Passenger and Goods Vehicles (Recording Equipment) Regulations 1989

HL Deb 08 November 1989 vol 512 cc792-5

Viscount Davidson rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 24th July be approved [28th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I beg to move that the draft Passenger and Goods Vehicles (Recording Equipment) Regulations 1989 be approved

A new scheme to approve repairers of tachographs came into operation on 1st April following lengthy consultations and discussions with interested parties. The purpose of the scheme is to introduce greater competition into the tachograph repair market and to ensure that repairs are of a satisfactory standard. Under the new scheme, repairers of tachographs will be approved if they meet the British Standards Institution quality standard known as BS5750 or an equivalent standard under the quality assurance scheme. These regulations provide for offences and penalties in connection with the scheme, although an initial period for repairers to register under the scheme has been allowed before these regulations come into force. The main interested parties have been told about our proposals to introduce these offences and no objections have been raised.

The greater competition which the new scheme is designed to introduce should help keep repair costs down. It will also end the virtual monopoly of the repair market enjoyed by the three major tachograph manufacturers. The reason why they have had this virtual monopoly is that most of the authorised tachograph calibration centres operate under the sponsorship of one or other of the manufacturers. Many centres have an agreement with their sponsor to sell or install only their sponsor's products. Under the new scheme an operator will be able to specify that his tachograph be repaired by any authorised repairer.

Penalties are needed for non-compliance with the scheme in order to ensure that it is adhered to. We aim to deter centres from installing or calibrating unapproved repairs by making it clear that, if they install or calibrate a tachograph repaired by an unapproved repairer, they will be liable to have their approval to operate withdrawn. They will have to make sure that a repaired tachograph bears an authorised repairer's seal before installing or calibrating it.

The regulations introduce two types of offence. The most serious of these is the forgery, use or alteration of a tachograph seal with intent to deceive. A person might do this in order to try to pass off an unauthorised repair as a genuine one. The penalty would be a fine of up to £2,000 if tried at a magistrates' court or up to 2 years' imprisonment if tried at a Crown Court.

The other types of offence is for a person to use, or allow to be used, a vehicle fitted with a tachograph which was repaired by an unauthorised repairer. A person charged with this offence will, however, not be guilty if he proves to the court that he neither knew nor ought to have known that the tachograph had not been properly repaired. Thus, if an operator installs a second-hand tachograph which he knows has been repaired by an unauthorised repairer, he will be guilty and liable to a fine of up to £2,000. If, however, a driver is told by the same operator that the tachograph in his vehicle has been legally repaired, and he cannot be expected to have known otherwise, he will not be guilty.

These regulations also amend an existing offence: that of using, or allowing to be used, a vehicle where the tachograph has been illegally installed. A person charged with this offence will not now be guilty if he proves to the court that he neither knew nor ought to have known that the tachograph was illegally installed. The fine for a person found guilty is also raised from £1,000 to £2,000. These charges ensure consistency with the new offence of knowingly using a vehicle fitted with a tachograph which was repaired by an unauthorised repairer.

I trust that your Lordships will agree that these somewhat technical regulations are a necessary accompaniment to the tachograph repair scheme, and will help to ensure compliance with what is a necessary road safety requirement. I beg to move.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Viscount for explaining the new regulation. I wish that the explanatory memorandum made some reference to the fact that an intention of the regulation was to increase both the number of repairers and the competition. There is no reference to that in the explanatory memorandum. It is a point that I have made on previous occasions. I find the remainder of the explanatory note helpful. I am glad that the noble Viscount has made some reference to that point.

I regard Regulation 2(3), as being most important. The noble Viscount referred to the possible defence that the individual neither knew nor ought to have known that the equipment was installed or repaired not in accordance with the Community regulation.

I have found the Freight Transport Association Drivers' Handbook in my records. I do not have the date of its issue. Mr. Peter Bottomley was then the Minister for Roads and Traffic. That may give some idea of the date.

I should like to refer to two passages which I found extremely helpful. On page 10 it states: All vehicles required to be fitted with tachographs must have the equipment calibrated and sealed". It continues: The sealing provision is evidence that the equipment has not been tampered with. Calibration and sealing has to be undertaken at a centre approved by the Secretary of State for Transport". It goes on to state: All equipment must be checked when it is installed and after it has been repaired at an approved calibration centre". The point is not explained in the booklet, so can the noble Viscount say who has the responsibility for carrying out the checking? That is a most important matter. Will the approved centre be responsible for any failure or fault and be caught by the new Section 97AA mentioned in Regulation 3 or are the important words "with intent to deceive"? What will happen to a centre which, after checking, is found not to have properly carried out the repair in accordance with Community regulations?

I am advised that there is often difficulty when the enforcement officer or examiner seeks to check on a driver's hours and rest breaks by looking at the records. That is the purpose of the tachograph. I am also informed that all tachograph discs are identical and therefore delays and difficulties arise during the important checking. Is it not desirable that tachograph discs are marked with serial numbers? That would simplify checks with a particular driver.

On referring to other records I found that in July last year this matter was raised in a debate in another place. I have looked quickly at the ministerial reply but can see no reference to it. I shall be grateful if the noble Viscount can reply tonight. This is a useful regulation which we should like to see enforced as soon as possible.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Viscount for introducing the regulations so comprehensively. During Question Time today I was moved to suggest that the cam eras were in the Chamber for the purpose of listening to this important debate. Therefore I am surprised to see that they are covered and that the camera usually in the Gallery has disappeared. Consequently, I shall save for another occasion the long and important speech that I had intended to deliver.

This appears to be a perfectly sensible step forward. It makes the use of tachographs more efficient and in some cases easier. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, that the explanatory note does not go to the heart of the matter as regards the noble Viscount's comments about increasing competition. I should have thought that the Government would have been only too pleased to offer explanatory notes on the subject. It is something of which I approve. The provision under Section 2(3) which gives a statutory defence against mistakes is clearly sensible. I wish the regulation well.

Earl Attlee

My Lords, I should like to say only a few words because the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, has said everything. These are sensible regulations and I support them 100 per cent. I wish that all private vehicles carried equipment showing the speed at which they were travelling so that it could be produced in case of trouble. I did not know that a tachograph does not have an identifying number and that is a serious lapse. Otherwise, I support the regulations 100 per cent.

Viscount Davidson

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Underhill and Lord Tordoff, for their reception of the regulations. I have noticed that since the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, has sat down the cameras have been removed. I do not know whether there is a connection between the one and the other.

The noble Lord, Lord Underhill, mentioned the Freight Transport Association handbook and asked questions about future procedure. The handbook, issued to its members, has a section on tachographs which the association will no doubt wish to consider amending. The department has issued a new tachograph manual to the calibration centres and it will include information on the new scheme.

A press notice has been issued by the department. Potential repairers can learn of the scheme through the tachograph centre, through publicity in the trade press or by contacting the Department of Transport.

The noble Lord, Lord Underhill, asked about serialisation. Computerised tachograph analysis systems can detect the driver who drives for a period and then inserts a new chart after destroying the previous one because the odometer will show that he has already driven. Chart serialisation would impose an unnecesary burden on operators in terms of cost and extra work. However, we are prepared to look again at the issue.

Lord Underhill

My Lords, before the noble Viscount sits down can he deal with the point that I raised? Who carries out the checking after calibration and repairs? If he does not have the answer can he write to me, because somebody must carry through the checking if there is to be control over the repairing?

Viscount Davidson

My Lords, calibration centres are approved by the Secretary of State. If the centre fails to carry out checks or install properly, the approval can be withdrawn. If the centre carries out work in such a way as to intend to deceive, by forging seals, for example, it would be guilty of the offence of forgery.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.5 p.m.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

[The Sitting was suspended from 7.16 to 8.5 p.m.]