1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 
Suitable agency?
Page 9
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The government has kindly offered to pay for the Vehicle and Operators Services Agency (VOSA) to enforce the Working Time Directive.
Certainly this is infinitely preferable to funding it from hauliers' hardwon licence fees but, before we become hysterical with joy, isn't that why we pay taxes in the first place?
On a more philosophical track, the PTA has suggested the appointment of VOSA is an "inappropriate use" of a specialist road safety agency. But what other enforcement agency is better placed to keep an eye on the activities of the more dubious working practices of hauliers—after all, isn't that what it does already?
The good news is that VOSA's pitiful, cash-strapped, working budget won't be stretched any further to pay for any WTD work— particularly as this is the same agency which recently declared that it desperately needed a major hike in test fees—in some cases up to 23%—although it still keeps many operators waiting for annual tests.
The bad news is that if VOSA does take on WTD enforcement, that's yet another call on its precious time and resources. If the government is going to pay for VOSA to police the WTD, then any funding should include an increase in staffing levels.