Clause 44 - Private hire vehicles in London

Part of Road Safety Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 6:45 pm on 1 February 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Christopher Chope Christopher Chope Conservative, Christchurch 6:45, 1 February 2005

I shall certainly limit my remarks about wedding cars and funeral cars to wedding cars and funeral cars in London, if that was not implicit in what I have been saying. The firm of which I speak is in Orpington, which is part of the Greater London area. It is in the London borough of Bromley. I will excuse you, Mr. Pike, for your lack of detailed knowledge of London. Many wish that they knew less about London than they do, especially given the way in which it is run these days. At any rate, I can confirm that Orpington is within the London borough of Bromley, which is represented by an exclusive and very competent team of right hon. and hon. Conservative Members. We do not need to go into the detail of each of their attributes.

P and J Travel operates in that London borough, for the people of Bromley, and it believes that if the Clause is unamended it will have to start to lay off staff and its costs will go up. I get the feeling that some hon. Members who are less familiar with the London scene would like us to move on to the next subject. One argument against the clause is that the criminal record checks are not effective. If the checking system is ineffective, it should be tightened, rather than it being addressed through draconian legislation. The onus for checking normally lies with the contracting body, but there is a loophole because unvetted replacement drivers can be used if a vetted driver is unavailable. If there is a loophole in the criminal record check system for local authority transport, and there seems to be some doubt about that, it is identified in paragraph 6.54 of the Government's regulatory impact assessment document.

The Government might say that the argument about criminal record checks is not well founded and is fallacious. If there is a weakness in the criminal record checks system, it should be put right directly, rather than in a roundabout way, which will result in extra regulation, extra expense and, although it will not necessarily putting P and J Travel out of business, it will seriously burden it. It will also drive a number of its employees out of business, because they regard themselves not as minicab drivers but as proud servants of the public, providing a necessary service to needy children. They do not regard themselves as drivers, and do not want to have to take the tests and be subject to all the regulation of the common or garden minicab driver. That is not to insult the great mass of minicab drivers, who almost invariably vote Conservative, because they are strong and independent and wish to be free, but it is to recognise that people working for P and J Travel do not want to be subject to additional, burdensome regulation. 

Clause

A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.

Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.

During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.

When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.

clause

A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.

Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.

During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.

When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.