DEFENCE TO CHARGE OF USING OR KEEPING VEHICLE WHERE NEW LICENCE PENDING (Hansard, 24 February 1969)

§ Mr. Michael Heseltine
I beg to move Amendment No. 46, in page 30, line 41, leave out "fourteen" and insert "thirty".
The purpose of the Amendment is to extend from 14 days to 30 days the period within which a motorist is entitled to claim that he should not be prosecuted for not having renewed his licence. There is at the moment a 14-day period of grace, and if a motorist has not renewed his licence it is a sufficient defence against the charge of using an unlicensed vehicle for that fourteen days.
It would seem equitable that the 14-day period, which has not given any great cause for complaint in the past, should be allowed to remain. I am grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for writing to me since the Standing Committee proceedings and explaining that that is his view.
1225 I want to put to the hon. Gentleman, however, the opposite view, which I subscribe to. I believe that, as a result of a change in the licence procedure which is embodied in the Bill, we are moving from a month by month situation of licensing to a day-by-day situation. I think the Parliamentary Secretary will be prepared to agree that it is easy for people to remember and be conscious of the fact that their licence expires in any given calendar month.
A motorist who uses his car at all frequently sees on the windscreen the licence disc which indicates clearly the month in which the licence expires. The date of expiry is, therefore, continually drawn to a motorist's attention. In such circumstances it is reasonable to expect people to remember that 14 days after the end of the month they must renew their licence or be liable to prosecution.
A different situation will now arise, one in which on a given day a motorist will find that his licence expires. It will be much harder for motorists to hold in their memories the date of expiry. It would also be much harder for the disc on the windscreen to indicate as clearly as it now does the date of expiry.
I have considered what would be the practical effect of this change on the ordinary citizen. I believe that in practice, given a certain coincidence of dates, for a given number of people the two-month period which they now have in which to renew their licences would effectively be reduced to one month. For example, if one were planning to depart from this country on 15th April and one's licence expired in May, under the present law one would not have to renew one's licence before 14th June. If one went abroad on 15th April, one would have the whole of May in which the licence expired, and there would then be a fortnight after the end of May before one was likely to be prosecuted. Thus, anyone leaving the country on 15th April would have two months in which to renew his licence.
However, under the new system anybody leaving the country on 15th April who, in the extreme case—and I agree that it is the extreme case—received his first reminder by the second post, would have only two weeks before his licence 1226 expired on 1st May. If, as is commonly the case, he went on holiday for four weeks, although he might remember that his licence expired in May, he might not remember the precise date and his 14 days of grace would expire on 15th May. Although the present position gives him a two-month period of flexibility, under the new system if he goes abroad on 15th April, he will not be able to plead the period of grace half-way through May. one month later.
A given number of people will find themselves in that situation. I do not pretend that it is an immense problem or that it will cause hardship throughout the country, but the situation would be that much better if the 14-day period were extended to a 30-day period, so that the contraction from two months was a contraction to six weeks. It would be extremely unlikely for people to be abroad for that length of time, certainly much less likely than people going abroad for four weeks, which is becoming more common within the increasing length of holidays.
I therefore ask the Minister to consider this situation again with a view to making an alteration in another place. This is a situation which will concern a number of people, and, although I do not believe that any hardship will be involved, I hope that the Government will be as flexible in their attitude towards this Amendment as they were to an Amendment which I suggested only recently.

§ Mr. Carmichael
Until the hon. Member for Tavistock (Mr. Michael Heseltine) mentioned reminders at the end of his speech, he seemed to be suggesting that one would have to remember that one's licence was due on 1st May. He said that someone would remember that his licence was due by seeing a little disc on his vehicle. In Committee many hon. Members confessed that they did not notice when their licence was due and that it came as a shock when they were reminded of it by someone else. I remember a long discussion with the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor) about reminders, when I said that there would be not one but several reminders. Even the person who went away on 15th April, missing a reminder by minutes, would have another reminder, because he would fall 1227 into the category of the absent-minded person who had forgotten even the reminder.
10.15 p.m.
As long as the person could clearly show that there was reason for his being away, he would be in the clear. If a person licences his vehicle from the date on which the previous licence expires there will never be any suggestion that the police or the local authority will prosecute. In this case the Minister institutes proceedings, and the safeguards are such that the honest citizen who has honestly failed in such a marginal case will be covered. The 30-day period in the new system will be rather important, and it could lead to abuse. The system of the 14-day period of grace is perfectly suitable, and I hope that with that explanation, and the various reminders which will be sent out, the hon. Member will realise that the honest person who has really forgotten and gone away at that vital time will be amply covered and there will be no likelihood of there being any witchhunt.

Mr. Edward M. Taylor
May I put one point which I hope the Minister will reconsider? The period of 14 days is rather important. Under the present arrangements any extension of it could lead to abuse, in that certain unscrupulous people who have their vehicles on the road unlicensed and undetected for a time could obtain another licence as from a later date. Obviously there is scope for abuse. On the other hand, under the new system of continuous licensing, if someone has not given an indication that the vehicle will not be used, this danger is removed. To that extent the abuse which was there under the old arrangements will be removed under the new arrangement.
We appreciate that our Amendment, if accepted, would apply to the current situation, to prosecutions under the 1962 Act. I hope that the Minister will give further consideration to this point before the new system is introduced. The scope for evasion and dishonesty in the present arrangements during these 14 days will not be available when the new system comes into operation.

§ Mr. Carmichael
With permission, may I tell the hon. Gentleman that I will undertake to look at the problem which he has raised and perhaps write to him on it.