Unfinished tacho business
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ALTHOUGH the occasion now seems to belong to another age, it is only four years since the industry awaited the Parliamentary vote on the subordinate legislation which, at last, would make the fitment and use of tachographs compulsory in this country. As the Transport Minister of the day, Norman Fowler, prepared for the debate, he must have hoped that no-one on the Opposition benches would quote back at him some of the critical things he had said about the instrument from those same benches when in opposition.
In the event the occasion passed off relatively quietly, and the industry started two years during which fitment was phased-in as the network of calibration stations spread. By the time use became compulsory nearly two years ago, the long years of controversy had been forgotten. The tachograph is now an accepted part of the British road transport scene — as CM had always predicted it would be.
But although the 1979 legislation was undoubtedly the major step towards compliance with the EEC legislation, it was not the whole story. And today, four years after that Commons vote, there are still outstanding matters to be dealt with.
The one which has received most publicity is the requirement of the EEC Regulation about periodic inspection. Earlier this year the Department of Transport published proposals for implementing this, but their plans were regarded by the FTA and RHA as unnecessarily elaborate and expensive. The Regulation says that the inspection "may be carried out in connection with roadworthiness tests" and the FTA in particular wants to see this done. This would mean reduced down-time, since the vehicle would only have to make one appointment to get all the jobs done.
The DTp rejects this argument — or has done so far. It pointed out that the goods vehicle test stations do not have all the equipment needed to check tachographs. Moreover, now that the stations are not to be privatised they will still be subject to Government restrictions on Civil Service manpower and expenditure. The last thing that Ministers want is an expansion of the stations' functions.
The tachograph calibration centres also have an interest. To obtain DTp approval they had to invest several thousand pounds in buildings, equipment and staff training. During the twoyear retrospective fitment programme they were busy and, one imagines, profitable. But to remain profitable after the fitment boom they need a steady supply of work. Loss of the twoyear checks would remove one source of this, and could lead to a reduction in the size of the calibration station network, especially in areas of sparse vehicle population. Such a situation would increase vehicle down-time, at least for operators in those areas.
There is also some doubt about what the Regulations actually require by way of a twoyear check. The FTA claims that what the DTp is proposing goes beyond what happens in some other EEC countries. On the other hand, some at least treat the two-year check as a full recalibration.
The debate continues. But at least the argument is out in the open. Other debates have received less publicity.
Most of these turn on Article 14 of the tachograph Regulation, No 1463/70. This lays down that the instruments "may be installed or repaired only by fitters or workshops" approved by national Governments. .
The network of 450 or so calibration stations sponsored by the tachograph manufacturers, and the staff working in them, clearly meet this requirement. But there are some grey areas.
One former grey area is now white. The DTp has recently approved a scheme under which truck and coach manufacturers can receive approval to fit tachographs on the production line and, if appropriate, calibrate them before delivery. Not all manufacturers want to bother with this, especially as in many cases calibration is ruled out by uncertainty about the tyres which will be fitted after specialist bodybuilders have completed their work. Nevertheless, the scheme now exists for those who want it.
However, one of the byproducts of the use of tachographs has been the growth of firms offering to sell operators' instruments which they have repaired or reconditioned in their own workshops. Neither the workshops nor the staff who carry out the repairs have been approved by the DTp.
These re-conditioned instruments are sold at prices well below those charged by manufacturers for new instruments.
Questions are sometimes raised about the legal position of those carrying out this reconditioning work. The wording of the EEC Regulation is (for once l quite specific. Since the workshops and their fitters have not received Government approval, it is argued that wh they are doing must contrave the Regulation.
On the other hand, it is cliff to see how the mere repair o tachograph can, by itself, be offence. Some people use th in vehicles which are outside scope of the Regulation. Sur the law cannot apply to thesd is only when the whole installation is calibrated that can be used for legal purpos that is when the quality chec needs to be made.
This problem seems likely grow in scale as the number second-hand tachographs fr scrapped vehicles increases DTp will probably come und increasing pressure to rule c the matter. At present it is powerless because the law prescribes no penalty for a breach of this particular provision. That might have t change if a large number of: standard instruments starts flood the market. But it seerr unlikely that the DTp will be any hurry to act.
Probably the most urgent need is the clarification of th terms used in the Regulatior especially those relating to operations which are exemr from its scope. The use of specialised vehicles for dooi door selling is particularly troublesome, but there are r others. Two or three of thes( have been referred to the European Court of Justice, L this is an expensive and Ion winded way of clarifying wh ought to have been better drafted in the first place.
Over and above all this flo the prospect of the Regulatil being amended as a result c seemingly endless review n being carried on by the Commission. Even when thl proposed changes finally emerge it seems inevitable1 many months will pass befc they pass into law.
As the theatre critics used say, this show will run and r Meanwhile operators must • run their businesses despite uncertainty.