LORDS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 23 October 1968)

§ LORD HUGHES

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on Amendment No. 59 to which the Commons have disagreed. This Amendment allows an applicant for an operator's licence, who has operating centres in the areas of more than one licensing authority, to make a single application to one authority for a licence to cover all the centres, rather than to make separate application to each authority concerned. All I wish to do is to mention again the reasons why the Government must ask the House not to insist on this Amendment, which has already been discussed in our Committee and, more recently, in another place.

First, there are genuinely local elements in quality licensing. There is the assessment of past records of operators, for example—can it be achieved solely by reliance on papers? A licensing authority's own knowledge of operations in his area, often built up over a period of years, can be vital. Disciplinary control frequently tends to take on local aspects. When things go wrong with the operations of a multiple company, it is usually in respect of one local depot and not nationally. Maintenance arrangements need to be assessed by reference to the position locally at each depot. So the local licensing authority will be the right body to examine and control these matters.

Secondly, great play has been made with the administrative inconvenience to operators which it is alleged that the regional system will involve. It is said that paper work will multiply and there may be inconsistencies between the standards applied by different licensing authorities, so that some depots of a national undertaking could be put out of action by the refusal of one licensing authority to grant a licence. I would ask your Lordships to consider these arguments carefully. They are advanced mainly on the part of those operators running now under "C" licences who can at the moment apply centrally for a licence covering depots in several areas. The argument does not arise in respect of "A" and "B" licence holders because they already have to apply on a regional basis.

1502 I admit at once that applying for an operator's licence, whether centrally or regionally, must involve rather more work than applying for "C" licences. The question therefore so far as "C" licence operators are concerned is not whether operators will have more work than they have now, but will the amount of extra work be affected by whether or not central application can be made in future? Here we must be quite clear on a fundamental point. Operators will have to give to the licensing authority separate information about each of their operating centres; about the licensed transport manager there; about the maintenance facilities and arrangements there and about the vehicles stationed there.

It makes very little difference in terms of the total work load whether all this information is filled in on one form and sent to one licensing authority or whether it has to be done on separate forms and sent to different licensing authorities. After all, the firm can still do the work at one central office if that has been its practice. The Bill says nothing about applications having to be made by the regional offices of the applicant. In short, the Government do not believe that any convincing argument can be made out for a centralised system. Rather, the specifically localised character of quality licensing demands the system of local application which the Government advocate.

§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD

My Lords, we have listened carefully to the argument advanced by the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, justifying the rejection of the Amendment. We can only say again that national industry fears that this will increase costs and paper work, and only time and experience will show who is right. The noble Lord made one point the force of which I have to recognise, that licensing officers build up local knowledge which is of course relevant in this context. I also know that this proposition of operators' licences has been thought about very closely in the Ministry of Transport for some years.

1503 There are some "bad actors", as they say, in this field, and it will be the job of the licensing authorities to cope with them. Therefore, the last thing we wish to do is to weaken the effectiveness of a system which we think will, on the whole, be beneficial.

The only point I should like to make, in conclusion, is that my noble friends and I are still apprehensive about the possible additional cost to nationally operating firms. I ask that the Government watch this system in operation to see how it works out. If these fears are justified, perhaps in due course an amending Bill—possibly not quite so long as this one—may be brought in and the matter put right. I grant the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, that he has a point about the necessity for effective control by the licensing authority and that the importance of local knowledge is considerable. For these reasons we do not dissent.