registration figures to the area where a vehicle is first registered rather than its age, which is not really relevant?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, we have covered the point with regard to the sales of motor cars throughout the calendar year. There is already a geographical identifier within the registration mark. The question of a further area mark is one of the options that has been identified and on which we are consulting.
Gurkhas: Accompanied Service
in the UK
2.42 p.m.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they have yet come to a decision on the provision of appropriate accommodation for the families of Gurkha personnel posted for service in the United Kingdom.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Earl Howe): My Lords, as I explained on 14th January, and confirmed on 22nd January, I expect a decision on the review of Gurkha terms and conditions of service, including the issue of married, accompanied service in the United Kingdom, to be announced next month.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, can my noble friend give any indication as to whether that decision
which is to be announced next week will be one that meets the ordinary ideas of decency and of proper provision for the dependants of these first-class soldiers?
Earl Howe: My Lords, my noble friend can be confident that the Government will want to continue to treat the Gurkhas generously. However, as I am sure he will appreciate, the last thing we wish to do is to disadvantage Gurkha soldiers and their families by not fully thinking through any changes to terms and conditions of service that we may be considering. A number of government departments are involved. The matter will inevitably take a little while longer.
Lord Dean of Beswick: My Lords, will the Minister enlighten the House as to what the Government consider to be appropriate? If there were some area of disagreement between families--the Minister will know that in housing matters that is bound to happen--can there be negotiations with those people who are to be rehoused so that their feelings about the matter may be considered as far as possible?
Earl Howe: My Lords, as regards the first part of the noble Lord's question, I ask him to wait until any announcement we make. He can judge the content of the announcement at the time.
On his second point, as a matter of general policy on the part of the Ministry of Defence, of course we try to take account of the concerns of individual families as far as we can when there is an entitlement to a married quarter.
Chinook Helicopter Crash Verdict
2.44 p.m.
Lord Chalfont asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they are still satisfied with the verdict reached by the RAF board of inquiry into the crash of the Chinook helicopter in Scotland on 2nd June 1994.
Earl Howe: My Lords, an extremely thorough investigation into this tragic accident was carried out, including RAF experts with first-hand experience of Chinooks and civilian specialists from the Air Accidents Investigation Branch. They concluded that the accident was caused by the two pilots, who wrongly continued to fly their aircraft towards the high ground of the Mull of Kintyre below a safe altitude in unsuitable weather conditions. This constituted a failure in their duty and regrettably, therefore, it was concluded that both pilots had been negligent. No new evidence has emerged to cause us to doubt the accuracy of this conclusion.
Lord Chalfont: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. However, is he aware that a well researched television programme on Channel 4 last night cast considerable doubt on the justification for a verdict which found two young officers of considerable experience guilty of gross negligence. Can he confirm that it is one of the rules in Royal Air Force inquiries of
this kind that it is only when there is absolutely no doubt that dead air crew should be found guilty of negligence? Can he state categorically that there is no doubt whatsoever in this case? If not, will he undertake to reopen the inquiry and review all the evidence?
Earl Howe: My Lords, I am aware of the programme to which the noble Lord refers. It made a number of unsubstantiated allegations. The RAF's inquiry into the cause of the accident was scrupulous and was carried out in accordance with agreed procedures, including the attribution of negligence. In forming their final decision on the cause, Air Vice Marshal Day and Air Vice Marshal Sir William Wratten judged that the two pilots did not exercise appropriate care or judgment and that their actions led directly to the crash. Such actions, they concluded, amounted to gross negligence. No new evidence has come to light which might cast doubt on that decision.
Lord Merlyn-Rees: My Lords, if there were to be a further inquiry on this matter, what procedures exist within the Royal Air Force to allow that to happen? On whose authority could a further inquiry be instigated?
Earl Howe: My Lords, if new evidence emerged it would of course be open to the Royal Air Force to reopen the board of inquiry. However, as I said, there is as yet no such further evidence and, therefore, no reason in the RAF's mind at least to take that course.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page