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 
FTA expects Lords' support
Page 6
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Freight Transport Association expects the House of Lords to back two of four key changes it wants made to the immigration and asylum legislation now going through Parliament.
The changes would remove operator liability for fines incurred by drivers for carrying stowaways and would set up an independent tribunal to hear appeals against the fines (CM20-26 June).
Chris Welsh. FTA head of campaigns and parliamentary affairs, says the other two proposed changes are still being assessed by experts.
These would require car bon dioxide checks to count as a statutory defence and fines to be imposed per offence rather than per stowaway.
"If the government takes on board these amendments they will go through by the end of the year," says Welsh. But lie warns that if the government rejects them, the chances of them becoming law will largely depend on how far the House of Lords is prepared to back them.
The changes, which are backed by the Road Haulage Association, are due to be tabled by backbench Tory peer Lord Attlee when the legislation goes through the commit tee stage of the House of Lords between 8-10 July,
As 0Mwent to press the FTA and RHA were meeting with the immigration service to discuss
their concerns about government amendments to the bill. FTA chief executive Richard Turner has written to Immigration Minister Beverley Hughes asking for improvements to the Bill, and expressing his disappointment that it was laid before Parliament without any consultation.