Road Safety Bill [HL]

This would be a radical change to existing arrangements. The UK is the only country in the EU that has a system of restricted licences for operators who carry goods for their own businesses, rather than on behalf of other people. Other member states do not follow that pattern of licensing. The requirements that ““own account”” operators have to meet in the UK are therefore already a good deal stricter than elsewhere in Europe. There is little evidence that restricted licence holders operate their vehicles less safely than standard national or international operators. I hear what the noble Earl says about some articles that appear, and there may be hearsay, but our judgment of the evidence before us is that the present licensing system of two categories does not lead to one being vastly superior to the other. Applying the full requirements for standard licence holders would be a significant burden on the high proportion of them who run small businesses. Restricted licence holders have to prove to a traffic commissioner that they are fit to hold a licence and have the resources to run their vehicles safely and within the law. They are subject to exactly the same road safety laws relating to vehicle standards and driver behaviour as other operators. Even if there were a case for revising the operator licensing system in the way that the noble Earl envisages, we could consider making such radical changes, affecting almost half the users of heavy goods vehicles, only after a proper review of the system and full consultation with those affected. We are satisfied that the current arrangements strike the right balance between the need to ensure that vehicles are operated safely and avoiding unnecessary burdens on operators. I hope that the noble Earl will recognise that the amendment would introduce a significant change, affecting a large number of operators. We could conceive of that only with very extensive consultation. At the moment, we are unpersuaded of the case.