Brexit: road, rail and maritime transport Contents

Chapter 2: Road haulage

16.Road haulage is the dominant mode of freight transport within the UK, accounting for 77.7% of all goods moved domestically.9 Domestic journeys account for the majority of activity by UK hauliers, but in 2017 UK-registered vehicles also exported approximately 3.7 million tonnes of goods and imported around 4.2 million tonnes.10 The majority of goods imported to and exported from the UK are handled by overseas hauliers, mostly by vehicles registered in Poland, Ireland and Romania.11 Figure 1 shows that in 2017, the UK accounted for 8% of total haulage activity in the EU.12

Figure 1: Share of total EU road haulage

Bar chart showing percentage of total EU road haulage by selected country

Source: Eurostat, Road freight transport statistics (August 2018): [accessed 8 May 2019]. Total transport includes national transport, international transport of goods loaded in the reporting countries, international transport of goods unloaded in the reporting countries, cross-trade and cabotage transport.

17.Road haulage is a diverse and competitive sector—operators range from large multi-fleet logistics companies to single vehicle businesses. Haulage is often characterised by Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs, 3.5 tonnes or more laden weight), but the last decade has seen a steady increase in the use of light vehicles (less than 3.5 tonnes laden weight), in part driven by the rapid expansion of internet shopping and home delivery markets.13

The EU regulatory framework

18.EU law has established a regulatory framework for road haulage in three main policy areas: access to the occupation of road transport operator; access to the international haulage market within the EU; and social and safety rules for drivers.14 This legislation has also been adopted in the rest of the EEA.

19.Regulation (EC) 1071/200915 sets high-level requirements for an undertaking to be a road transport operator—in other words, to be authorised to transport goods or passengers. These include requirements on establishment, financial standing and competence. Regulation (EC) 1072/200916 establishes specific arrangements for goods transport operators under a Community Licence system. Operators with a Community Licence may transport goods across EU Member States with vehicles above 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle weight.17

20.Community Licence holders are also entitled to cross-trade and cabotage rights within the EU. Cross-trade is the transport of goods between two countries by a haulier resident in a different country—for example, a UK haulier picking up goods in France and moving them to Spain. In 2017, UK hauliers’ share of total EU cross-trade operations was 0.1%.18

21.Cabotage refers to the transport of goods solely within a single country by a non-resident haulier—for example, a UK haulier moving goods between two locations in France. The concept of cabotage can be applied across transport modes and is discussed throughout this report. Cabotage journeys represent only a small proportion of total road freight transport in the EU—2.3% of tonne kilometres19 reported in 2017.20 The share of EU cabotage performed by UK vehicles was 0.7%, whereas 3.6% of total cabotage was undertaken in the UK.21

22.The significance of cabotage in a national market is generally measured by the cabotage penetration rate—the share of cabotage operations in total national transport for hire and reward. In 2017, the UK’s cabotage penetration rate was 1.5%, compared to an average of 4.3% in the EU-28.22 Figure 2 shows the Member States with the largest shares of total EU road haulage, broken down by type of operation.

Figure 2: Total EU road haulage by operation (tonne kilometres)

Stacked bar chart showing total EU road haulage by operation in tonne kilometres of selected countries

Source: Eurostat, Road freight transport statistics (August 2018): [accessed 8 May 2019]

23.In addition to complying with the provisions of the Working Time Directive,23 HGV drivers (and drivers of passenger vehicles with more than nine seats) must also adhere to specific EU rules on working hours and rest periods.24 Drivers who are covered by these rules must use vehicles equipped with tachographs—devices that display and record vehicle movements and driver activity periods—which are used to check compliance.25

24.Professional drivers benefit from general provisions for mutual recognition of EU driving licences set out in Directive 2006/126/EC.26 They are, however, also subject to a specific requirement to hold a driver Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC), which involves periodic training.

Future arrangements

25.The Government’s June 2018 Framework for the UK-EU Partnership: Transport set out a desire for the UK to maintain liberalised access for hauliers after Brexit, including “cabotage and cross-trade rights”. The subsequent White Paper sought options for “reciprocal access”. It also highlighted the high share of international haulage handled by non-UK hauliers in the UK, “demonstrating the importance of continued connectivity to both the UK and the EU.”27 The Commission’s high-level negotiating slides argued that “outside the single market ‘eco-system’” access would be based on a “bilateral quota system”.28

26.Unsurprisingly, our witnesses stressed the criticality of future arrangements to preserve reciprocal access for hauliers. The Freight Transport Association (FTA) was clear on the limited alternatives: “International road haulage is not liberalised by default and there is no such thing as a WTO fall-back option for road transport.”29 Duncan Buchanan, Policy Director, Road Haulage Association (RHA), reflected on the profound importance of haulage in underpinning trade, and said that, if an agreement was not found, supply chains would be “savaged”, which would be “completely unnecessary and stupid”.30

27.RHA set out a general aim for “UK and EU operators to have unrestricted ability to engage in international road haulage to, from, through the entire area covered by the UK and EU”.31 FTA ranked future arrangements models by order of preference, the first being a UK-EU agreement providing for “the mutual recognition of the Community Licence”.32 This first option was described by RHA as “the least intrusive” outcome. On the other hand, RHA held that the alternative of UK-specific permits “should not be dismissed”.33 FTA agreed that, failing continuation of the Community Licence, “negotiators could agree on a permit system”.34

28.If a single UK-EU arrangement could not be reached, RHA said the next option would be to move into “bilateral arrangements with individual EU States”. One way of doing this would be for bilateral agreements to “mutually recognise current licences”. For example, “the UK could recognise a Dutch Community Licence and the Dutch could recognise a UK Standard International licence without the need for any additional permits”. RHA noted that existing arrangements with Turkey provided a precedent for this.35 FTA, though, highlighted several challenges associated with bilateral agreements, including “long and resource-intensive negotiations” and the possibility of differing market access conditions between Member States.36

29.FTA and RHA agreed that any new arrangement that required a permit system should be quota-free. FTA said that a system “implying volume restrictions”37 would be unsuitable, while RHA argued that “quota limitations lead to corruption and appalling inefficiency”.38 Both organisations also highlighted the need for new arrangements to minimise bureaucracy for transit journeys. RHA said, by way of example: “So no one would need a French permit to transit to Italy through France.”39

Cabotage and cross-trade

30.FTA thought that post-Brexit, “cabotage should continue to be allowed on the basis of existing criteria”.40 Wincanton PLC felt that the loss of cabotage arrangements would “cause an immediate shortage of resource”, which would need to be covered by the UK fleet. Nonetheless, Wincanton criticised current cabotage rules and thought they ought to be reviewed, lest an “unfair advantage … be gained by foreign operators”, thanks to factors such as “wage inequality”.41

31.Mr Buchanan reflected on cabotage performed by UK hauliers in the EU: “We asked our members how they use cabotage in Europe at the moment. Quite a number of them say they make one cabotage journey and that is about it. Many do no cabotage in Europe.” He also agreed that there was greater interest in EU operators performing cabotage in the UK than UK operators in the EU.42 RHA noted that cabotage rates on the island of Ireland were an exception to general UK-EU rates.43 We explore this further in Chapter 8.

32.Mr Buchanan went on to highlight the added difficulty of securing political buy-in for reciprocal cabotage rights:

“It is absolutely clear from my discussions with other EU Member State trade bodies that there is no appetite to allow UK hauliers to have cabotage rights in the EU. If there is no appetite for it to happen in the EU, our contention is that we should not allow it here unless there is some sort of dramatic self-interest in allowing cabotage.”44

33.RHA concluded that cabotage would “probably be desirable, but any benefits are modest and the complexity for enforcement will be significant”.45

34.Mr Buchanan held that securing arrangements for cross-trade was “much more important”, as anything less would “add huge complexity”. Cross-trade was essential because “goods are picked up in one country; they go to a second country and then they are all part of a cohesive supply chain”.46 RHA emphasised the need for reciprocity: “If UK operators are banned from ‘cross trade’, it would be unfair competition to allow EU operators to ‘cross trade’ in or out of the UK.”47

35.Figures 3 and 4 show share of EU cabotage by country of haulier registration and location of operation respectively. Figure 5 shows share of cross-trade by country of haulier registration.

Figure 3: Share of EU cabotage by country of haulier registration

Bar chart showing percentage share of EU cabotage by countrey of haulier registration

Source: Eurostat, ‘File: SE Cabotage 2017—update.xlsx’ (24 October 2018): [accessed 8 May 2019]

Figure 4: Share of EU cabotage by location

Bar chart showing share of EU lcabotage by location of selected countries

Source: Eurostat, ‘File: SE Cabotage 2017—update.xlsx’ (24 October 2018): [accessed 8 May 2019]

Figure 5: Share of EU cross-trade by country of haulier registration

Bar chart showing percentage share of EU cross-trade by haulier country of registration

Source: Eurostat, Road freight transport statistics (August 2018): [accessed 8 May 2019]

36.On 19 December 2018, the Commission proposed temporary measures to allow UK hauliers to carry goods to the EU in a ‘no deal’ scenario, contingent on reciprocal rights being granted to EU hauliers in the UK.48 No reference was made to cross-trade operations and cabotage was explicitly ruled out. The final negotiated text, however, was more liberal. It provided for two cabotage or cross-trade journeys within seven days for a period of four months, followed by an allowance of one cabotage or cross-trade journey within 7 days for the following three months.49

The Government’s position

37.The Government reiterated its objective to “seek reciprocal access for road hauliers”, as set out in its White Paper. It said: “The key focus of such an agreement would be that current trade levels should not be subject to new restrictions”, adding that “if the use of Community Licences cannot be continued”, future arrangements may mean a system “with sufficient permits to cover all international EU haulage journeys”. However, the “details of such a system and the method of permit delivery and verification would depend on the outcome of negotiations”. The Government also recalled that it had already “laid the framework for a permit regime”, through the Haulage Permits and Trailer Registration Act 2018.50

38.The Secretary of State for Transport, Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP, told us that his discussions with EU counterparts were about “maintaining connections”, and none had “expressed any desire for anything other than a sensible agreement”.51 He explained that a “permit-based system” would not necessarily be “just for no deal”.52

39.Mr Grayling described cabotage as an “issue”, but emphasised his goal of “the most liberal possible arrangements”.53 He noted that “the total volume of cabotage within the UK by EU hauliers exceeds the total value of the import/export trade for UK hauliers”.54 He said he “would not wish to see a constraint” on these types of journeys, for example where “an EU haulier entering the United Kingdom with a load of widgets can drop some off in London, some in Birmingham and some more in Manchester”, and he could not see why the EU would wish to impose such a constraint. He felt that there was a “big difference” between this and a situation where “an EU haulier entering the United Kingdom can pick up a consignment in Liverpool and take it to Newcastle”.55 On the reciprocity of future arrangements, he said: “I cannot conceive of a situation where we would allow an unlevel playing field.”56

40.Ben Rimmington, Director, Road Safety, Standards and Services, DfT, provided further information on the use of cross-trade and cabotage by UK hauliers: “Our statistics suggest that around 40% of UK international journeys … involve an element of cross-trade or cabotage.” He noted, however, that he did not have detailed information on the patterns of cross-trade and cabotage usage within these journeys.57

41.It is difficult to overstate the importance of future arrangements to preserve UK-EU market access for hauliers. The Political Declaration identifies “comparable market access” for freight road transport operators as a shared negotiating objective. We call on the Government to clarify the meaning of ‘comparable’ in this context.

42.The continuation of the Community Licence system for UK hauliers would maintain the status quo. The published positions of the UK Government and the EU suggest that this is not a likely outcome. A UK-specific permit or licence system could provide a workable alternative. We consider that a system based on a limited number of permits should be avoided.

43.Cabotage and cross-trade are types of international haulage operations performed by non-resident hauliers. Future cabotage and cross-trade arrangements will therefore have a bearing on the opportunities available to UK hauliers in the EU as well as on how EU hauliers can move goods to, from and within the UK.

44.A significant proportion of international journeys by UK hauliers involve cabotage, cross-trade or both, but UK hauliers have a low share of total EU rates in terms of volumes transported and distance travelled. Cabotage by EU hauliers in the UK is more significant, but still relatively modest. Securing reciprocal cabotage rights may be politically difficult and we do not consider cabotage to be essential to the UK in a future UK-EU agreement on road haulage. We address the role of reciprocal cabotage on the island of Ireland in Chapter 8 of this report.

45.While cross-trade performed by UK hauliers is also relatively low, witnesses told us that cross-trade rights have wider implications for certain sectors or operators. We call on the Government to provide more detailed information on the importance of cross-trade to the flow of goods in and out of the UK, including any significant sectoral implications.

46.Where the UK and EU may have primary interests in different aspects of future cabotage and cross-trade arrangements, a trade-off between these interests in a future road haulage agreement could benefit both sides. We urge the Government to work closely with the road haulage industry to make clear its priorities for future cabotage and cross-trade arrangements with the EU.

47.Negotiations on the EU’s ‘no deal’ measures for UK hauliers resulted in a limited, shared allocation for cabotage and cross-trade journeys. This might provide a model for future UK-EU arrangements—though such a system could be burdensome to enforce.

Regulatory alignment

48.DPD, a parcel delivery service, took the stance that “any plans to diverge from specific EU road haulage rules for the benefit of UK hauliers must be balanced by the need for UK and EU systems to remain interoperable after Brexit”.58 RHA supplemented this position:

“The benefits of standardisation and simplicity should not be underestimated. Having common rules allows significant practicality and operational certainty and ensures deployment of resources (human and vehicles) can be done in a clear regulatory environment.”59

49.Nevertheless, Wincanton recommended “a review of the modules and content” of the EU’s driver CPC training, “to ensure that it is relevant to UK road users”.60 FTA suggested that national and international CPC exams could be decoupled, observing that “new entrants to the profession of transport manager are now required to learn the entire syllabus for national and international exams, even though the majority will likely never be involved in international operations during their careers”.61

50.FTA argued for the introduction of a “3-in-1 driver card” as a move away from “inspection of physical documents”. It explained that EU legislation required “vocational drivers … to carry a digital tachograph card and Driver Qualification card whilst driving and possess a driving licence”, even though “only the tachograph card has a technical function”.62

51.Aricia Limited criticised the “complex regulations” on drivers’ hours, noting that “the Government’s own ‘simplified’ guidance runs to 23 pages”. Aricia argued that “the driver’s day has gradually been lengthened through a number of EU related changes”, suggesting that measures be introduced to reverse this trend.63 Wincanton felt that the overlay of the Working Time Directive on drivers’ hours rules was “unnecessary” and “onerous to manage”.64 A similar argument was made by FTA: “FTA members have long been of the view that the application of the Working Time Directive to workers who are already subject to the rigours of the driver’s hours rules is a significant regulatory burden with little demonstrable benefit.”65

52.We note that the Government has made a commitment not to reduce the standards of workers’ rights from EU laws retained in UK law.66

53.That said, FTA said that overall there were “hardly any EU rules [their] members would like to be able to diverge from”.67 James Hookham, Deputy Chief Executive, FTA, concluded that, while over the years the industry had been frustrated by “how detailed and specific Directives and Regulations are … or the administrative arrangements that the Government have to put in place”, any adjustments should not be seen as “some kind of compensation for the kind of traumas we anticipate the road haulage sector going through”.68

The Government’s position

54.The Government highlighted that the “vast majority (76% by vehicle movements) of UK-EU haulage is undertaken by EU hauliers” and noted that many UK operators did not undertake international haulage at all. In this context, the Government noted that Brexit would mean that the “UK can fully consider the merits of legislation … and ensure that this works for the UK haulage sector”. At the same time, it pointed out that “the case for divergence on any given element of regulation will need to be considered in the light of the outcome of negotiations”. The Government also clarified that it “does not have any immediate plans to change the current regulatory framework”, and is committed to “high standards in areas such as employment and the environment”.69

55.In a few areas divergence from EU haulage standards would reduce the compliance burden for UK hauliers, particularly in relation to domestic-only operations. The Political Declaration suggests that the depth of market access under a future arrangement will be a function of the alignment between UK and EU rules in a number of policy areas, including social standards and conditions of employment. The limited benefits of regulatory divergence are unlikely to outweigh the opportunities of greater market access.

Contingency arrangements

56.Witnesses from the haulage sector stressed the utmost importance of, in the words of Mr Buchanan, agreeing “a deal of any sort” with a transition period “to mitigate the worst of the possible impacts”. However, he warned that future arrangements for hauliers must be forthcoming to enable the industry to use the transition period to implement them.70 Mr Buchanan concluded:

“If we find ourselves here again in two years’ time, looking at a situation where we are leaving but we do not know what customs arrangements we will have and what the permits are for road haulage, we will be in the same position as we are in now. We need to move on so that we can implement something.”71

57.The Government’s ‘no deal’ technical notice on commercial haulage, published on 24 September 2018, set out two contingency measures—ECMT permits and bilateral agreements.72 We consider these measures below in terms of their potential efficacy in the absence of agreed future arrangements for the haulage sector. We discuss the EU’s contingency arrangements for road haulage earlier in this Chapter.

ECMT permits

58.The first contingency measure set out by the Government was the use of ECMT permits, which are described in Box 2.

Box 2: The European Conference of Ministers of Transport permit scheme

The European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT)—now known as the International Transport Forum—was established in 1953 under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as an international platform for discussing and coordinating transport policies.

In 1974, it created a system of multilateral haulage permits to enable the transport of goods in 43 countries. All EU Member States (except for Cyprus) are members of the ECMT scheme, alongside Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Russia, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine.

Unlike the Community Licence, ECMT permits are limited in number and do not allow for cabotage. ECMT permits provide for cross-trade and transit, though the latter is restricted in Italy, Austria, Hungary, Greece and Russia.

Sources: International Transport Forum, ‘About the Multilateral Quota’: [accessed 12 December 2018]; International Transport Forum, ECMT multilateral quota: user guide (January 2014): [accessed 12 December 2018]; Department for Transport, ‘International road haulage: operator licences and permits’ (4 September 2012): [accessed 12 December 2018]; and written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

59.In early November 2018, DfT issued guidance on the allocation criteria for the limited number of ECMT permits available for the UK in 2019:

DfT expected “the number of applications for ECMT permits [to] exceed the number of permits available”.74 Mr Buchanan agreed with this assessment: “ECMT permits are insufficient for the needs of the market”.75 FTA estimated that “ECMT permits would cover 2% to 5% of transport needs”.76

60.On 5 March 2019 the Government announced that it had secured a limited number of additional ECMT permits at the ECMT Road Transport Group meeting.77

Bilateral agreements

61.The second contingency measure set out in the Government’s ‘no deal’ notice was an intention to “bring previous bilateral agreements with individual EU countries back into force and conclude new ones as swiftly as possible”.78 Mr Buchanan told us: “Analysis of previous bilateral agreements is that many of them can be restarted without major legislative requirements in either the UK or the EU. I believe that about 19 countries fall into that category.” However, some agreements may be more difficult to reinstate than others: “Belgium requires major legislative work, as do Denmark, Ireland and Hungary.”79 Mr Hookham observed that under bilateral agreements, “There is no clear number of permits that will be available … and it is almost certain that it would still be insufficient to support current levels of trade”.80 Mr Buchanan added: “Bilateral permits are clunky; each of them is different and you have to carry multiple ones … People will try to make it work, but it will be expensive and inconvenient.”81

Operation Brock

62.Many witnesses expressed concern at the implications for road hauliers of delays arising from future immigration and customs controls. We discuss the Government’s contingency arrangements to manage lorry queues around the Port of Dover in Box 3, but note that Holyhead may face similar consequences and that some implications will apply to other ports across the UK.

Box 3: Operation Stack and Operation Brock

‘Operation Stack’ describes a procedure used by Kent Police and the Port of Dover to park heavy goods vehicles on the M20 motorway when there is disruption to cross-channel services. A temporary new procedure is to be introduced to maintain traffic flow in case of delays at the border, including any that may arise from Brexit. The National Audit Office (NAO) explained in a July 2018 report:

“At present, Operation Stack manages congestion on the M20 to Dover when ferry or rail services are disrupted. The Department has identified an interim replacement for Operation Stack, called ‘Project Brock’, which will allow for the flow of traffic in both directions on the M20 using a contraflow on one carriageway while the other is used to queue lorries.”

The project, later named ‘Operation Brock’, is sponsored by DfT and delivered by Highways England. The Secretary of State provided us with further details:

“There is additional capacity in place in and around the Port of Dover compared with 2015 for a small number of trucks—I emphasise a small number. We then have a section of the M20 where work is being carried out to strengthen both hard shoulders to enable one carriageway to be used for lorry parking. The other would operate as a dual carriageway in both directions so that conventional motorway traffic can continue through Kent.”

On 11 April 2019 Highways England announced that the contraflow installed on the M20 would be “deactivated” in the light of the reduced threat of disruption to services across the Channel following the decision by EU leaders to extend Article 50. The steel barrier installed on the Londonbound carriageway would, however, remain in place “should Operation Brock be required again in the coming months”.

Sources: National Audit Office, Department for Transport: Implementing the UK’s Exit from the European Union (19 July 2018), p 9: [accessed 18 December 2018]; 54 (Chris Grayling MP); Highways England, ‘Operation Brock - work to remove M20 contraflow starts tonight’ (11 April 2019): [accessed 23 April 2019]

The Government’s position

63.The Minister of State, Jesse Norman MP, told us in March that ECMT permits were part of a ‘no deal’ landscape that also included the EU’s contingency measures and bilateral agreements.82 Mr Rimmington said DfT was clear that the ECMT system would not be able “to meet anything like the current levels of trade between the UK and our major trading partners in Europe”, adding that the initial allocation of permits was 11 times oversubscribed.83

64.Mr Rimmington told us that the priority for securing bilateral arrangements was “access points for the UK into the continental market—France, Netherlands, Belgium and Germany—and our key overall trading partners such as Spain and Italy”. He said that updated agreements had not been signed, but “good informal progress” had been made, and “we are in a reasonably good place to be ready for that world if it is the world that we have to enter”.84

65.The Minister of State emphasised that Project Brock was “not at all related merely to Brexit [but] to do with resilience in the system overall”. He said that the “phased deployment” of Project Brock would be “much safer … than if roads and byways are choked with traffic”.85 Mr Rimmington added that “the overall holding capacity matches [the Government’s] assessment of the worst reasonable case scenario”.86

66.The ECMT system facilitates road haulage in Europe and surrounding regions. In the absence of an agreement on road haulage, ECMT permits would allow some UK-EU journeys, but permits are limited in number, do not allow cabotage and present some restrictions on transit. The limited number of available permits appears to be the most significant limitation. The first-round allocation of available permits to UK hauliers demonstrated that the supply is vastly outstripped by demand.

67.Bilateral agreements between the UK and individual Member States would also facilitate haulage in the absence of a comprehensive agreement with the EU. A number of historical bilateral agreements could be reinstated without major legislative work, although some would be more difficult to revive. We support the Government’s prioritisation of negotiations with the UK’s nearest neighbours and major trading partners. We note that EU-level arrangements, such as a basic agreement or contingency measures, may place restrictions on bilateral agreements with Member States.

8 European Union Committee, Brexit: the customs challenge (20th Report, 2017–19, HL Paper 187)

9 The latest data available refer to 2017. They do not include vehicles registered in Northern Ireland. Department for Transport, ‘Freight (TSGB04)’, table TSGB0401: Domestic freight transport, by mode (6 December 2018): [accessed 15 April 2019]

10 Department for Transport, International Road Freight Statistics, United Kingdom 2017 (26 July 2018), p 1: [accessed 26 November 2018]

11 Department for Transport, International Road Freight Statistics, United Kingdom 2017 (26 July 2018), p 6: [accessed 26 November 2018]

12 Total transport includes national transport, international transport of goods loaded in the reporting countries, international transport of goods unloaded in the reporting countries, cross-trade and cabotage transport. See Eurostat, Road freight transport statistics (August 2018): [accessed 23 April 2019]

13 RAC Foundation, Van travel trends in Great Britain (April 2014), p 23: [accessed 13 December 2018]

14 In 2017 and 2018 the Commission adopted a series of ‘mobility packages’ to amend existing EU road transport legislation. At the time of writing this report the mobility packages were at various stages of the legislative process.

15 Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing common rules concerning the conditions to be complied with to pursue the occupation of road transport operator and repealing Council Directive 96/26/EC, OJ L 300/51 (14 November 2009)

16 Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international road haulage market, OJ L 300/72 (14 November 2009)

17 In the UK, Community Licences are automatically issued to transport operators that obtain a Standard International Operator Licence from a Traffic Commissioner (in Great Britain) or the Northern Ireland Department for Infrastructure (for Northern Ireland).

18 Eurostat, ‘Road freight transport by journey characteristics’ (August 2018), table 6: [accessed 23 April 2019]

19 A tonne kilometre represents the transport of one tonne over one kilometre. See Eurostat, ‘Glossary: Tonne-kilometre (tkm)’: [accessed 24 April 2019].

21 Eurostat, ‘Road freight transport statistics—cabotage’ (1 August 2018), table 4 and figure 3: [accessed 24 April 2019]

22 Eurostat, ‘Road freight transport statistics—cabotage’ (1 August 2018), figure 1: [accessed 24 April 2019]

23 Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, OJ L 299 (18 November 2003)

24 European Commission, ‘Road: Driving time and rest periods’ (15 March 2006): [accessed 12 December 2018]

25 Ibid.

26 Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (recast), OJ L 403/18 (30 December 2006)

27 HM Government, The future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union, Cm 9593, July 2018, p 43: [accessed 4 December 2018]

28 European Commission, Internal preparatory discussions on framework for future relationship: Road, rail and maritime transport (20 February 2018), p 19: [accessed 18 December 2018]

29 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

30 Q 40 (Duncan Buchanan)

31 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

32 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

33 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

34 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

35 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

36 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

37 Ibid.

38 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

39 Ibid.

40 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

41 Written evidence from Wincanton PLC (TRA0013)

42 Q 41 (Duncan Buchanan)

43 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

44 Q 41 (Duncan Buchanan)

45 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

46 Q 41 (Duncan Buchanan)

47 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

48 The Government laid an SI on 6 February 2019 to provide EU hauliers access to the UK. The Licensing of Operators and International Road Haulage (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (SI 2019/708)

49 Regulation (EU) 2019/501 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 March 2019 on common rules ensuring basic road freight and road passenger connectivity with regard to the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the Union, OJ LI 85/39 (27 March 2019)

50 Written evidence from the Department for Transport (TRA0012). The Haulage Permits and Trailer Registration Act 2018 empowers the Secretary of State for Transport to set up an international road haulage permit scheme and a trailer registration scheme after the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

51 Q 57 (Chris Grayling MP)

52 Q 55 (Chris Grayling MP)

53 Q 58 (Chris Grayling MP)

54 Q 55 (Chris Grayling MP)

55 Q 58 (Chris Grayling MP)

56 Q 57 (Chris Grayling MP)

57 Q 78 (Ben Rimmington)

58 Written evidence from DPD (TRA0010)

59 Written evidence from the Road Haulage Association (TRA0011)

60 Written evidence from Wincanton PLC (TRA0013)

61 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

62 Ibid.

63 Written evidence from Aricia Limited (TRA0021)

64 Written evidence from Wincanton PLC (TRA0013)

65 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

66 See for example: Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, ‘Workers’ rights to be protected in UK law’ (6 March 2019): [accessed 2 May 2019].

67 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

68 Q 42 (James Hookham)

69 Written evidence from the Department for Transport (TRA0012)

70 Q 39 (Duncan Buchanan)

71 Ibid.

72 Department for Transport, ‘Commercial road haulage in the EU if there’s no Brexit deal’ (24 September 2018): [accessed 18 December 2018]. The publication was replaced with a new notice on 14 January 2019: Department for Transport, ‘Prepare to drive in the EU after Brexit: lorry and goods vehicle drivers’ (14 January 2019): [accessed 23 April 2019]

73 Department for Transport, International Road Haulage Permits: Guidance on Determining Permit Allocations (November 2018), pp 11–12: [accessed 29 November 2018]. The UK’s initial allocation for 2019 was 984 annual permits for Euro VI emission vehicles, 2,592 monthly permits for Euro VI emission vehicles, and 240 monthly permits for Euro V or VI emission vehicles.

74 Department for Transport, International Road Haulage Permits: Guidance on Determining Permit Allocations (November 2018), p 1: [accessed 29 November 2018]

75 Q 39 (Duncan Buchanan)

76 Written evidence from the Freight Transport Association (TRA0017)

77 The additional permits brought the UK’s 2019 totals to 1,320 annual Euro VI permits, 290 annual Euro V permits, 3,744 short-term Euro VI permits (valid for 30 days) and 1,080 short-term Euro V permits (valid for 30 days). Department for Transport, ‘International road haulage permits guidance on determining permit allocations March 2019 new application window’ (5 March 2019): [accessed 29 November 2018]

78 Department for Transport, ‘Commercial road haulage in the EU if there’s no Brexit deal (24 September 2018): [accessed 29 November 2018]

79 Q 40 (Duncan Buchanan)

80 Q 40 (James Hookham)

81 Q 40 (Duncan Buchanan)

82 Q 80 (Jesse Norman MP)

83 Q 80 (Ben Rimmington)

84 Q 79 (Ben Rimmington)

85 Q 69 (Jesse Norman MP)

86 Q 70 (Ben Rimmington)

© Parliamentary copyright 2019