HL Deb 07 July 1981 vol 422 cc636-8

7.2 p.m.

Lord Elton rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 28th April be approved.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of this short order is to make legislative provision for Northern Ireland, as has been made for Great Britain, for private motorists giving lifts in their cars to passengers on a cost-sharing basis. It follows similar provisions in the Transport Act 1980. Without this order a private motorist who used his car on a cost-sharing basis would have to comply with public service vehicle licensing and road service licensing regulations, and these would require him to hold a public service vehicle licence and a road service licence for his car and a public service vehicle driver's licence for himself. If he did not, apart from anything else, his insurance cover would be invalid. The effect of this order is to relieve him of that necessity and thus make cost-sharing on motor car journeys both a legal and a practical proposition.

In the debate in this House on 13th May last year during the Committee stage of the Transport Bill 1980 noble Lords were particularly concerned about insurance. They will be glad to know that the Motor Conference have agreed to extend to Northern Ireland the undertaking they have given for Great Britain in relation to car-sharing under the Transport Act 1980. That undertaking relates to the whole cover provided by a full third-party or comprehensive policy and not just to the limited field of liability required by road traffic law to be covered by insurance.

The way in which motorists can use their cars in this way is clearly set out in Article 3(1)(a), (b) and (2). In general terms, the conditions are that the car is not adapted to carry more than 8 passengers, that the aggregate of payments for the journey does not exceed the car's running costs for the journey (the running costs do include an element for wear and tear) and that arrangements for payment are made before the journey began. The running costs may include an appropriate amount for depreciation and general wear. The other costs which can be considered include petrol, oil, insurance, vehicle excise duty, servicing and repairs. In fact, however, I imagine that many people will simply share the cost of petrol and oil. The important point is that there should be no element of profit. These provisions are based on those of the Transport Act 1980 and I hope your Lordships will give a welcome to the order. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 28th April be approved.—(Lord Elton.)

Lord Blease

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his detailed explanation of this order. He has gone to considerable length in explaining it and I think in total it means that the road services licensing laws, the public service road passenger licensing laws and the insurance coverage as they are at present in Great Britain now apply, to bring Northern Ireland into parity with the arrangements. My understanding is that in many ways the order regularises and legalises the private motoring practices which have been in existence for some time. These private travel arrangements enable friends, neighbours and work colleagues to save money in the course of travel, to their mutual advantage and convenience.

Concerning the wider public implications and claims of the order, that it will reduce traffic on the roads and will save scarce energy fuel and that it will promote a community sense of voluntary service, I am not convinced that these very laudable objectives will be achieved by the provisions of the order. In my view, if the order results in a further deterioration of public transport services, it could have the directly opposite effect on traffic density and on fuel consumption. I certainly feel that an efficient public passenger transport service is in the long run a much more desirable social objective and ought not to be eroded or sacrificed for some apparent short-term gain or the selective interests envisaged in the car-sharing arrangements. Having said that, it is not the intention of this side of the House to oppose the order.

I note in passing that the order was approved by another place on 24th June. It would be helpful if the Minister could indicate whether it is the intention of the Government effectively to monitor the working of the car-sharing arrangements throughout Northern Ireland. We should be particularly concerned to know the effects of the order on the existing public road and rail passenger services, and we should also like the Government to keep under some form of scrutiny the methods employed by private car owners to advertise their travel facilities and the touting of car-sharing arrangements. I shall be glad if the Minister can make some observations on that point.

Finally, there is a point which has been raised with me on which I should like to hear the views of the noble Lord. If, over a period of time, the custom and practice of car-sharing has been established under the order, could this be deemed as a legally enforceable contract? In other words, if a person makes an arrangement to give a lift to two, three or four persons going backwards and forwards to work and in some way opts out of that particular arrangement, could it be considered that he had invalidated an established custom and practice or a contract, even if it was not for profit?

With those remarks I give the order the qualified welcome that I seem to have indicated from this side of the House.

Lord Beaumont of Whitley

My Lords, my noble friend Lord Hampton is sorry that he cannot be here to speak on this order this evening, and I am rising to say that we on these Benches welcome this measure as a very sensible one. We share with the noble Lord, Lord Blease, a certain doubt as to whether in fact it will make a very great deal of difference, and since I am able to lip-read I understand that it is a doubt which I share with the Minister sitting opposite. But even if it does not make a great deal of difference, it is a useful measure.

There is just one question that I should like to ask out of my own personal ignorance. What is the reason for payment having to be agreed before the journey is started? Perhaps the Minister will be kind enough to explain that. Otherwise, we give the measure a warm welcome.

Lord Elton

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Blease, and to the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, for their welcome for this order. I am not certain that I give much of a welcome to Lord Beaumont's revelation of his secret weapon. I think perhaps he ought to check the calibration before he uses it.

The noble Lord, Lord Blease, asked me a number of questions. He is plainly worried about the impact which this arrangement may have on the level of public service transport. Of course, if his own view—that is, that this is going to have rather small results anyway—is borne out, the effects on public transport will be minimal, and I presume what he is doing is guarding against being mistaken in this. The Government regard these arrangements which will be made under this order as being purely private arrangements between individuals, and it would not really be practical to have a monitoring arrangement of all those deals, though doubtless the public services themselves will be the first to let us know if their level of customers is significantly altered. I agree with the noble Lord that public service of a high order is something we all desire. Unfortunately, it is something we cannot afford for everybody. As everyone knows, if you do not live on a bus route life can be very difficult indeed. This arrangement will be extremely helpful to people in that position.

There are no restrictions that I know of on the method of advertising such arrangements. I would expect the postcard in a shop window or at most a notice on an office or factory notice board. Certainly the most you would expect would be a small ad in a local paper, because the whole intention of this order is to provide that there shall be no profit in the exercise, and therefore it will not pay anybody to undertake expense in order to set up such an arrangement. Similarly, the law of contract is not involved because these are private arrangements between people making their own individual arrangements, and my understanding is that the law of contract will not therefore apply. As to why the payment has to be arranged in advance, I am afraid I shall have to write to the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, on this, because the need for this does not spring immediately to my eye. I think I must take advice before I commit myself. I hope your Lordships will be satisfied with those replies and will agree to authorise this order.

On Question, Motion agreed to.