Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill [HL].


Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, we still have some way to go with this Bill but the principle behind it is straightforward; namely, that the DVLA is a trading fund—it is a government agency—but it is obliged to meet its costs. The nature of the driving licence has finally to be identified. We are still subject to probing and challenging amendments from the other side, as the noble Earl may have noticed, so I cannot be categoric about costs. However, I have indicated that there are costs. Photographic renewal will cost the DVLA an additional £60 million per annum and it does not have a budget from which it can produce a subsidy for that. There are costs but many renewals will be free. Following a fee restructuring in March last year, licence renewals for those aged 70 and over for large and passenger carrying vehicle licences and for licences with a restricted duration as a result of a medical condition are now issued free of charge and that will continue. Replacement licences for those categories will remain free. Nevertheless, noble Lords will recognise that we cannot expect a government agency, which is meant to operate on a not-for-profit basis, but which has to meet its costs, to write off such significant costs, so charges will be made. I accept that the noble Lord has identified a point on that. Taken in the round, we are seeking to guarantee the security of the British driving licence when we are all too well aware of the inadequacy of the present form. It is true that more recent forms of the driving licence have been a great improvement. A police officer has a real problem when he stops an individual who shows him a piece of paper without a photograph but which contains the general details that we all know appear on the driving licence. The police have real difficulties in establishing that the owner of the licence is the person driving the car at the time. As regards road safety measures, we cannot think of anything that is much more important than guaranteeing the security of driving licences. We need to combat fraud. This is an area where fraud clearly occurs, in Britain and through our licences being used elsewhere. I hope the noble Lord recognises—if I am not given fresh arguments today—that I have reinforced and clarified some of the arguments I made in Committee and that he has had a sufficient answer to enable him to withdraw his amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c115 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Applications Costs Closures Accidents Countryside Bureaucracy Bus lanes Cars Cycling Fraud Identity cards Injuries Level crossings Large goods vehicles International cooperation Helmets Electric vehicles Police Passengers Motorcycles Proof of identity Motorway service areas Photography Taxis Registration Young people Safety Roads Road traffic offences Theft Driving licences Picnic sites
Legislation
Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk