HC Deb 24 May 1982 vol 24 cc724-37

'(1) This section of this Act shall have effect with a view to securing the observation of proper hours of work by any person, engaged in the carriage of passengers by road, who is in full-time employment in an occupation other than as a public service vehicle driver (in this section referred to as "a part-time driver").

(2) A part-time driver, engaged in operations under the relevant transport regulations—

  1. (a) shall not on any working day drive a vehicle or vehicles for periods amounting in the aggregate to more than one and a half hours and on any two working days to more than two and a half hours in the course of any consecutive seven days;
  2. (b) shall not, on any one day when no other employment is undertaken, drive a vehicle or vehicles for periods amounting in the aggregate to more than eight hours;
  3. (c) shall not drive in the course of any consecutive seven days for periods amounting in the aggregate to more than seventeen and a half hours; and
  4. (d) shall not exceed four hours in continuous driving without an interval of not less than half an hour to obtain rest and refreshment.

(3) A part-time driver, engaged in operations under the Transport Act 1968

  1. (a) shall not on any working day drive a vehicle or vehicles for periods amounting in the aggregate to more than four and a half hours; and
  2. (b) shall not, on any one day when no other employment is undertaken, exceed five and a half hours in continuous driving without a interval of not less than half an hour to obtain rest and refreshment.

(4) If any of the requirements of subsections (2) and (3) of this section is contravened in the case of any part-time driver

  1. (a) that part-time driver; and
  2. (b) any other person (being that part-time driver's employer or a person to whose orders that part-time driver was subject) who caused or permitted the contravention shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine as specified under the Transport Act 1968 and the relevant transport regulations.

(5) In this Act, "the relevant transport regulations" means Council Regulation (EEC) No. 543/69 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport.'.—[Mr. Robert Hughes.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Robert Hughes

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

The purpose of the clause is self-explanatory. It seeks to regulate the hours of part-time public service vehicle drivers. Full-time public service vehicle drivers have their hours regulated to ensure the safety of passengers and other road users and to protect themselves from unscrupulous operators who make them drive too long. However, part-time drivers need to be considered and brought into regulations for safety reasons.

Two sources of law govern the hours of driving of public service vehicles—the Transport Act 1968 and EEC regulation 534/69. The EEC regulation applies to all coach operators, and the United Kingdom law applies to bus operators on routes of less than 50 km. The basic principle in both laws is to place restrictions on the amount of driving in a day and over a period and to provide for statutory periods of rest between shifts, during shifts and over a period.

Over an eight-hour shift an employer can expect to get a maximum of seven hours driving out of a full-time employee. That is eight hours, less a minimum 30-minute break and a further 30 minutes for booking-on time. In the light of experience, most employers will do extremely well if they manage to get six and a half hours of driving out of an eight-hour shift. The overtime use of a full-time employee is limited. It is limited under United Kingdom law to about three and a half hours of driving and under EEC regulations to one and a half hours or two and a half hours of driving.

No one would dispute that the law as it stands effectively protects the travelling public, the employers' property and the employees' health and safety from the damage that excessive driving can cause, but these protections apply only in the case of the full-time driver. There is nothing to stop, say, a foundry worker, after completing his normal day's business, or a Member of Parliament, after an all-night sitting, from driving a coach full of people for the total number of hours allowed for a full-time driver. I am not suggesting that, should we have an all-night sitting tonight, any of our colleagues might be tempted tomorrow to drive a PSV, but there is obviously a case for ensuring that there is proper protection for the driver and the public, as well as property.

9.15 pm

I have some evidence about the prevalence of the use of part-time drivers. If the new clause is to be accepted, we must show that operators make considerable use of part-time drivers. I have a great deal of evidence here, although I confess that I have not had a chance to check the information. For that reason, I hesitate to give the names of the companies, although I should gladly do so if any right hon. or hon. Member feels that my information is inaccurate.

I should point out at the start that these companies do not have a bad safety record or a greater than ususal number of accidents. Therefore, it will be better not to name the companies. I have no wish to suggest that the companies or the men concerned are accident-prone or dangerous.

The evidence shows that there is a great prevalence of part-time driving. It shows, too, that the conditions in which people are working are not conducive either to their own health and safety or to that of the companies for which they work. For example, three companies in the Newark area employ staff, who work for the national Coal Board at the Newark power station, to operate school contracts. There is a company in Skegness which has six buses and no full-time drivers. It uses among others, what are described as billycart men. Some people may know what a billycart man is, but I do not. The explanation given here is that they are council cesspit operators. They do private hire and school contracts. There is a company in Boston with 22 buses and only six full-time staff, the rest being part-timers. There is a company in Scunthorpe which uses 60 to 70 part-timers to operate stage carriage, schools and private hire. It draws its part-time employees from, among other places, the steel works, the police and people on the unemployment register.

Another company which has 35 coaches has 40 or more part-time staff. It uses employees mainly from Perkins of Peterborough. Those men have to travel from Peterborough to do the job, and that could take up to two hours driving to and from work. Another company uses a fireman to do part-time work, and we know that regulations apply to firemen. There is another company in Berwick which employs a milkman who does an early morning round, school work in the afternoon, and private hire in the evening. He must be putting in many hours of work.

Perhaps the most serious example is a company in Morpeth that employs a security officer, who does a 12-hour night shift, to drive part-time. It cannot fill anyone with confidence that that man drives after a 12-hour night shift. In another example a man who does continental shifts which involve long hours then drives part-time. The list goes on. I am certain that the list that I have been given is preliminary only. If all other operators were examined, we would find that the practice is widespread. I understand that in some cases drivers may be employed under exempt employment when they drive vehicles which are not covered by driving hours regulations.

The matter should be examined seriously. There should be restrictions on the use of part-time employees who have already completed a full-time job. As is clear from the evidence that I have given, some are involved in heavy manual labour, so they will be physically as well as mentally tired at the end of the shift.

Mr. R. C. Mitchell (Southampton, Itchen)

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could clarify subsection (2)(c) in the new clause. Is he saying that a person who is on holiday from his normal employment can drive only 17½ hours in a seven-day period? I take it that the hon. Gentleman refers to a man who has not done a normal job during the day but who may be on holiday. If that is correct, why has he inserted a limit of 17½ hours for a person who, although he may be in full-time normal employment, is not working at the time?

Mr. Hughes

I am not referring in subsection (2)(c) to someone working during his holiday. If the hon. Gentleman examines subsection (2), paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d), he will find that they add up to the combinations of hours that are already applied to full-time drivers. I can go through the regulations in detail if the hon. Gentleman wishes. There are specific regulations on the number of hours that a man may drive normally during the day, there are regulations about overtime and there are regulations governing the number of hours in any period. The purpose primarily is to prevent the over-use of rest day driving. Some of the cases to which I referred include people who are driving part-time for some companies but who have already done a full-time job and would probably be debarred from working full time as drivers. However, they can still work on rest days or part time. I hope that that answers the question.

We wish to avoid the abuse of employing people who have already done a full-time job. I do not wish to over-dramatise the position, especially as I know of an event that happened a long time ago and does not apply to public service vehicles. I know of a case where a driver was asked to drive a lorry-load of fish from the north of Scotland to London, having been at sea as a fisherman for 14 hours and having had only two hours sleep. It happened many years ago but I am sure that the regulations would now make it an offence. We wish to ensure that there is no abuse.

We also know that the EEC Commission is alarmed at the growth in the use of part-time workers. A study is being carried out into the use of part-time workers. The study, which is not specifically allied to PSV vehicles, is about general working conditions and exploitation by employers who believe that, by employing workers part-time, they can pay lower wages and provide worse conditions.

That is certainly a possibility if people work outside their normal working hours in order to earn extra money. I hope that I have said enough to persuade the Government that the new clause should be accepted.

Some questions may be raised about the technicalities of the measure. We found it difficult to decide what the penalty should be. We decided to take advantage of the Transport Act 1968. A Bill currently going through the House—which is probably still in Committee—is updating penalties. That Bill is probably the best vehicle to use, instead of selecting an arbitrary figure of £100 or £200 and allying it to some comparable offence with this legislation. It must be of concern to the House that tired people may be driving coachloads of children. Therefore, I hope that the Under-Secretary will accept the new clause and that the House will give it a fair wind.

Mr. David Penhaligon (Truro)

The new clause presents a serious problem that is worthy of debate. I am not convinced that the new clause is the solution. The hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hughes) is not so remote from this problem as some of his colleagues. There are some aspects of rural life that do not fit in with the quaint image of people working a nice, standard eight-hour day and then doing other work.

Public transport in Cornwall is now becoming something to tell one's children about, but what remains of it depends upon what I would describe as the part-time driver. I do not necessarily mean part-time as defined in the new clause. I refer to someone whose means of earning a living is not restricted to driving a lorry. Cornwall county council spends around £1¼ million a year transporting children to school. This work is largely carried out by small local firms who own one or two buses. They employ someone to drive the children to school. That driver will then come back to work in the garage for a few hours, perhaps repair a tractor, and then return to pick up the children from school, drive them home and do whatever else the business may require that day.

In my experience, it is not unusual for a self-employed farmer to have a coach as a side-line. He might milk the cows in the morning, drive the children to school, return to do a bit of farming, perhaps have a couple of hours' rest and then muck out or do whatever else is required on the farm and then take the children home in the afternoon. Much of what remains of transport in my area is done in that way. I fear that some of those people may find themselves in a difficult and embarrassing position when it comes to convincing the authorities that they are not breaking the law.

Another part-time Cornish business will soon be plied again, that of "soak the tourist while he is there". Mystery tours are provided and that is one of the great sports of my county. Some visitors are put on board a coach and driven up whatever road has no traffic on it. The visitors are charged £2 or £3 and they seem to be extremely happy with the entertainment provided for the evening. Such a driver would be part-time within the context of this clause but I can see no harm in making a few honest shillings when the chance is available. I would be appalled if the House were to prevent those who do not exactly live in one of the country's prosperous parts from making a few shillings when the opportunity arises. However, I commend the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North for introducing a matter that clearly deserves some attention.

9.30 pm

I hope that the Minister will reject the clause, but I recognise that there is a problem. Every year there seems to be a transport Bill with numerous clauses. I hope that the Department will apply its mind to the problem. However, I beg the Government not to enact legislation that could lead to the loss of some public transport in areas such as mine. In a jocular way, I should point out that if public transport in my area was not provided in that way, there would not—on the economics of the real world—be any. The idea that a full-time coach operator or driver can make anything like a living in some of the remoter parts of my constituency is, I am afraid, something that ceased to have validity a decade or more ago.

I hope that the Government will not accept the clause as drafted. However, the House should apply its mind to the problem. In drawing up any legislation I implore the Government not to forget the remoter parts of the country that have work patterns that do not fit the urban image of British life, that is personified by the Labour Party, of people getting up, working for eight hours, finishing work and going home. Thank goodness, not all Britain is like that.

Mr. Bagier

The hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Penhaligon) has painted a lurid picture, which is no doubt true of what has happened to public transport in the remote parts of the country. Many of us have been concerned about that for some years. During the Beeching era the rural railway lines were slashed. I hope that the hon. Member for Truro will be in the Chamber when we discuss the disposal of the express coach services and so on, which cross-subsidise his part of the country. He may well perceive that there is another grave danger to public transport in areas such as his.

I should hate to think that the hon. Member for Truro was being too jocular. I should hate one of his mystery tours to end down a ravine because the part-time driver had been overworked and had worked too hard in another job. However, I was impressed by the hon. Gentleman's remarks. We must consider how the provision will apply to various parts of the country.

My hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hughes) backed the new clause with information that has been gathered—as he would be the first to agree—at fairly short notice. It dealt with the possible abuses of part-time driving. Many of the examples come from the Northern region. We have had less than a week to draw up some evidence. Just over a week ago it was suggested that part-time drivers were a danger. We said that it would be interesting to have some positive evidence and that it would be no use making a broad allegation about the dangers of part-time driving without that evidence.

Unfortunately, in certain parts of the country the part-time driver is a moonlighter, and sometimes a very dangerous one at that. In that context, the Government must discover some means of controlling the part-time driver who, after all, does not work as a full-time driver and who is, therefore, not subject to the same controls. The safety angle is important. Some Conservative Members may applaud the energies of those cited by the hon. Member for Truro. They may say that they are great entrepreneurs and that in Cornwall a man can be a milkman in the morning, drive children in the afternoon and conduct mystery tours at night. However, the House must decide whether that is safe and whether he will fall asleep at the wheel. Of course, the entrepreneur outlined by the hon. Member for Truro is not necessarily the man that we are discussing. According to the evidence, a large fleet of coaches in the Ashington area employs passenger transport labour from the National Coal Board and the police force. In that case, part-time policemen are engaged in driving, even though they are now well looked after by the Government. Is there really a need for police to be employed as part-time coach drivers?

Mr. Arthur Lewis


Mr. Bagier

My hon. Friend says "Yes", but I disagree. In Amble, another firm employs pitmen, schoolteachers, driving instructors and retired employees of the NBC subsidiary. In Cramlington, even the doorman of a working men's club is employed as a part-time driver for private hires at weekends.

A safety aspect is involved, and that is what the House should be worried about. That is the main burden of the arguments that have been put forward.

There is another argument. In my part of the country, there is high unemployment. I wonder why the economics of these coach services are in such a state that they cannot employ full-time drivers instead of part-timers. We all know the reasons. Those services do not want to take people on as staff. They prefer to use them on a part-time basis. On some occasions there is an argument in favour of letting out small contracts on a part-time basis, but that is by no means regularly the case.

By no means are the employers of that part-time labour motivated by the desire to fill a vacancy. Very often they are motivated by the economic consequences of not taking on extra staff. I particularly deplore that practice in my area, and I hope that they will refrain from doing so.

In another example, a security officer working a 12-hour night shift is being used to drive part time. I do not believe that the Secretary of State, the Under-Secretary or the Government believe that to be a safe practice. I suspect that they would like to do something about it, as would every hon. Member. It may well be that the new clause does not take into account all the aspects required by the law to control this abuse. As the hon. Member for Truro said, it may even have bad rub-offs.

It ought to be incumbent on the hon. Lady to come forward with a suggestion that will control the situation and stop the abuse of part-time drivers transporting children in minibuses and service buses to and from school. The Minister should do something to stop a part-timer driving a coach full of old-age pensioners up hills and down dales, late at night, often in dangerous parts of the country.

A full-time driver cannot work more than seven hours on duty, otherwise he becomes tired and is not capable of doing the job properly. That is the law. It is therefore incumbent on the Government to say that a man who has worked for eight hours down a pit, or a policeman who has done eight hours' duty is not capable of driving safely. The same applies to the other people mentioned in the long list that emerged from this week-long investigation.

I ask the hon. Lady to explain why it is difficult to control the part-time driver. I wish that she would go further. If there is difficulty about the new clause, I hope that she will say that the Government have the matter in hand and intend to produce something better. I hope that she will accept that we have introduced the new clause with the best of intentions. I trust that there will be more control over the safety considerations that apply to part-time drivers and that eventually the use of such people will be discontinued.

Mr. R. C. Mitchell

This is by no means the first time that this issue has come before the House of Commons since I entered Parliament in 1966. It must have come forward in every Parliament at least once or twice, but so far no Government seem to have succeeded in solving the problem of part-time driving.

I hope that the Minister will recognise that this is a serious problem. A man who works an eight-hour day, takes out a coach at 7 o'clock at night to take a group of people to a skittle alley and arrives back at 12 o'clock or 1 o'clock in the morning, can create a hazard. I have seen it. I have been in coaches with drivers looking terribly tired. Those drivers were part-time. They did other jobs during the day.

One of the problems that the coach firms find is connected with the Under-Secretary's previous existence in the DHSS. I recently heard of a man who had been unemployed for a long time, who was fed up with sitting at home. He was offered a job with a coach firm doing a morning and evening school bus service, for which he was paid the princely sum of £25 a week, which was probably right for the hours that he worked. Having taken that job, he found that his income was half what it was previously when he has been on social security. He could not claim supplementary benefit because he was not available for work as he was doing a couple of hours driving in the mornings and afternoons. Because of the regulations it is difficult for a coach firm to employ someone, who is not otherwise employed, to do specific jobs in the evening or during the day. The amount that such a firm pays is insufficient to keep people who cannot claim supplementary benefit.

I am not convinced that the wording of the clause is right to solve the problem. As was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Truro (Mr. Penhaligon), if the provisions in the new clause were rigidly adhered to, there would be difficulties in rural areas. I hope that the Minister will tell us her ideas for attempting to stop or limit the abuse of someone, having worked an eight or 10-hour day, taking out a coach for four hours in the evening.

Mrs. Chalker

This has been an interesting debate. One cannot help but sympathise with the case that has been made. There is no hon. Member who does not want bus and coach travel to be as safe as humanly possible. We all know that the driver who is tired is liable to be dangerous. Without endorsing all that is already contained in EEC Regulation 543/69, which is being reviewed at present, I can safely say that bus and coach operation is now a great deal safer than it was before driving hours were controlled.

I have difficulty with the new clause, despite the persuasion of hon. Members. While I agree with them on the grounds of safety, I differ with them for the reasons that were clearly spelt out by the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Penhaligon) concerning part-time drivers. I have further problems. Despite the excellence of the clause, there are drafting difficulties. I must tell the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hughes) that the clause does not define full-time employment or the working day. There are many other problems with the clause.

This matter has come up before. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services, when he was the Secretary of State for Transport, debated it on 12 February 1980 in Committee. What he said is as true today as it was two years ago. He said: the independent sector of the bus industry relies heavily on part-time drivers. They reduce costs because they are more flexible about shifts. They are obviously invaluable in the seasonal coaching trade."—[Official Report, Standing Committee H, 12 February 1980; c. 1524.] My right hon. Friend went on to cope with many other comments that were made and recognised the importance of safety. I fully accept the importance of safety. Nothing that I shall say will go against that. Nevertheless, I cannot advise the House to accept the new clause, not only because of the drafting but because of the important role that part-time drivers play in the private sector of the bus and coach industry.

9.45 pm

We all know that there is a tiny minority who might be described as cowboys. When I say the private sector, I do not mean such people. Traffic commissioners already have powers through operator licensing to deal with cowboys. They can and do deal with them. Many small bus and coach operators have a great fluctuation in their work load from one day to another or from one week to another. They need the flexibility of being able to employ part-time drivers if they are to provide the service that is demanded of them by the people in their localities. That is especially true with regard to people living in rural areas and holidaymakers.

The House would be doing a great disservice to the travelling public if it were to go down the path that was suggested by the hon. Members for Sunderland, South (Mr. Bagier) and Aberdeen, North. The costs to small operators would be vastly increased if they were required at all times to employ full-time drivers. I am sure that such operators are fully aware of their responsibilities to their passengers. I am sure that, in the main, with the exception of the cowboys whom I have described, small operators have the safety of their passengers in mind.

Despite what the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North, said, there is no evidence that part-time drivers as a group are any less safe or reliable than their full-time colleagues. He may be aware of the Hunt study that was carried out a few years ago. It investigated the relative safety of part-and full-time bus drivers. It analysed their respective accident rates and differences in the types of accident. It was a well-planned study with a 30-day pilot study and involved 490 bus operators.

The main part of the study invited PSV operators with vehicles of more than 12 seats to participate. The final study covered 3,148 operators, who eventually came to the firm conclusion that part-time drivers have a lower accident rate than full-time ones, taking account of the relative exposure to risk of each group. Indeed, the evidence showed that the full-time driver had more than three times as many accidents per 1,000 driving hours as a part-time driver.

Mr. R. C. Mitchell

Is the definition of a part-time driver in the study someone who has already done a full day's work?

Mrs. Chalker

No, the questions were asked of all part-time drivers, whether they were employed in other ways or solely for part of a day and in no other employment. Taking the differences that were shown up in the study, the fact remains that part-time drivers had a lower accident rate irrespective of whether they were employed at other times in other work. That showed up clearly. The hon. Member for Aberdeen, North, advanced a selection of evidence. I fully accept that changes may be occurring.

The hon. Members for Truro and Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Mitchell) both said that the new clause was not the way to proceed, and I certainly agree. The House should not take such a step without far fuller consultation with the industry than has taken place so far. As a result of the operation being carried out by the European Commission, we are also looking carefully at this in relation to the European regulations to ensure that we do not omit safety considerations in dealing with the driving of public service vehicles.

Much of the industry depends on small coach operations and thus uses part-time drivers not only at weekends but sometimes during the week. The whole of that part of the industry would be turned upside down by the new clause, even if the drafting faults were put right.

Moreover, there is a fallacy in the argument advanced by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North. The use of part-time drivers is crucial to the economics of the private sector of the bus industry. If we prevent full-time workers elsewhere from driving part time, logically we should also prevent full-time drivers from working elsewhere part-time. We do not have the power to do that. That is why I agreed with the hon. Members for Truro and Southampton, Itchen that the new clause is not the way to accomplish what all hon. Members wish to achieve—that is, safer driving, whether by part-time or full-time drivers.

Mr. Bagier

The Minister says that there is nothing to prevent a full-time driver doing other work elsewhere. The House would have no objection to that. He could work in his garden or do what he liked. He will not be driving a vehicle, to which these safety considerations apply. Will the Minister answer the question put to her by the hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Mitchell)? Do the Government object to a person working full-time as a policeman, a coal miner or in any other business starting to drive after his full-time job is finished? If the Minister does not object to that, does she believe that it is safe?

Mrs. Chalker

It depends what the full-time job is. Full-time drivers are required to take rest periods, but we cannot guarantee that they actually rest during those periods. Some people with full-time jobs may be fully rested at the end of their seven-hour day. Looking at certain groups, one certainly wonders. I am saying that a person who is not fit to drive a public service vehicle, whether he be a part-time or a full-time driver, should not be driving such a vehicle. But the matter does not fall neatly into the categories advanced by the hon. Gentleman.

In addition, the new clause restricts the individual beyond what may be necessary. I suggest that we should not use this measure, even if its faults were corrected, but that we should await the revision of drivers' hours that is now taking place. The operation that we have already carried through to control driving hours has achieved a great improvement in the safety of bus and coach operations. We want that to continue. I do not believe that the new clause will help us to achieve what the House wishes to achieve. Therefore, I must advise the House not to accept new clause 7.

Mr. Robert Hughes

I am extremely disappointed at the comments that have been made about the new clause. First, I do not apologise for any technical drafting errors. One does the best that one can, and it is easy to point out difficulties. I am surprised that some hon. Members do not even seem to have read it.

The hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Penhaligon), who is concerned about part-time drivers, did not seem to realise that the clause begins by pointing out that it is dealing with people in full-time employment in an occupation other than as a public service vehicle driver. We are not speaking about the fellow who is employed part-time in the morning and part-time in the evening. With the greatest respect, I am a bit tired of lectures from the Liberal Party about the community politics and snide remarks about the Labour Party in towns having no concern for, or comprehension of, rural areas.

The hon. Member for Truro is asking us to apply lower safety standards in rural areas than in cities. I should have thought that any constituent of his in a rural area who knew that a bus operator was employing someone who had done a full-time job of eight or 10 hours a day and then gone out on a mystery tour, or taken the children to and from school, would be appalled at the suggestion that part-time drivers are the only way to maintain the life-blood of rural communities.

It may be that the part-time driver is the life-blood of the private operator. However, they do not have to be part-time drivers who are already employed in another job. Even in Truro there must be some unemployed people who, properly trained, could be public service vehicle drivers. Wherever the thousands of bus operators work up and down the country, there are many unemployed people who would be glad to do a part-time job in this business.

My hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Bagier) put the matter of the mystery tour aptly. It is not much fun on a mystery tour if one ends up in a ravine. It is certainly not much of a mystery tour if one ends up in the grave.

The defect in the study that the Under-Secretary mentioned is that it did not distinguish between part-time drivers and part-time drivers who had already done a full-time job. Standards of safety are paramount. It cannot be said that there is a fluctuation from week to week to the extent that the poor small operator cannot survive without part-time drivers. If he is using part-time drivers excessively, he is making the driver and the vehicle that he operates a danger on the road and he is damaging the driver's health.

The Under-Secretary put forward the argument that we are trying to control the part-time work of a PSV operator who is in a full-time job other than driving a public sector vehicle, but doing nothing to control the full-time PSV operator from having a part-time job. Nobody cares if a bus driver does eight hours on the road, or whatever is his maximum time, and then draws pints in the working men's club. No one objects if he takes a part-time job in foundry, where there may be serious dangers, but they are controlled by the Factories Acts. However, we do care about people who do a 12-hour night shift as a security officer and then take schoolchildren on the road.

I am upset that the hon. Lady has rejected the clause so comprehensively. I do not think that it is good enough to wait for the study that has been carried out in the review of the EEC regulation. I invite my right hon. and hon. Friends to support the new clause by joining me in the Lobby.

Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—

The House divided: Ayes 211, Noes 290.

Division No. 166] [9.59
Abse, Leo Edwards, R. (W'hampt'n SE)
Adams, Allen Ellis, R. (NED'bysh're)
Allaun, Frank English, Michael
Anderson, Donald Ennals, Rt Hon David
Archer, Rt Hon Peter Evans, Ioan (Aberdare)
Ashley, Rt Hon Jack Evans, John (Newton)
Ashton, Joe Field, Frank
Atkinson, N.(H'gey,) Fitch, Alan
Bagier, Gordon A.T. Flannery, Martin
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)
Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) Foot, Rt Hon Michael
Bennett Andrew (St'kp'tN) Ford, Ben
Bidwell, Sydney Forrester, John
Booth, Rt Hon Albert Foster, Derek
Bray, Dr Jeremy Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd)
Brocklebank-Fowler, C. Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald
Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend)
Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) George, Bruce
Brown, Ro n (E'burgh, Laith) Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John
Buchan, Norman Golding, John
Callaghan, Rt Hon J. Graham, Ted
Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) G rant, John (Islington C)
Campbell-Savours, Dale Hamilton, James (Bothwell)
Canavan, Dennis Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife)
Cant, R. B. Hardy, Peter
Carter-Jones, Lewis Harrison, Rt Hon Walter
Cartwright, John Healey, Rt Hon Denis
Clark, Dr David (S Shields) Heffer, Eric S.
Cocks, Rt Hon M.(B'stol S) Hogg, N. (EDunb't'nshire)
Cohen, Stanley Holland, S.(L'b'th, Vauxh'll)
Coleman, Donald Home Robertson, John
Concannon, Rt Hon J. D. Homewood, William
Conlan, Bernard Huckfield, Les
Cook, Robin F. Hughes, Mark (Durham)
Cowans, Harry Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)
Craigen, J. M. (G'gow, M'hill) Hughes, Roy (Newport)
Crowther, Stan Janner, Hon Greville
Cryer, Bob Jay, Rt Hon Douglas
Cunliffe, Lawrence John, Brynmor
Cunningham, Dr J.(W'h'n) Johnson, Walter (Derby S)
Dalyell, Tam Jones, Rt Hon Alec (Rh'dda)
Davidson, Arthur Jones, Barry (East Flint)
Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (L lli) Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald
Davies, Ifor (Gower) Kerr, Russell
Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) Kilroy-Silk, Robert
Davis, Terry (B'ham, Stechf'd) Lamborn, Harry
Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) Leadbitter, Ted
Dewar, Donald Leighton, Ronald
Dixon, Donald Lestor, Miss Joan
Dobson, Frank Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW)
Dormand, Jack Lewis, Hon(Carlisle)
Douglas, Dick Litherland, Robert
Dubs, Alfred Lofthouse, Geoffrey
Duffy, A. E. P. Lyon, Alexander (York)
Dunn, James A. Mabon, Rt Hon Dr J. Dickson
Dunnett, Jack McCartney, Hugh
Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. McDonald, Dr Oonagh
Eadie, Alex McElhone, Frank
Eastham, Ken McKay, Allen (Penistone)
McKelvey, William Shore, Rt Hon Peter
McNally, Thomas Short, Mrs Renée
McNamara, Kevin Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford)
McTaggart, Robert Silkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich)
McWilliam, John Silverman, Julius
Marks, Kenneth Skinner, Dennis
Marshall, D (G'gow S'ton) Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark)
Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) Snape, Peter
Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) Soley, Clive
Martin, M (G'gow S'burn) Spearing, Nigel
Mason, Rt Hon Roy Spriggs, Leslie
Maxton, John Stallard, A.W.
Maynard, Miss Joan Stoddart, David
Meacher, Michael Stott, Roger
Mikardo, Ian Strang, Gavin
Millan, Rt Hon Bruce Straw, Jack
Miller,Dr M.S. (E Kilbride) Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley
Mitchell, R.C. (Soton Itchen) Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth)
Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) Thomas, Dr R.(Carmarthen)
Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) Thorne, Stan (Preston South)
Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) Tilley, John
Moyle, Rt Hon Roland Tinn, James
Newens, Stanley Torney,Tom
Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon Urwin, Rt Hon Tom
Ogden, Eric Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.
O'Halloran, Michael Wainwright, E. (Dearne V)
O'Neill, Martin Walker, Rt Hon H.(D'caster)
Orme, Rt Hon Stanley Watkins, David
Palmer, Arthur Weetch, Ken
Park, George Welsh, Michael
Parker, John White, Frank R.
Parry, Robert White, J. (G'gow Pollok)
Pavitt, Laurie Whitehead, Phillip
Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) Whitlock, William
Prescott, John Wigley, Dafydd
Price, C. (Lewisham W) Willey, Rt Hon Frederick
Race, Reg Williams, Rt Hon A. (S'sea W)
Rees, Rt Hon M (Leeds S) Wilson, Rt Hon Sir H. (H'ton)
Richardson, Jo Wilson, William (C'try SE)
Roberts, Albert (Normanton) Winnick, David
Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) Woodall, Alec
Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) Woolmer, Kenneth
Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) Wright, Sheila
Rooker, J. W. Young, David (Bolton E)
Ross, Ernest (Dundee West)
Rowlands, Ted Tellers for the Ayes:
Sandelson, Neville Mr. Frank Haynes and
Sever, John Mr. George Morton.
Adley, Robert Braine, Sir Bernard
Aitken, Jonathan Bright, Graham
Alexander, Richard Brinton, Tim
Alison, Rt Hon Michael Brooke, Hon Peter
Ancram, Michael Brotherton, Michael
Arnold Tom Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'n,)
Aspinwall, Jack Bruce-Gardyne, John
Atkins, Rt Hon H. (S'thorne) Bryan, Sir Paul
Atkinson, David (B'm'th, E) Buchanan-Smith, Rt. Hon. A.
Baker, Kenneth (St. M'bone) Buck, Antony
Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) Budgen, Nick
Banks, Robert Bulmer, Esmond
Beaumont-Dark, Anthony Burden, Sir Frederick
Bendall, Vivian Butcher, John
Bennett, Sir Frederic (T'bay) Cadbury, Jocelyn
Benyon, Thomas (A'don) Carlisle, John (Luton West)
Benyon.W. (Buckingham) Carlisle, Kenneth(Lincoln)
Best, Keith Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (R'c'n)
Bevan, David Gilroy Chalker, Mrs. Lynda
Biffen, Rt Hon John Channon, Rt. Hon. Paul
Biggs-Davison, Sir John Chapman, Sydney
Blackburn, John Churchill, W.S.
Blaker, Peter Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n)
Body, Richard Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe)
Boscawen, Hon Robert Clegg, Sir Walter
Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) Cockeram, Eric
Bowden, Andrew Cope, John
Boyson, Dr Rhodes Cormack, Patrick
Corrie, John Knox, David
Costain, Sir Albert Lang, Ian
Cranborne, Viscount Langford-Holt, Sir John
Critchley, Julian Latham, Michael
Crouch, David Lawrence, Ivan
Dean, Paul (North Somerset) Lee, John
Dickens, Geoffrey Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark
Dorrell, Stephen Lester, Jim (Beeston)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)
Dover, Denshore Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo)
du Cann, Rt Hon Edward Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)
Dunn, Robert (Dartford) Loveridge, John
Durant, Tony Luce, Richard
Dykes, Hugh Lyell, Nicholas
Eden, Rt Hon Sir John McCrindle, Robert
Eggar, Tim Macfarlane, Neil
Elliott, Sir William MacGregor, John
Emery, Sir Peter MacKay, John (Argyll)
Eyre, Reginald Macmillan, Rt Hon M.
Fairgrieve, Sir Russell McNair-Wilson, M.(N'bury)
Faith, Mrs Sheila McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st)
Farr, John McQuarrie, Albert
Fenner, Mrs Peggy Madel, David
Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles Major, John
Fookes, Miss Janet Marland, Paul
Forman, Nigel Marlow, Antony
Fowler, Rt Hon Norman Marshall, Michael (Arundel)
Fox, Marcus Marten, Rt Hon Neil
Fraser, Peter (South Angus) Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus
Fry, Peter Mawby, Ray
Gardiner, George (Reigate) Mawhinney, Dr Brian
Gardner, Edward (S Fylde) Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin
Garel-Jones, Tristan Mellor, David
Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian Meyer, Sir Anthony
Glyn, Dr Alan Miller, Hal (B'grove)
Goodhart, Sir Philip Mills, Iain (Meriden)
Goodhew, Sir Victor Mills, Peter (West Devon)
Goodlad, Alastair Miscampbell, Norman
Gorst, John Mitchell, David (Basingstoke)
Gow, Ian Moate, Roger
Gower, Sir Raymond Monro, Sir Hector
Gray, Hamish Montgomery, Fergus
Greenway, Harry Morgan, Geraint
Griffiths, E.(B'y St. Edm'ds) Morris, M.(N'hampton S)
Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes)
Grist, Ian Morrison, Hon P. (Chester)
Grylls, Michael Mudd, David
Gummer, John Selwyn Murphy, Christopher
Hamilton, Hon A. Myles, David
Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Neale, Gerrard
Hampson, Dr Keith Needham, Richard
Hannam, John Nelson, Anthony
Haselhurst, Alan Neubert, Michael
Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael Newton, Tony
Hawkins, Paul Normanton, Tom
Hayhoe, Barney Onslow, Cranley
Heddle, John Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S.
Henderson, Barry Page, John (Harrow, West)
Hicks, Robert Page, Richard (SW Herts)
Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L. Parkinson, Rt Hon Cecil
Hill, James Parris, Matthew
Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) Patten, John (Oxford)
Holland, Philip (Carlton) Pattie, Geoffrey
Hooson, Tom Pawsey, James
Hordern, Peter Penhaligon, David
Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Percival, Sir Ian
Howell, Rt Hon D.(G'ldf'd) Peyton, Rt Hon John
Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk) Pink, R. Bonner
Hunt, David (Wirral) Pollock, Alexander
Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) Porter, Barry
Johnson Smith, Geoffrey Prentice, Rt Hon Reg
Jopling, Rt Hon Michael Proctor, K. Harvey
Joseph, Rt Hon Sir Keith Raison, Rt Hon Timothy
Kaberry, Sir Donald Rathbone, Tim
Kellett-Bowman, Mrs Elaine Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal)
Kershaw, Sir Anthony Rees-Davies, W. R.
Kimball, Sir Marcus Renton, Tim
King, Rt Hon Tom Rhodes James, Robert
Kitson, Sir Timothy Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon
Knight, Mrs Jill Ridley, Hon Nicholas
Ridsdale, Sir Julian Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman
Rifkind, Malcolm Temple-Morris, Peter
Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey Thomas, Rt Hon Peter
Roberts, M. (Cardiff NW) Thompson, Donald
Roberts, Wyn (Conway) Thorne, Neil (Ilford South)
Rossi, Hugh Thornton, Malcolm
Rost, Peter Townend, John (Bridlington)
Royle, Sir Anthony Townsend, Cyril D, (B'heath)
Sainsbury, Hon Timothy Trippier, David
St. John-Stevas, Rt Hon N. Trotter, Neville
Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) van Straubenzee, Sir W.
Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) Vaughan, Dr Gerard
Shelton, William (Streatham) Viggers, Peter
Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) Waddington, David
Shepherd, Richard Wakeham, John
Shersby, Michael Waldegrave, Hon William
Silvester, Fred Walker, Rt Hon P.(W'cester)
Sims, Roger Wall, Sir Patrick
Skeet, T. H. H. Waller, Gary
Smith, Dudley Ward, John
Speed, Keith Warren, Kenneth
Speller, Tony Watson, John
Spence, John Wells, John (Maidstone)
Spicer, Jim (West Dorset) Wheeler, John
Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) Whitelaw, Rt Hon William
Sproat, Iain Whitney, Raymond
Squire, Robin Wickenden, Keith
Stainton, Keith Wiggin, Jerry
Stanbrook, Ivor Wilkinson, John
Stanley John Williams, D. (Montgomery)
Steen, Anthony Winterton, Nicholas
Stevens, Martin Wolfson, Mark
Stewart, A. (ERenfrewshire) Young, Sir George (Acton)
Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) Younger, Rt Hon George
Stokes, John
Stradling Thomas, J. Tellers for the Noes:
Tapsell, Peter Mr. Anthony Berry and
Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) Mr. Carol Mather.

Question accordingly negatived.

Ordered, That, at this day's sitting, the Transport Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.—[Mr. Gummer.]

Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), again considered.

Forward to