REDUCTION OF MINIMUM AGE FOR DRIVERS OF PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES (Hansard, 25 March 1980)

§ Mr. Fowler
I beg to move amendment No. 37, in page 28, line 19, leave out from 'Act' to end of line 21 and insert '(PSV drivers' licences: minimum age and other conditions) for the words from "unless" in the first place where it occurs to the end of the subsection there shall be substituted "unless he fulfils such conditions as may be prescribed".'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bryant Godman Irvine)
With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 38, 39 to 41, and 55.

§ Mr. Fowler
When, in Committee, I accepted the original amendment relating to the age of PSV licence holders, I said that it would require alteration to take account of Community law. These amendments do that, and they also take account of the debate in Committee that centred on the need for bus companies to be able to employ younger drivers.
The amendments therefore restrict the driving of large passenger vehicles to people employed by PSV operators. I believe that we may be confident that those drivers will be carefully selected and trained, and will take tests of competence.
The minimum age for holding a PSV licence has been removed, but—as was explained in Committee—Community law prevents 18-year-olds from driving PSVs in some circumstances. The amendments to the Road Traffic Act 1326 1972 enable 18-year-old employees of PSV operators to be trained to drive public service vehicles. When qualified they would therefore be able to drive on regular passenger services on distances up to 50 kilometres. They are also authorised, when qualified, to drive empty buses between depots.

§ Mr. Michael McNair-Wilson (Newbury)
Amendment No. 38 seeks to ensure that a professionally regulated training schedule approved by the Ministry of Transport should apply to those who are intending to take the PSV vehicle test. I tabled this amendment because, surprising as it may seem, there is no statutory requirement on local authorities to enforce tests for the issue of public service vehicle licences. There is no Ministry-structured training scheme that those seeking PSV licences must enter, nor is there a Ministry-approved training code.
From these two statements I would not like to give the impression that I know of any local authorities that do not insist on tests. I merely make the point because it seems incredible that it is possible for a local authority to allow a PSV licence to be obtained without a test. As the law now stands it is purely at the discretion of the traffic commissioners.
The situation varies from area to area, and in the South-East the National Bus Company told me that either its drivers have to take a test organised by the Metropolitan Traffic Commissioners or, if they come within the area of the South-Eastern Traffic Commissioners, the training and testing of the driver is done by the National Bus Company.
I am also told that London Transport has, dare I say it, so little faith in the PSV licence, as such, that it insists that its drivers take a further test although they might already possess a PSV licence. London Transport has been known to fail drivers who hold such a licence.
On the other hand a small coach company in my constituency called "Swansdown" told me that it devises the training schedule for its drivers but that the testing is done under the auspices of the South-Eastern Traffic Commissioners at Swindon and Reading, who impose a one-and-a-half-hour test.
I hope that in those few words I have at least made it clear to the House that 1327 the pattern for training and testing varies. While small companies may embark on such training as they believe to be necessary, the larger companies follow training procedures laid down by the Road Transport Industry Training Board and if they use a qualified instructor they are given a grant by that board.
By the same token, if training is an arbitrary business, so is testing. It appears that, depending on the area, one's luck in getting a PSV licence may or may not be good, since some examiners are known to impose much stricter tests than others. Of course, it may be said that even if the situation is as arbitrary as I have described the system has worked well and that, by and large, the safety rate for buses in this country is at a reasonable and low level and that we should therefore, leave well alone.
I do not dissent entirely from that argument, However, if 18-year-olds are to be allowed to have PSV licences to drive on regular bus routes and perhaps drive school buses we should rationalise the training and testing procedure to give it more structure.
Eighteen-year-olds are likely to have only recently won their driving licences, and their road experience is likely to be minimal. In the bus industry maturity and experience are considered to be two of the greatest assets that drivers can possess, and yet we are giving young people the ability to drive large vehicles—with some limitations—and are not insisting on a training procedure approved by the Ministry of Transport or a statutory direction to local authorities that tests must be carried out under the auspices of the traffic commissioners. If we are to make a change in the age at which PSV licences can be granted we should make another nationwide change.
No charge is made for the test. As a result, applicants apply for tests but do not turn up. There is no penalty. It is not surprising that my local coach company says that the waiting time in the area is from six to eight weeks. A company might not be able to employ a driver because he cannot take an early test, although another driver might not bother to turn up. The time has come to impose not only a structured training procedure but a charge for the test.
One of the organisations representing 1328 the bus industry says that it does not oppose reducing the minimum age to 18 but that it believes that for safety the first year after a PSV licence has been awarded should be probationary. During that time the young driver should acquire practical knowledge before taking passengers on a regular route or driving a school bus.
I hope that the Minister will accept the spirit of my amendment. He said that we have brought clause 29 provisions within the European directive. In addition to the 50-kilometre stipulation, is the Minister agreeing that young drivers should not drive public vehicles that can carry more than 15 passengers? I understand that that is in the directive, and yet it does not appear to be covered by the amendment.

§ Mr. Booth
I have sympathy with the arguments advanced by the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson). I regret that there has been so little consultation by the Government on the proposition. The major operators have not assented to it. They believe that there is a case for allowing people to begin training before 21 years of age and for allowing them to drive vehicles only in certain circumstances. They suggested that they should drive buses from maintenance depots to bus sheds and on similar journeys that would give the drivers experience of handling the vehicles in advance of driving buses containing large numbers of passengers in difficult traffic conditions.
11 pm
I go along with the argument of the hon. Member for Newbury that if younger people are to drive public service vehicles we should ensure that there are high standards of training. I am tempted to feel rather conservative in the arguments that I advance. However, I rest to some extent on the accident statistics and the views of insurance companies, which think that a young driver, or someone who does not have considerable experience in this area, is a considerable insurance risk and often load insurance premiums accordingly. There are a number of opportunities to introduce young people to driving skills in advance of allowing them to drive public service vehicles. The matter was introduced suddenly on Report.
It is nonsense to apply the EEC 1329 regulations in an unqualified way. Those regulations appear to say that it is quite all right for a young driver to drive a bus full of passengers around Marble Arch in the rush hour but that it is not all right for him to drive a much smaller bus along a country road on a 32-kilometre route. That seems to be the effect of the EEC regulations. Yet the Minister is now introducing them in an unqualified way into the United Kingdom driving situation.
For those reasons I hope that the Minister will give us assurances that he will consider more carefully the special problems that apply to driving public service vehicles in British urban and rural driving conditions. He must ensure that nobody takes a bus out in those conditions unless he is trained. He must be thoroughly satisfied that there will not be an increased risk from relatively untrained and inexperienced drivers conveying their passengers on stage and other bus service routes.

§ Mr. Iain Mills
I regret having to rise to reply to the comments made. However, having moved an amendment in Committee on behalf of my right hon. and hon. Friends I feel that I should say a few words.
First, I heartily condemn the use of the term "young driver". Surely in this age we should be talking of trained or untrained drivers. To imply that youth automatically means incompetence is quite wrong. One should apply the regulations for PSV licences to drivers of all ages, on a basis of competence, not age. There must be many young men and women who at the age of 18 are far more competent, both physically and in their manual dexterity skills, than some people with bad eyesight or health, or who lack training or experience. I also condemn any suggestion that age automatically brings experience. In terms of public service vehicles, surely skill is a result of experience.
From Back Benchers' investigations before we proposed the amendment, it was clear that the use of young drivers of 18 would occur for three reasons. First, the National Bus Company has a great shortage of drivers. It finds it difficult to get them. In some areas there is a shortage of up to 2,000 people. Secondly, the 1330 career development is difficult. If drivers may start work only at 21, what can they do from the age of 18? Presumably they must sit on oil drums in the garage and do nothing. Thirdly, the unsocial hours during which drivers must operate are much more easily tackled by young people. Finally—and probably this is the most telling remark—we seem to be out of line with our EEC compatriots on many of our regulations in this respect.
I seriously ask the House to be very careful in its judgment of young drivers. It is a question not of experience but of competence, and I hope the Minister will cover that point.

§ Mr. Fowler
First, I will give an assurance to my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson) on the question of fees. He will not be surprised to know that my Department has taken that on board and that in the Bill there is a fees clause under which a charge can and will be made.
The second assurance that I should like to give him and the right hon. Gentleman is that most certainly we agree that training is important, particularly for young drivers. The amendments that I have moved make it clear that young people without PSV drivers' licences must drive large passenger vehicles under supervision. I would consider a more formal scheme, and I certainly gladly give my hon. Friend the assurance that I shall consider his suggestion to see whether there is further movement that we can make to meet the point that he and the right hon. Gentleman made.