aw and isorder
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
OST DISCUSSIONS about gislation concentrate on its erits or defects. Talk might rn to obscurities of wording; e format is usually ignored. it this is also important. If the w can be found in one Act it is uch easier to absorb than if it scattered around among veral Acts and Statutory struments. Although joining e EEC has added to the implications by introducing 'other source of legislation, the nition was confused long 'fore 1973.
An Act of Parliament on a plc — especially, it seems, a ad transport topic — is barely the Statute Book before irliament passes another Act nending it. Often the nendment is minor — )metimes a belated removal of defect which ought to have en spotted when the original A was drafted. But even the mplest and most desirable nendment means that at least io Acts have to be consulted. Moreover, amendments may ?tucked away as relatively )scure sections of Acts with tally different titles from the cts which they are amending. )r example, the maximum level 'fines under the Road Traffic Id Transport Acts is increased Dm time to time in Criminal istice Acts.
This process continues from :alto year, and in time brings out a chaotic situation. For
example, the law on goods vehicle operators' licensing is scattered among at least five different Acts, with another about to receive Royal Assent. On top of all this, there are innumerable Statutory Instruments and EEC Regulations. And the position on drivers' hours' legislation is infinitely worse.
Parliament has devised a system to deal with this problem. It is known as a Consolidation Bill. (This is quite separate from the Consolidated Fund Bill, the major annual measure dealing with Government expenditure.) As the title indicates, a Consolidation Bill brings together into one Act all, or at least a substantial part of, existing legislation on one main theme. If all the normal timeconsuming Parliamentary processes had to be followed it would be open to any MP or Peer to seek to change the law while it was being consolidated. Very few clauses could expect to get through without debate and division, for which there is simply not enough Parliamentary time.
In order to avoid these difficulties, a Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills is established at the start of every Parliamentary Session. This consists of twelve Members of each House of Parliament. Their task is to consolidate the law on topics agreed between the political parties as being ripe for this. The choice of topic often follows a report by the Law Commission. This consists of five senior lawyers charged with keeping the format of the law under review, and recommending its modernisation when appropriate. It is not concerned with the merits of the Acts and Regulations it reviews, but simply with presentation.
The Law Commission is a relatively recent body, whereas the consolidation procedure goes back to the end of the last century. Originally there was a very strict rule that the Joint Committee could not make any amendment whatever. Even obvious mistakes had to be incorporated in the new Act. The absurdity of this led to a twostage process; short amending Bills were enacted under the normal procedure and then immediately consolidated under the special procedure.
Eventually the rule was relaxed. The Committee can now recommend not only corrections but also minor improvements which would express more clearly the law as it stands.
Since this procedure exists, why is road transport law in the mess described above? The sad answer is that even the streamlined consolidation procedure suffers from lack of Parliamentary time. Each subject must await its turn, and road traffic law was last consolidated fairly recently — in 1972. The Road Traffic Act 1972 repealed seven Acts in their entirety, and parts — often large parts — of seventeen other Acts, as well as three Statutory Instruments.
The 1972 Act provides a textbook example of the difficulty of the consolidation process. Even while the Joint Committee was working on the consolidating Bill, Parliament was passing legislation which amended it!
The advent of the Law Commission has widened the opportunities for flexibility in the consolidation process. In particular, the scope for amendments has been increased. But even so progress is painfully slow.
HM Stationery Office publishes a loose-leaf series "Statutes in Force", which groups in one volume the Acts on a variety of subjects, including separate volumes on road traffic and on transport. But the road traffic volume covers 47 Acts, and the transport volume 27 — including the Carriers' Act 1830, introduced when George IV was on the throne! Something better than this is required.
It should be possible for Parliament, when legislating, to consolidate as it goes along. For example, each time the Road Traffic Act 1972 is amended, one unified text, incorporating all amendments currently in force, could be produced. But the extreme reluctance of MPs to change any aspect of their working practices makes it unlikely that this will happen. The best the industry can hope for is probably an early reconsolidation of existing road transport legislation.