HC Deb 26 January 1968 vol 757 cc844-52

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Armstrong.]

4.13 p.m.

Sir Ronald Russell (Wembley, South)

The subject which I wish to raise on the Adjournment this afternoon is the transport problems of commercial travellers. I am glad of the opportunity to do so and I am grateful to the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport for being here to answer the debate.

The function of commercial travellers is vital to the economy, because they are a link between the manufacturer and the producer, on the one hand, and the distributor and the retailer, on the other. Without them, samples could not be taken to the buying offices of merchandise firms or the showrooms of commercial buyers and thus goods could not be marketed successfully.

The samples carried in vehicles used by commercial travellers are often heavy, bulky, fragile and sometimes very valuable and most samples cannot be carried more than a few yards from the vehicle to the premises of the buyer because of their bulk or weight and to carry them any distance in crowded streets would often cause serious inconvenience to pedestrians. Expensive samples like jewellery and watches would, of course, raise problems of security.

The United Commercial Travellers' Association, which is the official body of commercial travellers—and I have the good fortune to be president of the Wembley branch—campaigns both nationally and locally for a measure of discretionary treatment of motoring commercial travellers by police officers and traffic wardens.

To help police officers and traffic wardens, bona fide commercial travellers can be provided by the Association with a windscreen badge to identify themselves, plus a card holder in which the traveller can place the address at which he can be contacted if his car is causing an obstruction while he is taking samples to a buying organisation or a shop. There are a large number of police authorities which instruct their officers and traffic wardens to use reasonable discretion, especially where the conveyance of heavy samples is concerned.

In too many instances, parking restrictions in city and town centres are enforced rigidly, without any discretion. I know that it is a difficult problem, but it makes things even more difficult for the traveller.

A classic example of mishandling occurred in Birmingham during a snowfall, a few weeks ago, when a visiting commercial traveller who was a comparative stranger to the city was served with a fixed penalty notice by a woman traffic warden for parking in the middle of heavy snow in a street which according to the traffic warden was marked with a double yellow line at the kerbside. Because of the snow the traveller had not seen the double yellow line.

That is an isolated example of the sort of difficulties that can occur where discretion is not exercised. There is a problem here about licensing, too. I have to be careful because of the dangers of advocating legislation. I am advocating administrative action. The problem of parking raises the need for quick loading and unloading. This problem has caused many travellers to use dual purpose vehicles, mainly estate cars, instead of saloons.

Unfortunately, this means that they attract the goods rate of licensing, although owners of such vehicles who use them for private purposes only pay a normal rate. This seems to be unfair, because the samples are not goods for sale. Quite often commercial travellers may be carrying shoes in batches of what are called half pairs—single shoes. Obviously, they have no commercial value. They use these vehicles because they speed up loading and unloading, and thus help to ease the parking problem. Yet they are being penalised for doing so. The anomaly of this restriction between dual-purpose cars and the saloon car is highlighted in proposals in the Transport Bill, at present beforethe House, in which I understand that vehicles over 30 cwt.——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman has reminded himself that he cannot discuss new legislation in an Adjournment debate.

Sir R. Russell

I am sorry, Sir. I thought that one could mention Bills before the House. I would like the Minister to look into this matter from the administrative point of view, to see whether some kind of licence can be granted to those who use dual purpose cars, such as is granted to those who use them privately.

I put forward this plea at a time when the volume of traffic on the roads is growing. The number of heavy vehicles is increasing, including even the use of abnormal loads, or indivisible loads, as the Ministry calls the monster loads which have to be guarded by the police. All this has increased the difficulties of commercial travellers who have to drive on the roads to carry out their work. I hope that the Government and the police will do all that they can to remove the frustration which besets commercial travellers, often unnecessarily, and make their life easier.

4.20 p.m.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Neil Carmichael)

I must thank the hon. Member for Wembley, South (Sir R. Russell) for raising a subject which I know concerns business people very much. It is true that commercial travellers pay a vital part in the commerce of the country and in enabling people in various areas to make a choice of the wide range of goods available. Only people like commercial travellers fulfil this function.

I want to be as helpful as I can. There is a good prospect of easing some of the licensing rules for commercial travellers. But I am afraid that there is no simple answer to the traffic problems which cause considerable difficulties for commercial travellers and all other people who have to use their cars in crowded city streets.

Perhaps I could deal with the licensing questions first. The official interpretation of one or two points should be given in order to obviate any misunderstandings which have arisen. The carrier licensing system was introduced in 1933 and, as the hon. Member knows, it has become increasingly out of touch with modern conditions. This we are trying to put right in the Transport Bill.

Let me explain what happens under the present system. Anyone using a goods vehicle—and this includes an estate car—to carry goods for business purposes must have a carrier's licence. These licences are not needed for ordinary private cars unless they have been specially adapted in some way for the carriage of goods. I will deal later with the question of private and dual-purpose vehicles which the hon. Member raised. If a commercial traveller uses a private car for his business trips, he does not need a carrier's licence. On the other hand, if he uses an estate car or van, a carrier's licence is normally required.

But there is an important exception to that rule. Commercial travellers using estate cars not exceeding two tons unladen weight to carry samples which are not on offer for sale are exempted from the licensing. A large number of commercial travellers benefit from this concession. Others cannot take advantage of it because they need to use their vehicles from time to time to deliver orders. However, a C licence, which most of these commercial travellers need for their estate cars, is available virtually on demand. It costs only 30s. and is valid for five years. There is a much smaller group of commercial travellers, who are mostly agents for a number of organisations, who require a B licence which costs £5, but is valid for two years.

Despite the exemption which I have just mentioned, the present situation is still a bit confusing for some commercial travellers and many other people with estate cars or small vans. We propose to change this in the Transport Bill, which will have a great liberalising effect in many ways. Nine hundred thousand estate cars and vans under 30 cwt. will be removed from the necessity to have a carrier's licence which will give some easement of the problem which the hon. Gentleman raised. This represents about 60 per cent, of all goods vehicles on the roads.

We do not want to continue licensing for licensing's sake. It is only being retained where needed to keep unsafe vehicles off the road, and to help us make sensible economic use of our transport resources. The second of these objectives is not applicable to commercial travellers, and carriers licensing is not an essential means of ensuring that commercial travellers' vehicles operate in a safe condition on the roads.

Exemptions from carriers licensing also carries with it exemption from the requirement to keep records of driving hours, although the limits themselves, which apply to all drivers of estate cars used for commercial purposes, will have to be observed.

We have also included in the Bill provision for the Minister to exempt by regulation any class of vehicle from the Bill's provisions——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Minister cannot discuss the Bill on the Adjournment.

Mr. Carmichael

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. Of course, I accept your Ruling. We watch in order to see whether further modifications may be required in the rules as they affect commercial travellers.

The rules for vehicle excise licensing are somewhat different. Under the vehicle licence law, a motor vehicle which is constructed or adapted for the carriage of goods of any description and is used for busines purposes, is classified as a "goods" vehicle, and the rate of duty is assessed on the unladen weight of the vehicle. There can be do doubt that estate cars are constructed specifically for the carriage of goods. This is the main reason for their existence, and why they are chosen when items which it is inconvenient or impossible to put into private cars have to be carried. Because of this, the actual use to which an estate car or van is put determines the rate of Excise Duty. If the goods are carried in the circumstances laid down in the law, the vehicle is classified as a goods vehicle, and the "goods" rate of duty becomes payable.

Here, one should clarify the fact that what we loosely term "goods" means in legislation "goods on offer ", and there is no doubt that odd shoes carried are "offered" in the legal sense. I do not think that anyone would argue that samples carried by commercial travellers do not come within the term "goods", and a commercial traveller on his round of business must be regarded as being engaged in trade or business. It follows from this that the kind of vehicle which he chooses to carry his samples has a material bearing on the Excise Duty to be paid. If he chooses an estate car or a van for this purpose, both the construction and use aspects, taken together, put the vehicle into the goods class. The Vehicle Excise Act does not differentiate between one sort of "goods" and another, when carried in a goods vehicle. A van or an estate car, though constructed to carry goods, can be quite properly licensed as a "private" goods vehicle if it is used only for private purposes. This is reasonable, bearing in mind that the intention of the law is to differentiate in this respect between trade and private use.

As the hon. Gentleman spoke of the problems and difficulties of parking that commercial travellers face, perhaps I may say something about that aspect now. I agree that, in common with many other classes of driver, commercial travellers have a problem, but I am afraid that to extend to them any special exemptions would only open the door to claims for similar treatment from a wide variety of road users. This would make traffic and parking control in busy town centres quite impossible. There would also be understandable objection from the police to a proliferation of exemptions, and other groups of the community would, for various reasons, consider themselves at least as entitled as commercial travellers to exemption.

Mr. F. A. Burden (Gillingham)

I appreciate the Parliamentary Secretary's sympathetic attitude towards this problem. My own company has 168 travellers, who have to call on stores. They have to carry bulky samples. It is extremely difficult to get them the cars they need, but in any case they have to stop their cars at a considerable distance from their calls. This causes them considerable hardship and makes it difficult for them to do business. In view of the high cost of shops, etc., nowadays, the owners of shops want the travellers to call on them and show their samples. People who are disabled have opportunities to stop. In practically every law it is common sense that should prevail, and it should in this.

Mr. Carmichael

I am aware that there are special problems for commercial travellers, but I would submit that there are in the community many other groups of people with special problems—for instance, window cleaners, people putting up advertising posters, funeral directors, chimney sweeps, television and radio repairmen, plumbers, knife grinders, veterinary surgeons, masseurs who make visits for an hour or half an hour each, and even journeymen gardeners who call for short periods of time. All these people, in our crowded city streets, would consider they have some right of priority—as well as doctors and district nurses.

It does not really matter who is in the car or who owns the car; the problem is that a car is a piece of machinery, and on the roadside in a busy centre causes obstruction. I have every sympathy with these people. I should like to give many, many people exemptions, but I fear that it is one of the penalties of our modern urban life that people have to change their ways in carrying out their business. I agree that commercial travellers have adapted themselves in many ways over the past twenty or thirty years, but I am afraid that as our streets become busier new methods will have to be found by them and the other people I have enumerated in order to carry out their work.

The whole purpose of waiting restrictions is to help traffic to flow more easily and thereby avoid the constant jamming of urban roads which, in itself, has a detrimental effect on the business life of the community. The cause of such congestion is, ironically, very often the vehicles left in the streets by others, and in consequence there is on many roads a sharp conflict between motorists who want to move and those who want to park, and this is a big problem in our modern society. Similarly there is a clash of interests between those wishing to park for a period and those needing the same space to collect or deliver goods.

I would, however, emphasise that traffic difficulties are in essence local problems, and my right hon. Friend is anxious that, so far as possible, they should be resolved locally, and this we hope to do in the very near future.

Commercial travellers, whether they are using private cars or estate cars, are generally entitled to stop at permitted places to load and unload goods, although this is a matter for local decision, but this does not mean that their vehicles can be left on the street for long periods in places where parking is not allowed. As it happens, licensing authorities are sometimes asked by people using private cars for business purposes to issue them with carriers' licences. I think they hope that the police and traffic wardens might be more inclined to let them leave their vehicles where parking is ordinarily not allowed. They feel that having a commercial licence would help them in this. Whether or not there is anything in this belief, the law does not permit licensing authorities to issue carriers' licences for use on private cars.

The hon. Member has suggested that commercial travellers should be issued with special windscreen stickers for their vehicles. There is nothing to prevent anyone from using a sticker in this way, but it cannot carry with it any exemption from the traffic laws. It may be that in some cases the police are more understanding in certain circumstances on this question, but tolerance and understanding do not alter the law that it is illegal to park on the street.

Looking to the future, I think that we shall have to see that those responsible for the design and development of our towns' business and commercial areas make adequate provision for off-street parking for use by commercial travellers and others with a like problem. The real dilemma is that we are trying to adapt many towns which have centres in the centuries old category for the conditions of the modern world and a number of motor vehicles which is increasing year by year. The solution of completely redesigned town and suburban centres is still a long way off. In the meantime, with the ever-increasing number of motor vehicles coming on to our roads, all of us, including commercial travellers, must accept some degree of control, however inconvenient it may be. I think that we all accept that the day is past when it was possible for motorists to park anywhere in a street for as long as he wished.

I hope that I have made hon. Gentlemen aware that we are concerned about the problems of the commercial traveller. We have gone into them with some care, but they cannot be separated from those of many other road users. Much as we would like to, all that we can hope to do is to see that, in future designs of roads in towns, some help is given to people like commercial travellers.

Mr. Burden

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that his Ministry would wish the police to be as liberal as possible towards commercial travellers, taking all things into consideration?

Mr. Carmichael

In general, most of the police with whom I have discussed the problem are very tolerant and liberal. However, it would be quite improper for my Ministry to give any directions to the police. The police have a duty to keep the life of the community going. In many parts of the country, keeping the life of the community going sometimes may be to aid the commercial traveller. In certain other cases, where traffic problems are particularly acute, keeping the life of the community going may be a hindrance to the commercial traveller. I believe that our police deal as leniently as possible with commercial travellers and other road users in a like position.

I hope that from our discussion today, hon. Members will realise that this is something to which my Ministry give considerable thought. In every way that we can in the planning stages of any development, we try to encourage local authorities to make provision for people such as commercial travellers to get on with their jobs.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-two minutes to Five o'clock.