Clause 58
Road Safety Bill [Lords]
6:00 pm
Stephen Hammond (Shadow Minister, Transport; Wimbledon, Conservative)
We are making good progress, and I shall not detain the Committee for too long. We have heard the Minister argue several times that parts of the Bill are not necessary because their impact is already apparent or because they would be detrimental. I argue that clause 58 is unnecessary.
As the Minister knows, the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 was introduced to regulate private hire vehicles or minicabs in London. The problem with that Act has been the three words “to the public”. A number of private hire vehicle operators and drivers who provide their services on a contract basis say that those vehicles are not available to the public and therefore should not be covered by the Act. That seems relatively appropriate. They are not saying that their whole fleet should not be covered by the Act or that their drivers should not be Criminal Records Bureau checked. They are merely saying that those vehicles hired on a contract basis—usually to local authorities to provide special transport for those in particular need or for schools or educational establishments—should not be covered.
Private hire vehicle operators provide a valuable public service. Their cars are not available strictly to the public, but they are in use for the public benefit. The 1998 Act works extremely well. The clause is unnecessary, and I hope that the Government will think again about why they feel the need for it.