Government Consultation on Driving Licence Changes (2 Viewers)

[DDJC]

Have you ever done a HGV course? I took my class 1 in 1991 and still use some of the lessons I learned.
When I observe other motorhomers manoeuvring I cant help but notice the standard is generally quite poor, as can be witnessed by all the corner damage,. They also get into some ridiculous situations from blindly following the satnav. Imo many of them would benefit from some training

Yep me too. A pair of hilarious, but permanently pissed army driving instructors.

 

[nicholsong]

Yep me too. A pair of hilarious, but permanently pissed army driving instructors.

So you had to pay to keep them pissed to pass the course?

 

[DDJC]

So you had to pay to keep them pissed to pass the course?

They certainly didn't have to put their hands in their pockets in the mess at night!

 

[The Wino]

Not strange. Currently, there is no common EU driving test, and several have rather odd anomalies from their neighbour.

But were they ever aligned before? It's one thing to say we all have different standards and it's going to take time to align them hence the grandfather rights on vision standards for hgv drivers and vehicle classes for people who passed their tests when other classes were automatically included. It's another to be aligned and suddenly change. You could well be right and it might be the case that in the scale of things it's just accepted but it's not necessarily a given. How strange would it be to live in Ireland and be restricted to 3500 still when people just over the border in NI could drive vehicles with a higher weight if they change the rules.

 

[nicholsong]

But were they ever aligned before? It's one thing to say we all have different standards and it's going to take time to align them hence the grandfather rights on vision standards for hgv drivers and vehicle classes for people who passed their tests when other classes were automatically included. It's another to be aligned and suddenly change. You could well be right and it might be the case that in the scale of things it's just accepted but it's not necessarily a given. How strange would it be to live in Ireland and be restricted to 3500 still when people just over the border in NI could drive vehicles with a higher weight if they change the rules.

What is the point anyway of aligning inside the EU when the acceptance of licences is governed under the Vienna Convention (See @DJCC's post #58 which covers about 135 countries.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Kayak Kid]

That isn't it! That is about non Petrol/Diesel vehs. It is this one: https://www.gov.uk/government/calls...es-for-changes-to-the-driver-licensing-regime

My apologies - you are correct. My error.

I posted the wrong link!

 

[DDJC]

But were they ever aligned before? It's one thing to say we all have different standards and it's going to take time to align them hence the grandfather rights on vision standards for hgv drivers and vehicle classes for people who passed their tests when other classes were automatically included. It's another to be aligned and suddenly change. You could well be right and it might be the case that in the scale of things it's just accepted but it's not necessarily a given. How strange would it be to live in Ireland and be restricted to 3500 still when people just over the border in NI could drive vehicles with a higher weight if they change the rules.

I don't think that there was ever any sort of alignment or harmonisation. A French 14 year old could ride one of those fantastic Solex front engine mopeds, but in Ireland, the minimum age is 16, making this an obvious example of the disparity that already exists in the EU. France has borders with countries that would not allow a 14 year old to ride a powered moped. You could cross to Italy, for example, as a 14 year old on a moped, but not into Germany, where you need to be 15. But a 15 year old German can't then go into Belgium, where you need to be 16, and definitely not north to Denmark where you need to be 18. Some nation states require licences for mopeds, some need a basic test, some require a fairly robust test.

What this does is explain that the awarding of driving licence categories is entirely down to the sovereign state. This includes testing. There is no enforced harmony across the EU, although it is possible that it might come soon. Currently there is only guidance.

But it doesn't matter. None of the above would affect any new legislation as a result of this consultation. Here is the key point. The EU uses the same (or virtually the same) system of A, A1, B, B1, B, C1, C, D etc, licence codes. It might be the case that an individual nation decides to ban drivers driving a vehicle that is in excess of a their national licence categories - for instance, perhaps Germany may make a law that foreign B category licence holders are limited to 3500kg - but that needn't matter, either. If you are pre-1997, you will see that you have C1 category on your licence. That category looks the same as it looks in Europe. C1 here, is C1 there. So if the UK government decides to award C1 to all existing B category licence holders (as it was pre-1997), there is nothing that the EU, or any member state can do about it. You have the correct licence code on your licence.

I suppose that there is a faint possibility that the EU or individual states may introduce new legislation to limit UK C1 licence holders to 3500 kgs, but that would probably be contrary to the Vienna Convention on Traffic. Could never see that standing up.

So, if the UK government determine to go back to pre-1997 times and add C1 back onto everyone's licence, then that is that, and no foreign state can do anything about it - indeed, it would be far more likely for everyone else to follow suit and make the change themselves.

As far as the safety argument goes, I would hope that the Government introduce two extra conditions. C1 should only added after the driver has two years experience, and not before the age of 21. I think the notion that if this change happens, everyone is going to go out and drive a 7.5 tonne lorry the very next day - because they can - is fanciful. If I was an employer, or a lorry hire company manager, I would want to take any new employees out on a little test before I let them drive one of my vehicles.

When we were tugging, in 2015, Mrs DDJC took a test to add towing (E) to her B licence so she could pull the caravan (1700kg). The government then changed the law in 2021 so that everyone who had B, was automatically given BE. This was never questioned by the EU - why should it be? This proves that it is simply down to the government deciding to make a change. The exact same procedure that would apply in this question. Bottom line is that the UK Government has the power to make such a change, if it so wishes, and if so, then the world will accept it.

So if you want it, write to your MP, like I did!

 

[The Wino]

I don't think that there was ever any sort of alignment or harmonisation. A French 14 year old could ride one of those fantastic Solex front engine mopeds, but in Ireland, the minimum age is 16, making this an obvious example of the disparity that already exists in the EU. France has borders with countries that would not allow a 14 year old to ride a powered moped. You could cross to Italy, for example, as a 14 year old on a moped, but not into Germany, where you need to be 15. But a 15 year old German can't then go into Belgium, where you need to be 16, and definitely not north to Denmark where you need to be 18. Some nation states require licences for mopeds, some need a basic test, some require a fairly robust test.

What this does is explain that the awarding of driving licence categories is entirely down to the sovereign state. This includes testing. There is no enforced harmony across the EU, although it is possible that it might come soon. Currently there is only guidance.

But it doesn't matter. None of the above would affect any new legislation as a result of this consultation. Here is the key point. The EU uses the same (or virtually the same) system of A, A1, B, B1, B, C1, C, D etc, licence codes. It might be the case that an individual nation decides to ban drivers driving a vehicle that is in excess of a their national licence categories - for instance, perhaps Germany may make a law that foreign B category licence holders are limited to 3500kg - but that needn't matter, either. If you are pre-1997, you will see that you have C1 category on your licence. That category looks the same as it looks in Europe. C1 here, is C1 there. So if the UK government decides to award C1 to all existing B category licence holders (as it was pre-1997), there is nothing that the EU, or any member state can do about it. You have the correct licence code on your licence.

I suppose that there is a faint possibility that the EU or individual states may introduce new legislation to limit UK C1 licence holders to 3500 kgs, but that would probably be contrary to the Vienna Convention on Traffic. Could never see that standing up.

So, if the UK government determine to go back to pre-1997 times and add C1 back onto everyone's licence, then that is that, and no foreign state can do anything about it - indeed, it would be far more likely for everyone else to follow suit and make the change themselves.

As far as the safety argument goes, I would hope that the Government introduce two extra conditions. C1 should only added after the driver has two years experience, and not before the age of 21. I think the notion that if this change happens, everyone is going to go out and drive a 7.5 tonne lorry the very next day - because they can - is fanciful. If I was an employer, or a lorry hire company manager, I would want to take any new employees out on a little test before I let them drive one of my vehicles.

When we were tugging, in 2015, Mrs DDJC took a test to add towing (E) to her B licence so she could pull the caravan (1700kg). The government then changed the law in 2021 so that everyone who had B, was automatically given BE. This was never questioned by the EU - why should it be? This proves that it is simply down to the government deciding to make a change. The exact same procedure that would apply in this question. Bottom line is that the UK Government has the power to make such a change, if it so wishes, and if so, then the world will accept it.

So if you want it, write to your MP, like I did!

Doesn't your example of the 14 year old French moped driver not being allowed into Germany or a German moped driving 17 year old not go into Denmark not show that countries can set their own rules?

 

[DDJC]

Doesn't your example of the 14 year old French moped driver not being allowed into Germany or a German moped driving 17 year old not go into Denmark not show that countries can set their own rules?

Exactly. And UK as a sovereign state can do whatever it wants. It isn't about what the codes do or say, it is about the testing and award process. And the testing and award mechanism is determined by the individual state.

Think of it like this. Slovenia (hypothetically, for example) decides to increase the duration of its C1 test to three hours. UK however, decides to simply give C1 away once you have done two years driving. The result is the same. The driver has a C1 category on his/her licence. The very same C1 category. It would be extraordinarily simple to do.

 

[nicholsong]

DDJC

I thought the proposal was to allow 'B' lince holders to drive at a higher weight, e.g. 4.5t, not to issue them with category C1 which would allow up to 7.5t automatically.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DDJC]

DDJC

I thought the proposal was to allow 'B' lince holders to drive at a higher weight, e.g. 4.5t, not to issue them with category C1 which would allow up to 7.5t automatically.

I don't recall the consultation being specific. It was more concerned about whether contributors thought it was a good or a bad idea, and why.

There are two ways of doing it.
First is as you describe, which is to increase the maximum permissible mass or weight, within a licence category. The second is to add a category (subject to conditions without any need for any additional testing.

The problem with the former, is that changing a weight within a licence category leaves a far wider grey area within which a foreign sovereign state can legislate against UK drivers from driving whatever their UK licence allows them to drive. However, if you simply add a new category to a UK licence holder, then that is it. It is not feasible to try and legislate against it, because as far as a driving licence goes, it wouldn't differentiate between someone who passed the C1 test fifteen years ago and is a professional lorry driver, and Mrs DDJC, who drives 5000 miles a year in the motorhome. Both would have the same C1 licence category.

The second advantage to option B is that it was done by the Government on 16 December 2021, with the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) (Amendment) (No. 5) Regulations 2021, amending the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999. This was done by Statutory Instrument - a quick and straightforward Government mechanism to make small and medium changes to existing law. It could be done in a few weeks.

 

[DDJC]

UPDATE

I have received a letter from the Minister for Roads and Local Transport, Guy Opperman MP. Well, he isn't any more as they are in purdah, and it isn't much of a response.

Simply, the reply is garbage. Written by some civil servant, who clearly didn't understand the question. Here is the meat of the answer:

With regards to the next steps following the publication of the Call for Evidence response summary, any restoration of rights previously granted to driving licence holders before 1997 must be carefully balanced against the potential negative impact on road safety. As such, it remains the case that these safety concerns must be properly addressed before any change is considered.

Rubbish. Safety wasn't even considered when the 2021 change (addition of 'BE' to any holder of a 'B' licence, without any additional testing. The statutory instrument went through after only 20 minutes in committee. Opposition MPs brought up safety, but the preponderance of Governing party MPs waved it through. Here is the text of the 2021 committee meeting in full, so you can read it for yourself:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-12-13/debates/ba430745-f51e-4317-ac6a-d216127b76e8/DraftMotorVehicles(DrivingLicences)(Amendment)(No5)Regulations2021

The second para:

Furthermore, Sections 87 and 89 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 require drivers to hold licences; and prevent the issue of a licence without a test being passed. The Secretary of State is not empowered to waive these requirements and to do so would require a change in law. Currently, there are no specific proposals for changes. That does not preclude their introduction at a future date.

More rubbish. The Secretary of State most definitely IS empowered to do this, as proven by what happened in 2021. It is just that despite the clear approval in the original consultation, the Minister can't be arsed.

And now, there is a GE so, there are no MPs. I doubt any new government will be willing to do anything that would have to be reversed should we rejoining the EU. So, a great idea is dead in the water, because of useless politicians.

I have sent a very brusque response.

 

[nicholsong]

UPDATE

I have received a letter from the Minister for Roads and Local Transport, Guy Opperman MP. Well, he isn't any more as they are in purdah, and it isn't much of a response.

Simply, the reply is garbage. Written by some civil servant, who clearly didn't understand the question. Here is the meat of the answer:


I have sent a very brusque response.

Please let us see the 'brusque response'

 

[The Wino]

UPDATE

I have received a letter from the Minister for Roads and Local Transport, Guy Opperman MP. Well, he isn't any more as they are in purdah, and it isn't much of a response.

Simply, the reply is garbage. Written by some civil servant, who clearly didn't understand the question. Here is the meat of the answer:

With regards to the next steps following the publication of the Call for Evidence response summary, any restoration of rights previously granted to driving licence holders before 1997 must be carefully balanced against the potential negative impact on road safety. As such, it remains the case that these safety concerns must be properly addressed before any change is considered.

Rubbish. Safety wasn't even considered when the 2021 change (addition of 'BE' to any holder of a 'B' licence, without any additional testing. The statutory instrument went through after only 20 minutes in committee. Opposition MPs brought up safety, but the preponderance of Governing party MPs waved it through. Here is the text of the 2021 committee meeting in full, so you can read it for yourself:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-12-13/debates/ba430745-f51e-4317-ac6a-d216127b76e8/DraftMotorVehicles(DrivingLicences)(Amendment)(No5)Regulations2021

The second para:

Furthermore, Sections 87 and 89 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 require drivers to hold licences; and prevent the issue of a licence without a test being passed. The Secretary of State is not empowered to waive these requirements and to do so would require a change in law. Currently, there are no specific proposals for changes. That does not preclude their introduction at a future date.

More rubbish. The Secretary of State most definitely IS empowered to do this, as proven by what happened in 2021. It is just that despite the clear approval in the original consultation, the Minister can't be arsed.

And now, there is a GE so, there are no MPs. I doubt any new government will be willing to do anything that would have to be reversed should we rejoining the EU. So, a great idea is dead in the water, because of useless politicians.

I have sent a very brusque response.

What makes you think a brusque response is likely to achieve anything! I suppose it's a hobby but not a very interesting one.

 

[DDJC]

Please let us see the 'brusque response'

No!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DDJC]

What makes you think a brusque response is likely to achieve anything! I suppose it's a hobby but not a very interesting one.

It won't, but then nothing will. This is a dead duck.

 

[DDJC]

Please let us see the 'brusque response'

Here it is. I wasn't being awkward! I was just livid. I installed a new M2 drive into my computer and cloned it from the SSD. Having sent the email to my MP, I couldn't find it. I have since had reason to mess about with my boot order and found that it was sent on the cloned drive.

Anyway, this is what I sent. I should stress that I don't really care whether folk agree with me or not, or feel that some MPs deserve any sort of reverence or respect. Just remember that her reply was sent to me on the afternoon before Parliament was dissolved, so she did not have to even read my response. That to me, is supremely disrespectful.

----

Dear Xxxxx

Sorry, but that is a 'fob-off', not an answer. Decades ago, I used to write responses to constituent MP letters and can tell you that this is written by a civil servant, who either doesn’t understand the question, or believes that I don't understand what I am asking; or that haven't done the research behind it.

Firstly,

With regards to the next steps following the publication of the Call for Evidence response summary, any restoration of rights previously granted to driving licence holders before 1997 must be carefully balanced against the potential negative impact on road safety. As such, it remains the case that these safety concerns must be properly addressed before any change is considered.

In 2021, less than three years ago, Rt Hon Trudy Harrison laid the 'Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) (Amendment) (No. 5) Regulations 2021', which was then made on 15th December 2021, coming into force a day later on 16th December 2021. It was debated in the Delegated Legislation Committee, under the Chair of Peter Dowd MP. The text of which is here:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-12-13/debates/ba430745-f51e-4317-ac6a-d216127b76e8/DraftMotorVehicles(DrivingLicences)(Amendment)(No5)Regulations2021

You might remember since you were on that committee and in the room, on the day. It lasted twenty whole minutes during which the Labour committee members put forward several points about safety. However, owing to the preponderance of Conservative committee members, such concerns were noted, but had no effect on the decision. The SI was agreed and laid two days later.

Therefore, any argument of 'safety' being a reason to not do it, is risible, in light of the 2021 Statutory Instrument. It is clearly about whether the Minister, or more correctly, his civil servants, are so inclined.

Secondly,
Furthermore, Sections 87 and 89 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 require drivers to hold licences; and prevent the issue of a licence without a test being passed. The Secretary of State is not empowered to waive these requirements and to do so would require a change in law.

Not empowered? Really? Did this response pass by anyone in authority, before being sent to you? Did you read it before it was forwarded by Toby to me?

It is complete nonsense, to say that the Secretary of State is not empowered to waive this requirement. In 2021, a licence requirement was waived by an SI, laid by a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport. So, unless Mr Opperman has fewer powers than Ms Harrison, it is just ludicrous.

Of course, it would require a change of law. As it did when the law was changed to award the towing component 'BE' to all 'B' license category holders in 2021. It was done in three days, albeit during covid, but it proves it can be done.

Thirdly,
Currently, there are no specific proposals for changes. That does not preclude their introduction at a future date

So why hold a consultation? Why then, having held a consultation, and receiving a 65% approval response, go against it? I undertake consultations myself and I know they aren't a vote. Even so, to go against a clear result shows a lack of something. Courage? Common sense? Maybe simply the will to be innovative?

One of my forum colleagues (this question and the progress of it, is on a national forum of more than 50,000 motorhome enthusiasts) has suggested that the reason why the Government seems so reticent is that to make such a change is to make any future re-entry into the EU easier. I really do hope not, but this response from the SoS, makes me inclined to agree with them.

I would like a response if time permits, but this close to a GE, I suspect you and your team are working hard to try and keep the Liberal and Reform vote share down. A big job. I am a lifelong Conservative voter, but this time, I am running out of reasons to vote Conservative in July. This inadequate and somewhat patronising response really doesn't help.

Yours sincerely,

DDJC

 

[Coolcats]

Apparently the Queen is the only person without a driving licence who is allowed to drive anything she likes on any roads.

Erm she’s like the Dodo as she is pushing up the daisies therefore you right she doesn’t have a driving licence but would be able to drive a ghostly carriage anywhere she wishes….

 

[DDJC]

Erm she’s like the Dodo as she is pushing up the daisies therefore you right she doesn’t have a driving licence but would be able to drive a ghostly carriage anywhere she wishes….

You should remember that when Speedy posted, Her Majesty the Queen was still living. Sadly, she passed away four days after that post.

 

[Coolcats]

You should remember that when Speedy posted, Her Majesty the Queen was still living. Sadly, she passed away four days after that post.

like many here who occasionally respond to a post that was done much earlier and didn’t notice the date so apologies to all including SpeedyDux and Liz

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}