The print-out is on the wall
Page 42
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
1982 WAS a remarkable year in road transport legislation, for a number of reasons. Most notable was the Parliamentary approval of higher weights. But almost as remarkable was something that did not happen.
For the first time since 1976 there were no changes in the law on drivers' hours and records. Tachograph use became compulsory on December 31 1981; since then the law in this normally hyperactive area has remained unchanged.
Moreover, this state of affairs seems likely to continue for some time. The discussions in Brussels on revising Regulations 543/69 and 1463/70 are making slow progress. The next move lies with the Commission, which has to put formal proposals for amendment forward to the Council of Ministers.
The delay makes it obvious that they are having difficulty in walking the tightrope between conflicting demands for, on the one hand, greater flexibility and, on the other, better enforcement.
Experience in 1976 and 1977 shows that this detailed subject moves very slowly indeed through the legislative machinery of the Council. 1983 will almost certainly repeat 1982's standstill. So, probably, will 1984.
However, those operators looking forward to a welcome period of peace are in for an electronic shock. The law will not change. But the method of its application is going to jump straight from the steam age into the microchip era.
Last November, in a littlenoticed written answer to a Parliamentary question, a junior Transport Minister revealed for the first time that the Department has been experimenting with the use of computerised reading of tachograph charts for enforcement purposes. These experiments were said to be almost complete, and if the outcome is satisfactory computerised chart reading equipment will be introduced into all Traffic Area Offices.
The mushroom growth of commercial chart-reading agencies during the last couple of years makes it clear that mass reading of charts by computer is perfectly feasible. Most of the commercial agencies offer services concentrating equally on providing management information and ensuring compliance with the hours law.
But routine checks on hours by employers are one thing; prosecution is quite another. The very highest standards of accuracy are required before initiating a process which could lead to heavy fines and loss of driver's or operator's licence.
There is no danger of justice being dispensed by computer, with convictions being obtained on the basis of a print-out which cannot be disputed. If that were to come about the old "spy-inthe-cab" image, now happily fading in the light of experience, would be resuscitated with a vengeance.
Talk of charts being "read" by computer is inaccurate. At present, only a small minority of charts can be scanned automatically and the results printed out without human intervention. In the vast majority of cases the charts are read by the human eye, with the results being fed into a machine which usually is, but need not be, a computer.
True, the next generation of tachographs will surely provide for information to be recorded in a form suitable for automatic reading. But at present the fallible human eye is the channel through which most tachograph information is fed to computers. That is the problem which the DTp is now satisfied it has overcome.
What is likely to happen is that the electronic methods will be used simply as a sort of rough sift. A large batch of charts from one operator will be put through the process to gain an overall picture of the degree of compliance. The human scanners will not take the charts at face value, but will also be on the lookout for evidence of fiddles.
The print-outs will draw attention to these as well as analysing the hours of driving, rest and breaks. They will then be passed to the traffic examiners. If the analysis shows many apparent breaches of the law the processes of enforcement now used substantially those carried forward from the log-book era will be followed. If this leads to a prosecution the evidence produced in court will be the chart, and not the printout. Any disputes about the facts of the case will centre on the accuracy of the tachograph recording, not of the computer.
This system will allow an enormous increase in the number of charts scrutinised. But the effects go far beyond that. Traffic examiners will be able to subject a suspect operator's whole operation to a thorough scrutiny with relatively little effort. The number of such operators is probably small. Computerised chart reading is likely to reduce it still further.
The timing is also likely to increase the impact of the change. As part of the DTp campaign to soften up the general public towards accepting heavier lorries, enforcement staff have been concentrating their efforts against overloading. The LAs' reports for 1981-82, due to be published in a few weeks, will probably show that a massive increase in the number of lorries weighed has been accompanied by a decrease in hours enforcement.
Now that the weights battle has been won there would in any case be a swing towards hours enforcement. The computer will give that trend a massive electronic push. Cowboys have been warned.