§ 2.49 p.m.
§ Lord Harrison asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether the licence regulations banning insulin-treated diabetics from driving vehicles over 3.5 tonnes should be replaced by a system of individual assessment of fitness to drive.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have the task of assessing for fitness to drive people who suffer from this and other medical conditions. Our general approach was reviewed in a valuable report by the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology. We have today published the Government's response to that report. Our response confirms that we will review the scope for more individual assessment, subject to advice from the Advisory Panel on Diabetes and Driving.
§ Lord HarrisonMy Lords, that is a very encouraging reply. However, does my noble friend agree that the blanket ban and the current regulations are arbitrary, illogical and inconsistent, as detailed in the recent report by the House of Commons Select Committee? Does he agree that the blanket ban represents an offence against the human rights of 100,000 of our fellow citizens? Further, does my noble friend accept that such unwarranted discrimination could be remedied by the introduction of a regime of individual assessment for those insulin-dependent diabetic drivers who wish to test their fitness to drive Class 2 vehicles?
§ Lord WhittyMy Lords, the prime consideration, from the Government's point of view, must be fairness 1012 to all road users in terms of road safety. That must be our central concern. There are still a number of accidents which occur to people with diabetic conditions. It is not true to say that there is a blanket ban. Car drivers can obtain a licence for up to three years, and renewal depends on medical assessment. However, the Select Committee made some valuable points, particularly in relation to small commercial vehicles where there is a degree of inconsistency in the regulations and probably a degree of unfairness. That is why I referred in my original Answer to a review to look at the possibility of greater scope for individual assessment.
§ Earl AttleeMy Lords, is the Minister aware that I am experiencing a severe case of gold-plated déja vu? Is it the case that an insulin-dependent driver from the Netherlands would be able to drive in the UK while a UK driver with the same medical condition would automatically not be able to do so?
§ Lord WhittyMy Lords, I do not think that it is a question of gold-plating. There are EU regulations on the matter and each member state carries out administratively the means to comply with those regulations. I do not have the precise details of the Dutch provision, but so far as concerns small commercial vehicles it depends on medical assessment. Therefore, it is not the case that any driver with this condition who has a Dutch licence can drive over here. Drivers with a Dutch licence will have been subject to a degree of medical assessment, which is more or less what the Select Committee in another place recommended for this country. There is no blanket permit anywhere in the EU.
§ Lord Morris of ManchesterMy Lords, I too am grateful to my noble friend for his original reply, but what assessment has he made of what constitutes high and low risk in relation to individual fitness to drive? In particular and specifically, does he agree with the finding of the Select Committee on Science and Technology in another place that a key criterion is whether licence applicants are able to spot the warning signs of hyperglycaemia and are in good control of their blood sugar levels and that those with good control and awareness may be considered low risk?
§ Lord WhittyMy Lords, in general terms I agree with that assertion. The area of contention relates to driving vans and minibuses where there is greater danger to others than there is in driving a car. In this area the Select Committee recommends individual assessment. The EU regulations relate to "exceptional circumstances" for this class of vehicle. We have hitherto interpreted that to mean people having a proven record of driving frequently and regularly before they can be considered for exemption. It may well be that that rather blunt identification of exceptional cases needs to be replaced by something closer to an individual assessment. It is not by any 1013 means certain that individual assessment would lead to larger numbers being permitted to drive, but it would relate more directly to an individual's condition.
§ Lord AddingtonMy Lords, following on from the question put by the noble Lord, Lord Morris, does the Minister agree that the statistics should be broken down to indicate those who collapse at the wheel as a result of hyperglycaemia so that we can act on that information? I have heard a figure of 120 for those collapsing at the wheel as a result of the condition. Has the Minister any idea what the statistics are, as they would give some idea of the magnitude of the problem?
§ Lord WhittyMy Lords, there are significantly more cases of people collapsing at the wheel due to hyperglycaemia. Not all such incidents result in accident injuries—I believe the noble Lord is referring to injuries—but all have the potential to cause injury and therefore present a problem. Research on the matter is not robust, as the Select Committee pointed out. We are about to commission substantial research which will give a very much better indication of the size of the problem and, therefore, it is to be hoped, scope for a solution.