– in the House of Lords at 2:44 pm on 24 January 2006.
asked Her Majesty's Government:
What steps they are taking to secure payment of unpaid congestion charge penalties, and parking and speeding fines incurred by diplomatic staff in London.
My Lords, we take every opportunity to remind diplomatic missions to meet their obligations to comply with United Kingdom law and pay promptly any fines that they incur. Following the annual Written Ministerial Statement on parking and congestion charge penalties on
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that robust Answer on what is clearly a scandalous situation. Will he confirm that the sum owed in unpaid parking fines and congestion charge penalties now exceeds £3.5 million and that the worst offenders tend to be the embassies of the richest countries such as the United Arab Emirates and the United States? Is he aware that in Oslo, which introduced a congestion charge before London, all the diplomatic staff, including the British, pay the charge to drive in and out of the city each day?
My Lords, it does tend to be the larger missions which do not pay, and it is certainly true that they appear to have no difficulty in paying the charges in Singapore and Oslo. The value of outstanding parking fines at the time that this brief was drafted was £354,860. In the case of the congestion charge, the top 10 offenders owed £1,909,700. The overall amount owed at that time was around £2.9 million.
My Lords, is the Minister aware that this is not the first time that this problem has arisen? In 1984, we faced it very directly as well as in the context of the outrage of the shooting from the Libyan Embassy. After examination by the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, we concluded that parking offenders should also be declared persona non grata where necessary. Thereby, the figures were reduced from 109,000 cases in 1984 to less than 8,000 in 1989. Would the Minister be wise enough to follow that example?
My Lords, I know that this is not the first time the matter has arisen or that a Question has been asked in the House. It is certainly true that those steps were taken following the FAC report. There was also a White Paper covering these matters in 1985. We are doing our best to ensure that everybody understands that they must comply with the laws—we expect them to do so—and that there are, in the final analysis, penalties that we can deploy. However, I expect that the House would be cautious before it saw all car-driving diplomats from all our major allies expelled from the United Kingdom at the same time.
My Lords, it is anathema to law-abiding motorists to see these people getting away with not paying their fines or congestion charges and parking in the wrong place. Is it not time to get rid of the diplomatic niceties and allow such cars to be clamped? That would send a message to diplomats in their big fat cars that they must obey the law like everyone else.
My Lords, my noble friend has made a proposition that is very tempting to the House, as I could hear from the response. I will bear it in mind, but I hope that the House will also allow me to try to keep at least some semblance of an international policy in relation to this.
My Lords, in how many foreign capitals do British diplomats have to pay similar charges and roughly how much per year does that amount to?
My Lords, of course we pay—that goes without saying. There are two other congestion charge areas: Singapore and Oslo. Parking fines can be attracted in the majority of cities in modern nations where there are parking regulations, although not everywhere in the world, and our policy is to meet our obligations and not to avoid them.
My Lords, why do diplomatic travellers manage to comply with the laws in Oslo and not in this country?
My Lords, that is a good question, and I have put it myself. There does not appear to be a complete willingness to answer it in terms, but I should love to answer it in the House. I speculate here a bit, but it is conceivable that the number of cars in Oslo, for example, even for a quite big mission, is relatively small, whereas the number of cars for a very large mission in the United Kingdom is quite large. But it may also reflect the relative wealth of the nations and their ability to pay.
My Lords—
My Lords—
My Lords, would it not be possible to negotiate a fixed charge for each mission to cover all its vehicle movements in the area?
My Lords, leaving behind parking fines, which are accumulated as people break parking laws, a fixed sum in respect of congestion charges would require the consent of the authorities in London. That was discussed with the authorities in London, but they were not prepared to have any variation in any of the charging arrangements. I suspect that some noble Lords might have complained about that themselves. That is what would be needed to change the congestion charging arrangements for London.
My Lords—
My Lords, could the Minister clear up the question whether the congestion charge is a charge or a tax? Is he aware that many embassies take the view that it is a tax and that, under the Vienna Convention, embassies are free from tax? There is considerable confusion on the matter. How are the Government going to resolve it?
My Lords, we have resolved it, as the noble Lord will be happy to hear. The question has been put to the Treasury, which answered it in completely robust terms having taken appropriate legal advice. I understand that, among lawyers, there is sometimes a difference of view about all the facts in the matter, but we have taken the view that this is not a tax but is akin to a toll or to other kinds of charges that are not in the nature of taxes and therefore cannot be avoided. That is our position, and we have told all diplomatic missions that.
My Lords—
My Lords, I regret to say that we have had 15 minutes.