Overwhelmed by bureaucrac
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
, "TIDAL wave of bureauracy" from the EEC was lamed by a solicitor when his lient appeared before Norrich magistrates last week. John Bastin, defending ARS larine Ltd, of Loddon, Norrich, and two of its drivers, oid that having concerned self with butter, eggs and rifle the EEC could now turn s attention to the transport idustry.
Until October 1976 the rules ad been in Anglo-Saxon form ad approved by the British ornament, but since then the EC had brought about • ianges in the hours and !cord regulations.
The company and drivers, ahn H. Leggitt and Lawrence . Forrest, pleaded guilty to )ecimen charges of failing to !ft DEPARTMENT of rransport inquiry into the Leatherhead interchange of the M25 — London's Outer Drbital motorway — is to go ihead again.
The inquiry was sus)ended in May after antinotorway campaigner lohn Tyme, on behalf of 345 ocal residents. told the 3Tp's inspector, Rear Adniral Nixon, that he did not tccept the Department's :ost-benefit analysis of the )roposals, which were orginally submitted to a pubic inquiry in 1971.
But Transport Secretary William Rodgers has told he inspector that there is it) need further to consider he line of the route.
Meanwhile the pro notorway group Move nent for London has been irging the Government to ;et on with building the 425. The volume of traffic iad risen tenfold since the 'oute was first proposed in 937, yet there were still )nly 17 of the proposed 116 ones of the route in use, aid the movement for Lonon's secretary Andrew Varren. make entries, failing to cause entries to be made and failing to maintain a register of records. Both drivers were also charged with driving without hgv licences.
The prosecution told the court that the traffic examiner visited ARS Marine in February and saw a director of the company, Mr Smith. Mr Smith was alleged to have told the examiner that he had been "lumbered with the job of looking after the vehicles" and knew nothing of transport matters. He anticipated that an examination of the records would show something to be wrong.
The problem arose because Mr Smith believed the vehicles fell outside the scope of hgv regulations. But it was pointed out to him that under plating arrangements, the vehicle came within the scope of the hgv rules and as a result the company and its two drivers were reported.
Mr Bastin submitted that prior to October 1976, the vehicle in question was under 3 tons and therefore outside the regulations weight limit. The use of the vehicle had not changed, it was simply that the significant figure now related to plating weight. The regulations had changed to bring the vehicle into the hgv category at the stroke of a bureaucratic pen.
The company was fined a total of £170, with £25 costs. Mr Leggitt was fined a total of £20, and Mr Forrest a total of £50.