Rail Freight: Working Time Directive (Hansard, 24 March 2003)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville)
My Lords, the working time regulations will apply to all member states and all companies from 1st August 2003. The effect of the proposals on transportation costs is estimated to be minimal, based on the regulatory impact assessment, which was published as part of the consultation document—extension of the working time regulations to the excluded sectors—in October 2002.

§ Lord Bradshaw
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply and for the letter which he sent me. First, who among railway management was consulted about the directive as in 1998 there was no one overall who could be consulted? Secondly, as regards the hierarchy within which drivers and other people can be, or should have been, trained, is the Minister aware that the companies at the top of the hierarchy such as GNER can recruit whereas those at the bottom such as the freight operators will be left with no drivers at all? Thirdly, is it not irrational to move from a safe 456 mode of transport towards a much less safe mode of transport in terms of road safety, and is that not contrary to the Government's policy?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I understand that the original railways social partners agreement of 1998, which was agreed by the industry and unions across Europe in 1998, involved the full participation of this country. Therefore, the industry has known about the partnership, which was included in the horizontal amending directive, for some five years. In terms of the impact, I wonder whether the industry has looked carefully at the derogations, which are substantial in this case in terms of night work and other areas for mobile workers; that is, train drivers. Until one has worked through that, it is difficult to assess whether the measure will have a major impact. There is no evidence to show that it should have a major impact. As regards the road freight industry, the draft regulatory impact assessment concluded that the measure would not affect the relative position of companies in tradable sectors.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, why did the Government themselves not carry out an industry impact assessment before agreeing to the directive?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I understand that the noble Baroness asks why we did not talk to the industry about the impact of the measure. There has been endless consultation. Consultation on the working time directive started in 1993. Consultation took place in 1998 on the railways social partners agreement and on the horizontal amending directive. Regulatory impact assessments have been undertaken of that. Major consultation is also being undertaken on the draft regulations.

Lord Berkeley
My Lords, I believe my noble friend said that the cost of the measure to the railway industry—I declare an interest as chairman of the Rail Freight Group—based on the regulatory impact assessment would be minimal. Is he aware that at a meeting of representatives of the railway industry and his officials in January which I had the honour to attend, we were told that the impact assessment covered hospital doctors, maritime workers and railway workers with one global figure for the lot? The industry was asked desperately for information to enable the Government to work out what the regulatory impact assessment should cover. Does my noble friend agree that more work needs to be done before he can state that the measure will have no impact whatever on the industry?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, our assessment of the cost to the transport industry as a whole is £100 million. It is difficult to obtain a precise figure for the rail freight industry as it is difficult to obtain the precise number of workers from employment surveys. Given that there are about 457 715,000 transport workers but only 10,000 railway freight workers, it is fair to say that the impact is likely to be minimal.

§ Lord Phillips of Sudbury
My Lords, does the Minister agree that one of the problems with the supposedly level playing field of Europe is that it is more in the nature of a race course where the member states impose their own handicaps in terms of their willingness to abide by the particular regulations? Is it not the case that the British feel—I think that it is certainly true of the road hauliers—that they will be disadvantaged in trading terms by reason of the fact that the British on the whole tend to honour regulations which many of their European competitors do not?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, that is a common cause of complaint for which there may be some justification. We are talking about the railways not the road haulage industry. I believe the noble Lord will find that the same complaint is made on the part of other European countries. I believe that there is nothing to suggest that overall we do significantly better than others in terms of implementing the measures we are discussing.

§ Lord Brookman
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that we tend to lose sight of what the directives are really all about? They are about a better life for workers in various industries, are they not? Should we not be glad that our Government, a Labour government, have gone along with the directives?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I very much agree. Given that that important social legislation has been around for 10 years and it has taken five years to implement the railways social partners agreement, a complaint about how long it had taken to implement would be much easier to understand than one that states that the legislation has been rushed through.

§ The Earl of Mar and Kellie
My Lords, how will the new directive be policed? How many people will be involved?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot give figures as to how many people will police the directive. It replaces normal employment legislation. I shall write to the noble Earl and give him the figures.