AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

1 THE LORDS

28th January 1999
Page 8
Page 8, 28th January 1999 — 1 THE LORDS
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?

COMMENT

HAVE IT...

ho says the House of Lords hasn't got a purpose? Two weeks ago CM revealed that the Labour Government was back-sliding on impounding— much to the anger and dismay of the industry. Two weeks ago we wrote: "The one remaining hope is that we get impounding via a Private Member's Bill, but that's a long shot at best." Not as long as we thought—but even we're surprised at where that shot's been fired from. Conservative hereditary peer Earl Attlee aims to introduce his own Private Member's Bill on impounding: the noble lord is not about to let the Government off the hook. We've still got a long way to go, as Earl Attlee is only too well aware. For impounding to work we must have JEDI fully operational. And there must be a change in the way operators add trucks to their fleets, which means overhauling the old "margin" system and dropping 28 days' notification. Surely in this day and age an operator should be able to notify the authorities that he has taken on a new vehicle by simply phoning in the details to his local Traffic Area Office. No doubt there will be some who will worry about the loads on impounded trucks. Jet them worry. If customers spent more time worrying about using lawabiding hauliers, then cowboy hauliers wouldn't have the loads to carry in the first place. After all the recent ballyhoo over hereditary peers, let's hope they aren't abolished just yet. After all, Earl Attlee deserves the time to succeed where the Government has so blatantly failed.


comments powered by Disqus