HL Deb 01 February 1984 vol 447 cc657-8

3 p.m.

Lord Strathcarron

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they propose to take to encourage 16 year-old riders of mopeds to take the driving test.

Lord Lucas of Chilworth

My Lords, last July the Department of Transport issued a discussion paper which considered the scope for encouraging 16 year-old moped riders to take training and pass the moped test. My honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport has been studying the responses to this paper and will be making positive proposals shortly.

Lord Strathcarron

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his reply. However, it would be nice to know how long "shortly" will be. Can my noble friend say whether the Government's measures on training are having any noticeable effect on road safety?

Lord Lucas of Chilworth

My Lords, recognising my noble friend's interest in this matter as chairman of the British Motor Cycle Safety Foundation, I can also recognise his supplementary questions. "Shortly" has been described in your Lordships' House in various ways. My noble friend will appreciate that when one is considering compulsion for 16 year-olds, one has to make very sure that one does not also greatly affect 17 year-old motor cycle riders. My noble friend will recognise that the level of casualties is unacceptably high. Therefore, the matter is of some complexity and my honourable friend the Minister would want to get it as near right as possible.

On my noble friend's second supplementary question, frankly, it is a little too early to assess the full impact of the measures in terms of their effect on casualties. It is certainly noteworthy that in the third quarter of 1983—the latest period for which figures are available—motor cycle casualties (and this includes moped casualties) were down by about 12 per cent. compared with the same period in 1982. However, I have to say that the total number of deaths and casualties in 1982, with moped riders at 3,109 and with motor cycle riders at 16,904, is much too high and a very serious matter.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, I think that there would be general agreement over the seriousness of the figures which the Minister has just given. In the light of the fact that in the general classification of motor cycle casualties over half of them are teenagers, can the Minister say whether that figure also applies to moped riders, or is the figure greater?

Lord Lucas of Chilworth

My Lords, if I understand the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, correctly, he is talking about ages. He will probably recall that moped riders are invariably between the ages of 16 and 18; learner motor cycle riders start at 17 years and, having passed Part 1 and Part 2 of the test, would then progress to a larger machine. Therefore, the two sets of figures that I have given embrace both groups.

If your Lordships will allow me, this gives me the opportunity to remind the House—and indeed motor cycle riders—that the provisional licences start to expire from 1st October this year. I strongly urge all riders who have not yet taken training and passed both parts of the motor cycle test to attend to that matter with a good deal of urgency; otherwise, of course, they will lose one year on the road.

Lord Nugent of Guildford

My Lords, can my noble friend tell us whether there are sufficient off the road facilities for training motor cyclists to accommodate all those who require this training?

Lord Lucas of Chilworth

My Lords, according to our information, there is a surfeit of off the road training facilities throughout the country.

Lord Strathcarron

My Lords, will my noble friend agree that, provided a 16 year-old moped rider has undertaken a recognised course of training and passed a test of competence, he should be allowed to ride a restricted performance 125cc machine displaying L-plates, and then take the second part of the test when he is 17 years old?

Lord Lucas of Chilworth

My Lords, I recognise what my noble friend is saying; I do not think that I can completely agree with him. Although it is an attractive proposition to induce 16 year-olds to take tests with the probability of an exemption for moving on to other machines, certainly those who were consulted in July and August of last year were not unanimous in their views on this aspect. It is for that reason that my honourable friend has found some little difficulty in arriving at the right kind of solution.