p ublic concern—or political mischief-making? It's funny, but we can't remember
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Labour making a public outcry about continuous 0licensing when the Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill was first raised. And what a coincidence that it should raise it in the same week as the Conservative Party Conference. Still, what better time to put the Government on the spot, especially over an emotive topic like road safety? The trouble is the story isn't as half as exciting as Labour might believe. Come conference time most media pundits will have far more interesting lines of enquiry. "Lady Thatcher! Lady Thatcher!...can we have a quote Lady Thatcher?" Does shadow roads minister Joan Walley really think Labour can stop continuous 0-licensing with quotes like: "The Government is once again putting lives at risk for the sake of political dogma." Soundbite anyone? The union, the CPSA has also joined Labour in its call to scrap any relaxation of controls on vehicle licensing. But it doesn't do itself any favours by publishing its leaflet A Cut too Far which, under a section headed "The Facts", contains some debatable statements such as: "Almost one-in-three HGVs randomly stopped by the DOT has defective braking systems." ince when did the Vehicle Inspectorate stop trucks on a purely random basis? Its examiners are famous for being able to spot a poorly maintained truck a mile away—or at least before they crawl underneath and start hitting it with their little hammers—that's why they're rightly feared by erring hauliers. Unfortunately any member of the public reading that sentence is more likely to assume that 30% of all trucks on Britain's roads have defective brakes. Is that what the CPSA is really saying? The Labour Party's press release is also somewhat contradictory. Having rightly attacked the DOT for allowing vehicle examiner numbers to fall from 864 in 1993 to the current 808, it notes that there has been a "huge increase in disciplinary action against operators from 1 991 to 1993". This suggests that the surviving examiners were working harder, or more efficiently, which would seem to support the Tory view. However, what's_really frustrating is that neither Walworth Road nor the CPSA has publicly asked the one question that the DOT has so far refused to answer: If the switch to continuous licensing results in major savings for the DOT, will it plough the money back into roadside enforcement? Ask that at Bournemouth and the chances are there will be a long, awkward silence.