AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

LUDICROUS LAWS

26th March 1992, Page 3
26th March 1992
Page 3
Page 3, 26th March 1992 — LUDICROUS LAWS
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Question: What does the Department of Transport have in common with the cricket World Cup organisers? Answer: They've both produced ludicrous lows that take precious little account of the views of the people they affect.

This week we've highlighted yet another cock-up in road transport legislation which makes it illegal for learner LGV drivers to drive on the motorway — something they were always able to do before a Whitehall warrior in Marsham Street stcrted to tinker with the 1988 Road Traffic Act. And only last week we reported on moves to close various other loopholes in the latest LGV driver licensing laws.

Other infamous own-goals from the Dip include the confusion over the retrospective fitment of speed limiters. The wording is, to put it politely, unnecessarily complicated. Then there was the Dip's infamous consultation document on lift axles which wasted the time of several engineers from the truck makers and trade associations before it sunk without trace, having been shown to be gobbledegook.

Meanwhile we have road friendly suspension and emissions laws bubbling away while the department insists on interpreting EC gross and axle weight limits in its own idiosyncratic way. Why doesn't anyone in the Dip bother to ask operators and manufacturers what they think of proposed legislation before it issues a discussion document? This might result in some legislation that actually does what it's meant to do.

Tags

Organisations: Department of Transport

comments powered by Disqus