Beta This is a new service and it is still being tested. Tell us about a problem.

Parliament's record since 1997: debates, questions, statements, votes, bills, committees and members' interests

Where MPs Stand

Sourced briefings on the record of Parliament

Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill

Public Bill Committee, 14 March 2017.

Examination of Witnesses

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Welcome. TheQ Bill was originally being talked about colloquially as the modern transport Bill—a Bill to look at the challenges facing particularly, but not exclusively, road transport in the decades to come. Parts 1 and 2— those dealing with road transport—focus on two main issues: the insurance liability of automated vehicles and the provision of electric charging infrastructure by big retailers. Do you think those are the right things for the Bill cover, and are there things that should be in the Bill that are not included?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Thank you. That is very useful.

The Government’s target is that all new vehicles on the road should be ultra low emission vehicles—zero-emissions, in fact—by 2050. How far do you think this Bill will contribute to that target? On current trends, we are a long way off that target at the moment. What do you think are the other barriers to the take-up of ultra low emission vehicles, or we could also say—more broadly—connected vehicles? There is quite a crossover between those two agendas. How do you think these other barriers can be best overcome?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

I want to recognise the progress that we have made in this country, but could I press you on the 2050 date, which is 33 years away? A quarter of all of Norway’s vehicles are either electric or hybrid. China has, I think, 517,000 new energy vehicles, as they call them, on the road, and last year there were 800,000 charging points, notwithstanding the fact that it is a larger country. Thirty-three years is quite a long way off. I would like to press both Mr Wong and Mr Naberezhnykh on how we might turbo-charge this, perhaps adding a bit more to the three As that Mr Wong has told us aboutQ .

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

I will move on to the mixed use of roadways in the intervening period. Clearly one of the challenges is the Q new technology coming on to the roadways while the old technology is still using them. Has anybody done any thinking about the regulatory implications of that?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q A couple of things have arisen from what witnesses have said. If I can call you David 1 and David 2, on insurance, David 1 helpfully used the word “compensation”. Presumably the key is to make sure that any injured party enjoys the same circumstances as they do now, and then anything else that happens does so invisibly to them. The injured party in any circumstance essentially gets what they get now; is that right?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q Quite. So, the delayed dispute disadvantage that you described, which might affect the ordinary motorist, pedestrian or whoever is involved in the incident, will effectively be invisible. My next question is to the other David. We have been talking about charging infrastructure. Should we have included powers for refuelling points for other low-carbon infrastructure? That came up in earlier consideration of the Bill. The technology is still developing and emerging. There are several competing low-emission technologies. What do you think about that?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

I want to ask about that specific point. There are obviously at the moment two competing power vectors for electric vehicles—hydrogen and batteries—and the Government are rightly saying that they are agnostic. Much of the Bill is agnostic, with much of the emphasis on battery-charging points. Is there a danger that industry could be compelled to spend a lot of money plastering the country with battery-charging points only to realise that battery vehicles are the equivalent of the fax machine—a temporary technology—and that fuel cells will overtake them within a fairly short period and the infrastructure will become redundantQ ?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q As the owner and driver of a semi-autonomous plug-in hybrid, I get incredibly frustrated at the lack of a battery-charging network. It strikes me that the hydrogen fuel cell requires the minimum of behavioural change from the consumer. I would fill up my fuel-cell car the same as I would fill up my current car. A hydrogen nozzle would just be another nozzle on the fuel dispenser. Is the development of that technology accelerating? Some countries are way ahead of us, right? On that basis, is your view that the slow uptake of fuel cell vehicles in this country is because of the lack of technology or because of the lack of fuel? If there was a fuelling infrastructure across the UK, would it be the natural uptake for the consumer, given the lack of behavioural change required?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q I get that chicken and egg point. For the Committee’s information, I used to be the chairman of the London Hydrogen Partnership, preparing the capital for this economy in the future. The same assumption does not seem to apply to battery electric vehicles. The Government are willing to put in the recharging network for battery electric vehicles, but not, seemingly, for hydrogen.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q I understand that viewpoint. There are obviously large original equipment manufacturers that have made a decision about batteries and are therefore lobbying heavily on that, but some large ones—Toyota and Hyundai—have made a decision to go down the route of fuel cells. Given that the Government should be agnostic on these issues, should they also be agnostic about the regulations in the Bill for taking the power to compel providers of charging points, for instance at motorway service stations? In other words, when they compel someone to provide a fast charging point for a battery, should they at the same time compel them to provide hydrogen refuelling? If they just compel a battery recharging network, it will be a VHS or Betamax situation.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q So you think the Government should predict and provide, rather than be agnostic about technology.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

IQ cannot see anything in the Bill that would change who is licenced to drive a vehicle. In terms of future-proofing, one can envisage that people under the age of 17 or people with significant visual impairment could be, to use the current verb, “driving” automated vehicles. Should that future-proofing be provided for in the Bill, Mr Williams, and if so, what insurance issues would there be, say, for a seven-year-old alone in an automated vehicle?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q The insurance provisions in the Bill would be sufficient to cover what I think you call a level 5 vehicle, which could be carrying a seven-year-old on their own.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

IQ want to explore some issues of public confidence in the potential uptake of autonomous vehicles and get your views on whether the Bill goes far enough to set the scene. Given that the technology is available, what measures are required to make the public accept it and want to take it up? We have heard about the confusion and resistance, perhaps, because of the different approach to electric vehicles, but what do you think is required for the future in the Bill?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q Very briefly, in terms of public confidence and liability issues, you mentioned safety. Do you feel the Bill should address public confidence in the maintenance of vehicles? How will that be conducted across the different standards?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

IQ am conscious that cars can be converted to use LPG if they are petrol. It seems to me that potentially they could be converted to use hydrogen, as well. Mr Wong, is that something that the industry has considered?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q To be clear, can you explain why we cannot get carbon below 75 grams when we are burning hydrogen? If we burn hydrogen, we get water. Where does the carbon come in?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Okay, I see the point you are making. What if one were to convert a car to run exclusively on hydrogen? Would that achieve zero emissions?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q I did not mean fuel cell, but an internal combustion engine running exclusively on hydrogen. Why could you not do that?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q I don’t want to labour this too much because I have other questions. The point I am making—

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q The point I am making is that a car with an internal combustion engine could be converted to run on hydrogen as an internal combustion engine, could it not?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Okay. I’ll move on from hydrogen in the interests of time. My other point is security. I am a former software engineer. I have got two points about software. First, have you considered cybersecurity and the risks of cars being hacked and people finding themselves driving to destinations they did not intend to go to?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q So is there a provision missing from the Bill in relation to cybersecurity?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Finally, on tampering, the point I made on Second Reading was that that section of the Bill that can exclude or limit an insurance liability after alterations to the vehicle’s operating system, or a failure to install software updates to the vehicle’s operating system, is a drafting point. The provision should simply state “software” rather than “operating system”, because there is firmware and there will be application software. You are nodding, Mr Naberezhnykh. Can I ask you to put on the record whether that is correct and the Bill should be drafted in terms of software and not only the operating system?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q You were nodding, Mr Naberezhnykh.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

I’llQ be very brief. The Bill introduces the new concept we are moving to—the exposure to manufacturers’ liability. Has the Bill got it right in terms of the balance between insurers’ and manufacturers’ liability? Secondly, Mr Wong talked about accessibility cost. The cost of insurance will be key. Is the insurance industry ready for this? Clearly, premiums should be cheaper if we are getting errorless driving, but is the insurance industry sophisticated enough and ready enough to make that offer to consumers in the first instance? Lastly, on the issue of updates, does that present fresh exposures to manufacturers for the duration of the life of that vehicle on every software update iteration? Have you given any thought to how that plays in the context of current consumer protection legislation and issues of limitation? Does that now cause us to revolutionise the way we look at people purchasing vehicles? Are they going to be out there forever with software with little or no control? Any thoughts or comments?

Richard Fuller (Conservative, Bedford)

WithinQ its scope, does this Bill do enough to position the UK as a global leader in vehicle technology? If not, what is missing? If you do not have the time to answer, maybe you can email me.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

IQ wanted to cover the issues of liability a little bit further, but I suspect we are going to run out of time before I can get an answer to those—in particular situations where there might be, for example, someone who is incapacitated in the vehicle. If they are incapacitated because of ill health, or for other reasons such as alcohol consumption, where would the liability sit, with such issues? Does the legislation need to go into more detail about some of those other causes? You mentioned the maintenance regime earlier.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q Good morning. Do you think there is too much emphasis in the Bill on the battery as a vector for powering electric cars as opposed to the hydrogen fuel cell? Should there be equivalence in the Bill from the Government, so that every time they compel, for instance, a motorway service station provider to provide a plug-in charge point, they should also compel them to provide hydrogen?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q So all three of you believe that the Government should pick a winner at this stage and put their muscle behind that. Does that not run the risk that in time—as you say, this is a pathway to a fuel cell—we will end up with tonnes of useless copper in the ground within a relatively short space of time as people switch to hydrogen refuelling?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q Hydrogen cars are of course electric—it is about the storage of the electricity.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q It is not the entire industry. Toyota are not doing that.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q The Mirai is a fuel cell car.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q This is my final question. There are some countries who disagree with that. The Dutch are spending a lot of money on a hydrogen fuel network across their whole country, as are the Germans.

Gareth Snell (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent Central)

Thank you, Chair. If the Government were to pick a winner at this stage, do we not run the risk of skewing future research and development investment by saying to developers, “The traditional battery is the route we are going down”? If hydrogen is 10 years away, we run the risk of it becoming further away because we are not putting the investment into it now to ensure that technology is comparable in the futureQ .

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q I think that you just hit on the nub of the matter. A board director has major capital investments to protect, which means that they are inclined to stay within trammels once a technology is established. That is very much the point that my hon. Friend the Member for North West Hampshire has been making: there is a danger that we could end up choosing the wrong technology because a whole system of incentives sets up people to stick with electric.

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

I have a few questions from a pre-selected list. It is probably best to ask about electric charging, to follow on from the discussion. The Government say that electric charging infrastructure makes more sense just now, and that hydrogen is still a wee way off. Can the panel advise what has been learnt today about the required structure of the charging network needed? Will the Bill and the current regime ensure that there will be adequate numbers of charging points in each part of the country?Q

On Second Reading we heard about the gathering of statistics on the current variance in the number of charging points. Orkney, for example, has many more charging points than some big towns in England. Also, is there a need for a uniform way to access charging points? Is the legislation as proposed sufficient for that? I rolled quite a few questions into one.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

I have a follow-up question on the infrastructure for charging points. Does more consideration need to be given in the Bill to connecting with different modes of transport—an intermodal approach? Or is it sufficient just to say, “There shall be charging pointsQ ”?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

For example, electric vehicles being able to connect with hubs at airports, railways, ports and so forth. Is enough thought being given to how the network will develop?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

I want to ask about the effect of demand on the grid. You dealt with it after I signalled my intention to ask the question, but further to that, does the industry need to think a bit about how it could incentivise people charging at different points? There is a history of this, with Economy 7 and all kinds of other things. Are there ways in which the industry could respond by encouraging people to charge in the way you describe? On the point about the distribution of infrastructure, what about rural areas? The Bill provides powers for the Government to do more. Have we done enough or could we do more to ensure the spread of infrastructure? It is fine to have these things in supermarkets and at motorway service stations, but that does not really help my constituents in Surfleet Seas End or Gedney Drove End, who are a very long way from either. What do you think?Q

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q The essence of your point is that the Bill and the debate that it stimulates will encourage innovation and catalyse the demand management tools that you describe.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

IfQ , over the next five years, 10% of new vehicles were electric and each of them, on average, did 10,000 km a year, 10,000,000 km per year would be driven in electric vehicles. This is a question for Mr Stewart. What is that as a percentage of UK electricity generation at the moment? You may not be able to reply today, but perhaps you will tell us. I am a bit worried that you will encourage all these electric vehicles and then the grid falls over, so I need to get some idea of proportionality.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q What percentage is that of total UK demand?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q That is 12% or 13% of total electricity generation.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q Hang on—but we still have to generate the electricity. For shorthand, this is just a kind of Economy 7 approach to the issue.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q Do you think that the market will handle it, in terms of a tariff regime that incentivises midnight charging, or do you think that there needs to be regulatory intervention by the legislator—to spread that load, literally?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q No, it is not that. I am saying that one way of doing it is regulation over the power supply and to say that you have got to make these incentives available for midnight charging. Should that be regulatory, to bring it about, or do you think the market will do that?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Mr Evans in an earlier answer described the purpose of the Bill being to take reserve powers to allow stepping in to stimulate the right kind of infrastructure where the market does not provide it already. May I press you a little more on what that is, and on whether the Bill is hitting the right target? The stress within the Bill is on the provision of charging infrastructure by what it describes as “large fuel retailers.”

A lot of the discussion we have had so far has been about the importance of having rapid availability of charging points, and sometimes smart charging points, in a much more dispersed area than what might be described as large fuel retailers—typically, the motorway service areas. Is the emphasis on that right? If it is not the right emphasis, do those powers need to be applied more broadly? If those reserved powers are applied more broadly, what safeguards need to be in the Bill to ensure that unreasonable regulatory requirements are not put on a whole dispersed range of potential electricity suppliers?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

The whole discussion has been predicated on the basis of saving the planet. What about reducing emissions? In the context of automated vehicles and vehicles generally, it is all about their obsolescence, not about sustainability. Given that we have talked about the updating of automated vehicles and the relationship of manufacturers with the end user throughout the duration, are we missing a trick here? Though there is nothing in the Bill that requires software updates, necessarily there will be that relationship.

Should we not be thinking about a new way of using automated and electric vehicles across the piece? Should we be having people owning vehicles, or should we be making the offer for that relationship to be maintained so that it is a sustainable product that can be revisited? At the moment there is going to be an obligation to keep in touch with these automated vehicles for their lifetime. We heard in earlier evidence that there will come a point where that is cut off. Are we talking about an opportunity for a whole new way of using the services provided by an independent, personal mode of transport?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Beginning with Quentin Willson, we are aware of the 2050 date that the Government have for all cars and vans to be zero-emission. My understanding for why that date was picked is that it is linked to the need to decarbonise the UK. To what extent do you think the legal issues that the United Kingdom is having with air quality at the moment mean that there might be a case for revisiting the speed with which we try to electrify the market? At the same time, I would be interested in your comments on what is happening internationally. I mentioned Norway and China earlier. There are different models and approaches that may not be suitable for the United Kingdom, but I would be interested if you could speak to air quality and the international perspective on these issues.

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q I think your thesis is a sound one, but may I press you first on the date and secondly on the international question?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q Mr Stewart, did you want to come in?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q May I just press you on the numbers? I am very interested that you refer to 1 million vehicles by the early 2020s. Last September, we had 87,000 ultra low electric vehicles on our roads, so it is quite a leap to 1 million in four or five years’ time.

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q What is your near-term target for, say, 2020?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q It is quite confusing to talk about percentages of new car sales. What is that in numbers of vehicles on the roads?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

To try to get a more rapid pace of development towards meeting the 2050 target, we have talked about infrastructure as part of that mix and about tackling anxiety—Quentin referred to that—and trying to ensure that consumers are not scared about electric vehicles, which can be good to drive. The third element is, in a sense, disincentives to drive other than ultra low or zero emissions vehicles through beefing up the MOT test and whatever.Q

The other thing is the carrot that goes with that stick. What are the right consumer incentives that could be put in place to encourage the take-up of electric vehicles? Let us face it: at the moment, they are pricey, so many buyers—certainly private buyers—will not be able to afford an electric or other ultra low emissions vehicle. What do you think about the changes there have been in Government policy on that, where measures such as the plug-in car grant have come down rather than gone up?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Is that not a double-edged one? For the market in new electric vehicles to take off, the fleet market will be important to that, and one thing that will be important to it is some certainty over residual values. Therefore, the low residual values at the moment, which might be an incentive to the private car buyer, are a disincentive to the big take-up of new EVs by fleets. Is that fair?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Perhaps you could answer a question about the idea of Government action on consumer incentives. Is there more that could be done? What should be the targets?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q Forgive me; in relation to the cycles that we are talking about in introducing new technology, as you correctly identified Quentin, the way we are going is towards transport as a service rather than as an item. If that is so, then presumably automatic vehicles will, rather like those vacuum cleaners you get in homes, be able to drive themselves to a car park somewhere, charge themselves up during the downtime and come back out again, at which point we are talking about investing an enormous amount of public money into an infrastructure system that will, within 20 years—you were referring to 2040—be redundant. That is quite a short timescale for large-scale infrastructure investment to be redundant.

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q But presumably they will be plugging themselves in, rather than the current vehicles that require somebody to get up, pick up a wire and stick it into a vehicle.

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q I am not sure that is necessarily to come. It is not beyond the wit of man to imagine that a car pulls up into a dock, and a little arm goes out. That is not the structure that we are intending to build right now.

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q What would you change in the Bill to make sure that that level of infrastructure change is more active?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q Is the technology used to operate autonomous vehicles safe and reliable at present?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q On roll-out and testing, is further testing suggested? One of the suggestions made on Second Reading was that the vehicles have not been tested in snow conditions yet, and there was a suggestion that different weather variables may need to be looked at. Robert gave the example of a busy Fulham Road at 7 o’clock at night. One example I gave on Second Reading was the single-track roads in Scotland, on which, if two vehicles drive head-on, somebody has to make the decision to back up to the nearest layby. Are there things like that that still need to be robustly looked at?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q It is good to hear you make the case for us being pre-eminent in this field. The Government are certainly determined to make this country a world leader. Returning to the issue of infrastructure, what are your views on on-street charging infrastructure? We spoke a bit about petrol stations, service stations, supermarkets and so on. Other places—Paris is a good example—have done quite a lot of work on spreading on-street charging infrastructure quite evenly across the city. What more could Government do on that?

In that spirit, what about the design of these charging points? Governments have not been entirely hopeless in past decades on that—one thinks of the Gilbert Scott telephone box, the Belisha beacon or the post box. In recent years it has perhaps been not so good, but we can do good things. Should we think more about the design of the charging points and what they look like, to make them instantly recognisable, iconic and widely respected and admired as such?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Welcome. I have two sets of questions. The first is probably principally to Mr Woodall and Ms Sayers, and the second is principally to Mr Nash. On the Bill’s provisions on electric charging points, I think it is fair to say that your two organisations have been rather more critical of what the Government are suggesting than a number of others. Can you outline why you think they are going in the wrong the direction with the provisions on charging infrastructureQ ?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q The Bill refers to “large fuel retailers”. Evidence that we heard this morning rather suggested that what will make or break the expansion of electric charging infrastructure is much broader than motorway service areas. There was a lot of discussion about supermarkets, what to do around on-street parking and smart charging at home. I will press you a bit further on whether your reservations about the parts of the Bill relating to electric charging are concerns about Ministers being given regulation-making powers to mandate others to provide charging points to certain specifications. Or do you basically accept that principle, but think that the provisions are targeted wrongly in focusing on large fuel retailers?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Can I can come to Mr Nash on a different area? In the written evidence you provided, you put quite a lot of emphasis on the importance of training and accreditation for people working on these charging points and autonomous vehicles in the future. Could you say a little bit more about your concerns?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Could you outline how it would work? In other words, how would the Government, or whoever, define the vehicles that would require licensed people to work on them, and what things they would need to work on? For example, some might say you should not have to be licensed in order to check the tyres; that is different from working on the electrics. There is potential for this to be a difficult area for definition.

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

I have a question for Ms Sayers and Mr Woodall. I understand your concerns, because it is quite a change to your business model, but are you not missing out on future potential? Given that we all expect this to be a growing and significant market, do you not want to be part of it, to capture that revenue? Are you not looking at other ways to make money around this, reimagining your business model a bitQ ?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q Thank you. I have a final question for Mr Nash. Hearing about the training needs of the industry, what preparation is going on in schools and further education colleges to set up courses so that we have enough skilled technicians to service these vehicles in future?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

I want Ms Sayers to clarify a bit. The supermarket I go to every week is, I suspect, like quite a lot of them. It has a large car park—it is one of the major multiples—and alongside but distinct from that car park is a petrol station, which is branded by the supermarket but is a Shell station. AsQ my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Richard Burden) said, the Bill gives “large fuel retailers” certain responsibilities. Would your members prefer the wording, “large retailers”, to make that clearer? In the supermarket car park, people may typically leave their car for 30 minutes. I am thinking of those old westerns where people hitch up their horse outside the saloon—people hook up their car, grab a trolley, go in to do their 30-minute shop and, when they come out and unplug it, they have had a fast charge. The charging points would therefore be better placed in each parking bay for the supermarket proper, which is not a large fuel retailer at the moment. Is that more consonant with the way in which your members are thinking?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

TheQ word “fuel” in “large fuel retailers” is causing you to scratch your head a bit?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

“Large retailers” would be more palatable for your members. Am I rightQ ?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Thank you. That is very helpful.

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q This is a question for Edward, and then perhaps Steve. Given the need to ensure that we have breadth in the charging infrastructure—not just number, but location—is it not important that we also base charging points in rural places, village shops and small post offices, rather than concentrating them in places that already have charging points? Similarly, is it not also important that we work with small garages, rather than simply the major garages, to avoid creating an uneven distribution of charging points that would be a major barrier to entry to the market for many potential consumers? Would you like to deal with that one before I come on to my second question?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q We would not want to exaggerate or exacerbate the trend towards fewer places at which to buy fuel and food. Steve, on your point about skills, this morning, at a roundtable with the industry, the point was made that this might act as a spur to people who were keen to get into the industry. The excitement of the new technology, and of being part of an important, cathartic change, might attract more recruits. Have you come to any judgment on that and, if not, how can we make that happen, as it is surely a good thing?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q We heard from a witness this morning who suggested that we should have roadshows—demonstrations of electric vehicles in different localities—and that once people had tasted the fruit, they would want more of it. That might also apply to people who want work in the industry. Is this not about marketing in a sense?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Good. Thank you.

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

I should declare an interest. I am honorary fellow of the Institute of the Motor Industry. It is non-pecuniary, but I thought I had better put that on the record.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

IQ want to ask a question similar to that asked by the Minister. Earlier, we were talking about the need to look not just at fuel stations as the only charging point locations. There is an issue of unintended consequences, arising perhaps from a lack of strategy and thinking over the deployment of charging points. Similar to the situation with village shops, in your view, is there a risk if we concentrate, for example, on large retailers, that we could see a further impact on high streets because there would be a disincentive to go there? A follow-up question would be, do you believe that enough work has been done and consideration given to other technologies such as in-road inductive charging as a possible solution to those conundrums?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q Can I press you for some thoughts on other charging technologies? That was the last part of my question.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Mr Woodall, if I understood correctly—I listened very carefully to the answer about business models, because the same question occurred to me—you said you do not wish to be forced, but you would be happy to be paid one way or another to take charging stations. I am not surprised, but you did not mention profit as an incentive to provide this service to consumers. Can you elaborate? Why did you not mention the potential to make a profit out of chargingQ ?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Is it just not profitable to provide charging to people?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q That is what I imagined. To make a profit, you need to get people through as swiftly as possible, get them in the shop spending as much money as possible, and then on they go. Hopefully, they are happy and have had the service they want.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Suppose you had an energy source that could be changed quickly, instead of over half an hour, would your current business model work? If, for example, we used hydrogen, as we were discussing this morning, your business model would continue to work in the same way, would it not?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Does anybody else wish to add anything on that point? No? Thank you very much.

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

EarlierQ , in the discussion with Rob, there was discussion about phraseology—about large fuel retailers or just retailers—and an issue with forecourts. I want to clarify something. I am not sure if forecourts are mentioned in the Bill, so is that a red herring? Is it not going to be up to the retailers to site the charging points where they are most convenient?

Following on from the previous question, if you are not blocking the forecourt, a rapid charger may take 30 minutes, but is that not an opportunity for sales if it is the shops that make all the money? I would have thought that for somebody who is travelling, if it is an intermediate store, it would be an ideal opportunity to park and charge their car, go into the shop, buy a newspaper or a magazine and a few snacks, sit in their car, then move on. Is there not a business opportunity there?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

IQ want to ask about brevity. Mr Woodall, I have to confess that I cannot ever remember spending more than five or 10 minutes in a convenience store—presumably, that is why they are called convenience stores, because it is convenient and quick—so I cannot quite see the model of me pulling up in my electric car, plugging in for the half an hour or even 15 minutes, and spending that time in the convenience store, particularly when the number of spaces will necessarily be limited. There will not be 15 or 20 spaces; you might perhaps have two, which might therefore be full the whole time. Do your members really see this as a big business opportunity or is there a Government subsidy available so you might as well take it?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q So on your earlier point on the greater investment required for hydrogen, given that hydrogen requires no behavioural charge—you refuel in about the same amount of time as you do a current internal combustion engine—the throughput of people might be greater, so the return on investment could be higher. Rather than having two people sitting there for half an hour, you might have 30 people going through who would therefore spend commensurately more, even though the initial investment might be more.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q That is what everybody keeps saying. There is a body of us who do not necessarily buy that, but okay, I understand that.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q I understand that. I have one other question, which is about the very high voltage required for fast charging. On an existing petrol or diesel forecourt, you are not even supposed to use your mobile phone because of the possibility of some kind of arc or charging gas. Is there a safety issue with the incredibly high voltage that is required to charge a car in half an hour and the possibility of arcing in an atmosphere of gasoline fumes?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q There are six actually.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Good afternoon, gentlemen. Thanks for coming. I have a number of questions. At the beginning of the Bill, we are told that automated vehicles are what the Secretary of State says are automated vehicles. Clearly, some thought has gone into the criteria for so-designated vehicles. What are your own thoughts and observations on how we can be sure we are getting that set of criteria correctQ ?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Of course, we are now entering a major shift, because we have to have insurers who are going to be picking up the tab for accidents involving automated vehicles. Presumably, as we progress, we will be getting errorless driving in automated vehicles. That is the objective, and incidents will result. Therefore, we should be looking forward to cheaper insurance policies, but that may not automatically be the case, if you pardon the pun. How progressed or how ready is the insurance industry to deliver products that would make fully automated vehicles accessible to people in terms of costings, including the cost of insuranceQ ?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Will you help me on another matter? When an accident is caused by an automated vehicle, we are told in the Bill that the insurer is liable for the damage, but when the automated vehicle is involved but is not insured, it is the owner of the vehicle who is responsible for the damage. I am wondering what your view is on whether that ought that to be the person in charge of the vehicle, rather than the owner. We might have the perverse situation of a stolen vehicle being involved in an accident but, according to this, the owner of the vehicle would be in the frame. Do you understand?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

That is really helpful.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q I do not know what your handle is on this, and that was terrific clarification, but do you not see that it is possible to interpret it in the way I did? A vehicle that has been stolen is not insured, but the owner of the vehicle is picking up the cost, not the person who stole it.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Finally from me, we are in the world of upgrades, which will present opportunities for manufacturers to continue to engage with the vehicle, in effect. I was wondering whether you had applied your minds to any future product liability exposures with the advent of new software. What does that mean in terms of those future liabilities and in terms of limitation, because current liability, once you part with the vehicle, has a 10-year limitation, although we have got some issues around extensions for people with disability insurance and so on? But if it is a product liability issue, there could be a succession of products that could give rise to liability. Is that factored into your thinking? Is it relevant? Have you dismissed it?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q You could be caught with a person with a disability, or a child, who is not subject to ordinary limitation; it would be from the date of their majority. There could be an action on the attaining of that majority and your product liability recompense from the manufacturer is effectively null and void.

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q On this insurance issue, there has been quite a lot of speculation about what might happen to the products that the industry offers, which will clearly have to evolve. We were told that again this morning. Is it your estimation that that will affect premiums? One would expect premiums to fall, given the fact that these cars will be safer; many of your claims are related to human error, after all. Is that how you see things developing? However, we are also told that many people who cannot currently drive will now be able to—the infirm, the elderly, some disabled people. In a way, that is the most exciting thing about this development. How would that affect your assessment of premiums?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q Public confidence in autonomous vehicles will be critical in terms of how quickly we can take advantage of some of the benefits that are portrayed by the industry. Given that the technology largely exists, do you feel that the Bill is going to go far enough to encourage the uptake of autonomous vehicles? I am specifically interested in whether you feel that the connectivity will allow a truly UK-wide uptake and also in rural areas, given that, as we have heard previously about electric vehicles, range and the ability to get to the destination is one of the limiting factors.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q Just to press that point about the end-to-end availability, is enough being done to ensure that you get truly wide coverage to allow people from outlying areas to get out and back again in the new technology?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q I would like to turn to clause 4, which relates to accidents resulting from unauthorised alterations or failure to update software. Hopefully, you have had a chance to look at this section of the Bill. It is all couched in terms of the operating system—interference with and failure to update the operating system. I am concerned that there are other aspects of software in a car that are relevant. Are you satisfied that the Bill is in the right shape, referring to the operating system, or would you prefer to see some other definition, in which case, what?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q We have a shared understanding of the purpose of this clause. I should say that I am a software engineer—or at least I was before I first came here—and I am slightly concerned that if this was tested in court and somebody had interfered or failed to update their firmware—a low level software—or if the driving was done by application software sitting on top of the operating system, the purpose of Bill, of which we have a shared understanding, could be defeated. You are saying that you have not formed a view on whether “operating system” is the right definition.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Fine. Thank you.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q I have three quick points for Mr Howarth. First, the Bill talks about the vehicle being insured as opposed to what currently happens, from my understanding, which is that driver is insured. So I have policy motor insurance that enables me to drive certain vehicles, including my principal one. Is the insurance industry happy with what appears to be a change in focus—that is it now on the vehicle rather than the driver?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q On that basis, is the industry also happy that the insurer is liable rather than the owner-driver which is currently the case?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q Yes, you used to be behind the scenes. For these vehicles, you would be up front. That is all right with the industry?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q The third point is on the software updates. From memory, when I bought my car, which has a touch screen on it for the radio and things, it would have cost me an extra £600 to have sat-nav put in. That is just the software because it already has the screen and the buttons and everything. I am thinking about software updates, which we have talked about, and a failure to install software updates could invalidate the insurance policy under clause 4. I understand that, but I am a bit concerned that the Bill appears to have no provisions to cap the charges for software updates. For the sake of argument, I have just spent £15,000 on a 2-year-old automated vehicle and then some software update comes in that is £1,000 and a month later they want another £1,000 out of me. If I do not do it, the thing is useless, because it is uninsurable and therefore undriveable. Do you think there should be provision for a cap on software update costs, so that vehicles do not become uninsurable and therefore driven without insurance?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q This stuff would not be optional, would it? The software update, effectively, would not be optional.

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q I just want to return to two groups that miss out on the freedom and opportunities of being able to drive. We talked about older people and disabled people but also young drivers, for whom insurance is often prohibitively expensive, running into many thousands of pounds. What analysis have you done of the advantages of connected and autonomous vehicles over and above taxis, private hire vehicles, getting an Uber? What extra benefits do you see those two groups being able to derive once this technology is established and there is widespread take-up? Have you done any analysis or thinking on the social benefits for those two particular groups?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q Has the insurance industry thought about these two groups?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q I have a couple of questions. The first one is for Ben. We have conflicting information about insurance cost. Insurance cost could be much higher because of the repair cost and the lack of people qualified to do the repairs, as well as the cost of the car itself, but there are also expectations that insurance costs will come down because there will be fewer accidents. Is it fair to say that at the moment there is just not enough information to do accurate modelling to understand what insurance figures are going to look like?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q Are there any special requirements that insurance companies would need for different testing, for example showing that people are capable of using the software or, with a semi-autonomous vehicle, when the right moment is to take action? We know that some people have trouble switching from a gear stick to manual, so this is another quantum leap. Are there any special requirements that insurance companies would like to see, going forward?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q I just wonder what input your organisations have in the testing trials that are ongoing. I know that there have been four trials in different parts of England, but I am thinking of the bigger issues. If we look at it from a Scottish perspective, we have rural roads, single-track roads and different weather conditions. There are connectivity issues, which my colleague touched on earlier. What plans are there to review the tests that are ongoing? How much more robust do the tests need to be and how is that going to be rolled out across the rest of the UK?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q You know that the Bill attempts to strike a balance between, on the one hand, doing enough not to constrain future development—indeed, to facilitate it—and, on the other hand, trying to determine what the schedule describes as an “unknowable future”. Have we got that right, or should we have done more? I draw particular attention to the relationship between connection and automation and the issues of privacy and security of data. Should we do more now, or is it enough that we take powers to do things when we know more later?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Can I go back to the definition? At the start of the session you said that the thing you welcomed in the Bill was that it would define what an automated vehicle is by whether or not that vehicle was on the list produced by the Secretary of State. Do you think that creating a definition will be simple? Where would autonomous emergency braking come into that? A large number of vehicles might have autonomous emergency braking that one would not normally define as automated vehicles. Nevertheless, autonomous emergency braking, by its nature, will take control of the car and stop it whatever the driver is doing. So would the car fitted with autonomous emergency braking need to appear on that list, because it would

“in at least some circumstances or situations”

be capable of driving itself without having to be monitored by an individual? If it were included, are we saying that this new insurance product that the Bill brings into effect is essentially going to be the norm, not the exception, much more quickly than we thought?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Is the boundary between those two as exact as you say? In a sense, with autonomous emergency braking, the driver has to monitor it. Whether the driver is monitoring it or not, that technology will take control of the vehicle.

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q What kind of consultation would you expect the Minister to go through before producing his or her list? At the moment, the Minister has complete discretion. There is nothing in the Bill that says he or she has to consult anywhere.

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

May I ask a couple of questions relating to the way that you have looked at the insurance? It seems to me that you are treating the concept of ownership as it is today, rather than as it is likely to become; transport is likely to become a service, rather than a commodity. Is that fairQ ?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q It will probably become unlikely that car companies will end up selling their cars; they will lease them for shorter and shorter periods, as many car companies already do with their corporate fleets. It would seem sensible to have a look at that.

Perhaps we can go straight on to insurance. The safety systems before full autonomy—what you are calling level 4 cars—

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q Various cars, while not fully automated, already warn you if you are going to cross a white line or are getting too close to the car in front. As automation levels come up, are insurance companies intending to offer better premiums?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q As the Bill comes in and starts to make greater provision for understanding who is liable, the question of ownership kicks in: is the driver responsible for upgrading the software, or does Toyota or whoever maintain ownership throughout? As semi-autonomy moves more towards full autonomy, you get an opportunity, but you also get this question: at what point do you start pricing out real drivers of real cars, if you see what I mean?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q Of course, as the number of incidents goes down, premiums will presumably fall for everybody. Given that car insurance is the most lucrative area of the insurance market, have you done any work on what this will mean for house insurance and various other forms of insurance, on the grounds that it seems unlikely that your members will voluntarily lay profit aside?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

It makes up about 50% of insurance profits in the UK.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Returning to the issue of software, clause 4 devotes a lot of attention to when insurers will not be picking up the can—something that we are familiar with. Can you say a little bit about how you are expecting software to be updated? What is the process for doing that? We all update our phones; we plug them in and press “install”, and the phone tells us when it is done. What is the current state of knowledge? Where are we, scientifically, on achieving that?

Linked to that, what responsibilities should there be on manufacturers to provide updates and tell the owners or users of vehicles that those updates have to be made? As I read it, there is nothing in the Bill that places any obligations on manufacturers to do that. A lot of time is devoted to when the software has not been updated, but where is the principal obligation for the manufacturer to do it? There are a lot of questions, but I am wondering whether that loops back to the definition and whether that needs attention to ensure that we have addressed the obligation. So how is it done and what are the obligations on the manufacturer?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Have we got this the wrong way around, then? Surely you have to establish how something happens before you start dealing with its insurance consequences. This is putting the cart before the horse, isn’t it?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q If we are getting into a discussion on clause 4 about failures to update software, where is your starting point? You are basically telling me, “Ah, we’ll do that somewhere else separately. We will have to get those regulations on board.” All that I am suggesting is that that is out of sync and we should be looking at the processes first, at least for what we are expecting, before we start dealing with the insurance consequences.

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Really, what the manufacturer would say is that if a vehicle has not been updated for one reason or another, or if they discover some other technical reason to shut it down, they will make sure that vehicle does not shift. Is it within the contemplation of the industry to take it that far?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q I have a couple of questions. We have a problem in this country with uninsured cars. Given that these cars are likely to be connected to the matrix in some way, do you think that it would be sensible for the Government to take a power to require that the car has to check whether it is insured before it moves? When I go and buy my tax disc, the system checks that the car is insured before it allows me to do so. Should these cars be required to do the same?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q Why?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q It is technically possible, right?

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q You seem to imply, Mr Howarth, that the insurance industry would be indifferent to the characteristics of the passenger, who need not be the driver of a level 5 car.

Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)

Q Would it be fair to say that level 5 cars might be the saviour of the rural pub? Can I drink and drive a level 5 car?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q One for Mr Howarth. What will the industry do about Northern Ireland and automated vehicles? That is not covered in the Bill.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

I do not know. I wondered whether you guys discussed it because the automated vehicle elements of the Bill do not apply to Northern Ireland, yet one would expect people in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere in the United Kingdom, to wish to have automated vehicles available to use.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

From an insurance point of view?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Okay, but from an insurance point of view, you have no concerns about Northern Ireland?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q I assume that you looked at other countries as you prepared for the Bill. Will you say a little bit about how other countries are addressing the insurance and regulatory challenges?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q What about our European partners?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q The reason this matters is that a lot people will now be thinking about booking their ferry and Eurotunnel tickets. Will we be able to take those cars abroad?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q It does not matter which hand drive a car is, does it?

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q Mr Tugendhat made an interesting point. It had not occurred to me, but if I am in my automated vehicle, which I have taken through Eurotunnel, and I am driving down a road in France and a non-automated vehicle is coming at me in the middle of the road, I do not want my British automated vehicle diving off to the left—which is what you would do to take evasive action in this country—

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Presumably, you have got GPS—

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

This is a serious point in the context of Mr Forbes’s discussing interoperability. I presume there has been a discussion about the coding—I would like reassurance about this—so that the evasive action that automated vehicles might take when faced by unsafe manoeuvres by non-automated vehicles is appropriate to the side of the road on which one drives. Otherwise, we will have a big problem, as Mr Baker will know, with software coding and so on.

Rob Marris (Labour, Wolverhampton South West)

Q Do we need legislation now, in the United Kingdom, to assist that process?

Richard Moriarty and John de Vial gave evidence.

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q May I begin by exploring some of the Bill provisions relating to the relationship between the CAA and National Air Traffic Services? Perhaps we can come on to the issues relating to the air travel organisers’ licence after that. I understand that the proposed changes have been broadly welcomed by stakeholders. I am struggling to understand how significant they are. They change the procedure through which the CAA can modify regulations under which NATS operates. Do we have any sense of how many of them are likely to happen and how often? The impact assessment says that the scale of the issue with which we are dealing is highly uncertain. Can you give us any guidance on the scale of the changes?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Looking ahead to the next few years, for the moment we will be part of the single European sky framework. That, presumably, could bring a number of initiatives under it that would be relevant to the provisions in this Bill. Am I right about that? What could the impact of Brexit be on this area of the Bill?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q So there should not be any impact at all?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q The impact assessment, again, talks about the likelihood of there being what it describes as a “light-touch” review of these new arrangements after five years and “a full review” after 10. I must confess that I could not see reference to either of those in the Bill. What was your understanding of the review arrangements around these changes?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q But the principle of a review after a period of time would be something—

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Can we move on to the ATOL questions within the Bill? Can you describe what the changes mean in practice for consumers and holidaymakers?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Are those companies covered by that protection because they are established in the UK?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Wherever they sell?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Looking at it the other way round, if there is a company that is established in another part of the European Union but sells into the UK, I understand that the package travel directive would say Q that the protections that it should offer would be those that would be applicable in that member state, rather than those that would be applicable in the UK.

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Is there any potential downside to that? For any packages sold into the UK by companies established outside of the UK, could the protection be less than it is now?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Will it raise it to the level of ATOL protection?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q A final couple of questions from me, and it is back to Brexit again. A lot of the changes in the Bill arise out of the package travel directive. From what you have said, some of our domestic ATOL protection is superior to what is in the package travel directive anyway, but are there any implications of Brexit for what this Bill brings in?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q The Bill provides for an air travel trust to be set up by the Secretary of State, but also leaves open the possibility that that could be split into a number of trusts if circumstances change. Could you tell us a bit about what that is all about and the kind of circumstances?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q I would be grateful if I could explore one other area with you briefly. One thing that raised a number of eyebrows when this Bill was published was the fact that it did not say anything about the regulation or safety of drones. How do you see the existing regulatory framework, and if we were going to look to improve that framework, who do you think should be responsible, for example, for bringing in geo-fencing?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

On the issue of penalties in respect of ATOL, you will know that this Bill attempts to amend the Transport Act 2000. In respect of section 225 of the Transport Act 2000, you will also know that there is a responsibility to prepare and publish a policy statement on the use of penalties. How do you envisage these penalties taking shape, and how will you ensure that their use is proportionateQ ?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q The other question I was going to ask reflects the point made by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield about the post-Brexit deal on travel. We have been a leading player—one might say a trailblazer—in terms of providing protection for holiday makers, haven’t we? Post-Brexit, it is really important that we retain consumer protection across Europe. What are your views on that?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q Some UK operators have stated that they feel that passenger rights go too far. Which passenger rights do you feel are most contentious in the industry?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q I would like to come to NATS, which I understand expressed concern about economic uncertainty and market volatility following the Brexit vote. It thought that air travel demand and, therefore, its revenues might suffer. Has there been any evidence of that to date?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q So that we can have a better understanding of how NATS works, let me ask about the ability to extend the length of its contracts to give them greater financial certainty. What sort of length of contracts do they typically operate with London airports at the moment? What levels of extra investment would you be looking to see NATS make with longer-term contracts, because presumably, it is unable to put that in at the moment?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q To clarify our understanding, can you elaborate a little on how the CAA will take action swiftly to protect passenger and staff safety when there is a serious system failure or when some aspect of NATS’s performance is worrying to you?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Can I ask about rights in the Bill? The big change is that you make the modification and NATS has the right to appeal, as opposed to the co-determination model that we have at the moment. There is also a provision for other parties to appeal, including the owners or operators of aircraft that you consider appropriate and the owners or managers of prescribed aerodromes that you consider appropriate. I am struggling to work out who has got the right to appeal the modifications you make to NATS’s licence. What does prescribed aerodromes mean?

Examination of Witnesses

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Good afternoon, gentlemen. Could you help me with the issue of shining or directing a laser at a vehicle? The Bill as drafted states that it will be an offence to direct

“a laser beam at a vehicle which is in the course of a journey, and…the laser beam dazzles or distracts a person with control of the vehicle.”

I am concerned about that, because I have never flown a plane and I have never, to my knowledge, had a laser shined at me. I am just thinking the matter through. Is that the totality of the thing that concerns you all, or are there other instances short of being dazzled or distracted that would cause you concern and cause you to think that something ought to be an offence? Also, although such an activity may have taken place, the driver or person in control of the vehicle might have no knowledge whatsoever of it having happened. I do not understand the experience. Does someone who is in control of a vehicle experience it only when their eyes are actually dazzled, or is there another perception of the event having taken place?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Would you even have to know that it has happened for an offence to have taken place?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Thank you for that. Does anybody else want to comment on that aspect of this offence?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q Although we are not specifically restricting this discussion to aviation, because it could be another vessel, I think BALPA has suggested in evidence to the Committee that it is equally important and significant when lasers are shone at air traffic control towers. Have we got a history of that happening? Is it a significant risk? Would you prefer to see the legislation embrace air traffic control towers, rather than just vehicles, as currently described?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

I am sorry; what did you say?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Q What do you think should be happening to better control the availability of the devices themselves? What restrictions would you prefer to see in place to stop the devices being acquired?

Andy McDonald (Labour, Middlesbrough)

Finally, changing tack totally, can the police officers help me with an unrelated matter in the Bill about diversionary courses for road traffic offenders? Have you come prepared to speak about that at all? Could you give some indication of your experience of those courses, how effective they are and, just as importantly, the evidence base that you may or may not have on whether they are effective and reduce repeat offending? Are you able to comment on that?Q

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

As you know, gentlemen, the CAA says that many of the incidents involving lasers are unreported and it is probable that there are many more than those of which we currently know. Is it your view that it is a growing problem? How do you think the proposed legislation will help with reporting? If you think it does not do enough, what more could it do?Q

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q Clearly, the use of these devices in the way you have described is malevolent, but have you made any assessment of how much of this is what might be described as irresponsible, thuggish behaviour, and how much is more serious than that? Potentially, we could be talking about devices that were used by some very serious criminals indeed. What is your assessment of that? How much is this people grabbing hold of these things and causing trouble, and how much of it is planned, plotted and serious?

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

Q Okay. But of course you would be able to search on suspicion following arrest.

John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)

I see. Thank you.

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

Q I am interested in how we take further action to tackle reckless behaviour. You have said that, because of the previous legislation, it has been very difficult to get the numbers of offences that are actually being committed, but I imagine that, even if anecdotally, there is some evidence of serial offending in these cases of shining lasers at vehicles. Given that is the case, do you feel that there should be consideration within the work we are doing here on the Bill of future repeat offending to have further punishment?

Drew Hendry (Scottish National Party, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)

I should say that justice is devolved to Scotland, but I was curious about your views. Thank you.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q I want to pick up remarks that I made on Second Reading about the seriousness of the offence. As the Bill is framed, it is an offence only if the person shines or directs a laser beam at a vehicle that is in the course of a journey. As police officers, do you have adequate powers if a person is assaulted with a laser when not in a vehicle? You are nodding.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Could you be clear on why those powers would not be adequate in the case of an aircraft in flight?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q You have pre-empted what I was going to ask. Can I ask BALPA whether it is possible that an attack with a laser could cause the loss of an aeroplane?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Could you remind us of the maximum capacity of the largest aeroplanes? How many people are on a big aeroplane now?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q So it is quite conceivable that a person deliberately dazzling a pilot could put that many people’s lives at risk.

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q With that factor in mind, I have tabled an amendment to probe the Government’s position. It would double the term of imprisonment. The Bill sets out a term not exceeding five years; my amendment would take that to 10 years, because I had this point in mind. I should say that it is a probing amendment to provoke this conversation. What do you think the appropriate term of imprisonment should be for a deliberate attempt to dazzle at that point in the flight?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q In the circumstances—I ask this to the police officers—what is the appropriate maximum punishment?

Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)

Q Why only manslaughter? Why not murder, if somebody has deliberately used a laser as a weapon to dazzle pilots?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q Commander Bray, you mentioned that you have written looking for a defined power for stop and search relating to lasers.

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q For that to work, would it need to be predicated on a redefinition of lasers in some way as an offensive weapon?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q If lasers were going to be defined in some way as offensive weapons, would the kind of laser need to be defined more closely?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q But if there were to be a reclassification to make them offensive weapons, would that reclassification somehow need to define the strength of laser involved?

Richard Burden (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield)

Q At the moment, there is no need to do that because the action of pointing a laser, however strong it is, at a vehicle is the offence. Presumably, without reclassifying them as offensive weapons, if you got your power of stop and search, that would be because of suspicion that the laser would be used for—or had been used for—that purpose. But if you were simply going to say that the possession of a laser could be the possession of an offensive weapon, would that need to define the strength of the laser?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q Given your point that the power is not entirely relevant because the dazzle is so important, can you talk about the other equipment that exists with lasers today? Surveyors use lasers, and presumably there is a risk, so they must be cautious about how they use them. Driverless vehicles are likely to use lasers in different ways and various autonomous measuring equipment is likely to use lasers. Can you talk about the dangers that they pose and how they might be mitigated?

Thomas Tugendhat (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling)

Q Does the Bill affect people such as astronomers using them as you suggest?

Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)

Q We have heard that lasers are becoming more common, and you obviously support the proposed legislation. It is similar with drones, which are becoming more accessible and more common. Would you like to see proposals to ensure better regulation and safety with regard to the use of drones?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q Chief Inspector Goodwin, I think you were expressing some concern about the increase in sales of lasers recently, and the possible need to regulate their sale. Do we have any figures on recent sales of lasers? Has there been a significant increase recently, and do we have any sense of the split in sales between legitimate use—such as for eye surgery, which we just heard about—and illegitimate use?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q As a supplementary, if the legislation before us does not provide the redress that we are all urgently seeking, given the seriousness of this problem outlined by Mr Baker and others, what would be the appropriate follow-on action and within what timescale?

Andrew Selous (Conservative, South West Bedfordshire)

Q Do I detect there is a slight sense of urgency on this and we probably want to see how this legislation goes and if there is not an improvement, you would be looking to Government to review the situation again, with a view to taking further action? Is that a fair summary?

The rest of the debate is in Hansard.