§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government under the authority of what Act of Parliament Regulations were published in a Statutory Instrument, November, 1973, permitting a uniformed constable to arrest without warrant the driver of a non-European car when suspected of not having insured it properly after a previous warning.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (BARONESS YOUNG)My Lords, I think that the noble Lord is referring to the Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 1973, although the power of arrest is not quite as the noble Lord describes it. It relates not to a suspected offence of not having proper motor insurance but to a suspected offence under the Regulations themselves. These Regulations were made under the authority of Section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972 and the European Communities (Designation) Order 1972.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for her correction, may I ask her this question? Is not this Regulation the result of a Directive by the Council of the European Community? Is it not a fact that it has never been discussed in Parliament, and does it not considerably extend the power of arrest without warrant which was previously restricted to serious cases authorised by Acts of Parliament? Does not this mean that Parliament has no authority, or no effective control, over serious Regulations of this kind?
§ BARONESS YOUNGMy Lords, the relevant E.E.C. Directive requires us to check vehicles entering direct from non-E.E.C. countries whose drivers do not have adequate insurance. It goes on to say that they must be prevented from driving the vehicle, or may drive it only to a particular place. We in this country have said that in order to fulfil this obligation a police constable shall have the power of arrest, and we have based this 754 on the Road Traffic (Foreign Vehicles) Act 1972, which sets a precedent for it.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, does not that answer illustrate my point? There is a Directive by the E.E.C. which is applied in this country without any discussion by Parliament, and which deals with this deeply held principle of arrest without warrant. Has the noble Baroness noted a very strong objection made in The Times of November 24 to this? Does not this prove the necessity for the Select Committee which has been proposed in another place, so that decisions about the law and regulations of the European Community should come before Parliament before they are applied?
LORD INGLEWOODMy Lords, before my noble friend replies, can she help us by casting some light on what is a "non-European car"?
§ BARONESS YOUNGMy Lords, if I may first answer the question of my noble friend Lord Inglewood, this definition refers to vehicles from non-E.E.C. countries.
§ BARONESS YOUNGMy Lords, it might refer to either or both. The Directive concerns cars driven from non-E.E.C. countries and coming direct to this country, and it is concerned quite specifically only with those cars or vehicles which enter and which do not have compulsory insurance. The Directive says that they must be stopped. In the case of the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, I think the confusion arises in that the Directive does not say anything about the powers of arrest. We have said this in the Regulations because we believe it to be the only way that we can carry out the Directive. I would accept, however, that the whole question of the discussion of E.E.C. Directives is a matter for both this House and another place.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, is not it quite extraordinary that this power to arrest without warrant should be extended in this way without any endorsement whatsoever by Parliament?
§ BARONESS YOUNGAs I said in answer to an earlier question, my Lords, 755 this particular power to arrest is based on the previous Act, the Road Traffic (Foreign Vehicles) Act 1972, which was of course discussed in both Houses.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, would the noble Baroness confirm that the power to arrest was not a consequence of the Directive? If that is the case, would the noble Baroness then say whether it would be possible for either House to reject that Statutory Order without infringing its responsibilities to carry out the Directive under the Treaty of Rome?
§ BARONESS YOUNGMy Lords, I should like to confirm what the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, said in the first part of that question. I think the answer to the second part is that it would not be possible at this stage to amend the Directive.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I thought the noble Baroness said that this power to arrest did not derive from the Directive itself. If that is so, would not the noble Baroness agree that it would be open to Parliament to reject the Statutory Order for the purpose of omitting that particular part without affecting our responsibilities under the Treaty of Rome?
§ BARONESS YOUNGMy Lords, I am sorry; I misunderstood the noble Lord's question. I understand that what he has suggested would be possible. However, I am bound to say that when the former Bill was being discussed, although it contained similar provisions to stop lorries and buses which infringed certain laws of this country, there was very little comment on the powers of arrest.
LORD BELHAVEN AND STENTONMy Lords, would not my noble friend agree that driving without insurance is a fairly serious offence, whether it is committed by European or non-European cars?
§ BARONESS YOUNGYes, I would agree, my Lords; but in the case of the E.E.C. countries there is a joint agreement which would cover someone involved in an accident who drove without compulsory insurance. It does not cover cars from non-E.E.C. countries.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, would the noble Baroness confirm that 756 her reply to the noble Lord, Lord Inglewood, means that half the countries of Europe are no longer European?
§ BARONESS YOUNGNo, my Lords, I would not agree with that.