The decision to introduce MOTs needs to be revoked

This deputy sent me parts of Chapter 2: Article 3 and Annex 5 to back up the deputy’s argument, but in fact when I looked at the whole of Article 3, backed up by the whole of Annex 5, in my mind it states that we can do whatever we want as long as when we enter international traffic that vehicle has a valid MOT. That’s why they could choose to have a not so stringent MOT because that was down to us. So if the vehicle remains on island there is absolutely no need for an MOT. It’s also my understanding that others, like India, Malaysia, and dare I mention Russia, that have signed up to the Vienna Convention and done nothing about it, so why can’t we? When I put my interpretation of the Vienna Convention to this deputy all contact and debate ceased. You can read Article 3 and Annex 5 for yourself below.

ARTICLE 3 Obligations of the Contracting Parties 1. (a) Contracting Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure that the rules of the road in force in their territories conform in substance to the provisions of Chapter II of this Convention. Provided that the said rules are in no way incompatible with the said provisions: (i) The said rules need not reproduce any of the said provisions which are applicable to situations that do not arise in the territories of the Contracting Parties in question; (ii) The said rules may include provisions not contained in the said Chapter II. (b) The provisions of this paragraph do not require Contracting Parties to provide penalties for any violation of those provisions of Chapter II which are reproduced in their rules of the road. 2. (a) Contracting Parties shall also take appropriate measures to ensure that the rules in force in their territories concerning the technical requirements to be satisfied by motor vehicles and trailers conform to the provisions of Annex 5 to this Convention; provided that they are in no way contrary to the safety principles governing the provisions of Annex 5, the said rules may contain provisions not contained in Annex 5. Contracting Parties shall also take appropriate measures to ensure that motor vehicles and trailers registered in their territories conform to the provisions of Annex 5 to this Convention when entering international traffic. (b) The provisions of this paragraph do not impose any obligations on the Contracting Parties with respect to the rules in force in their territories concerning the technical requirements to be satisfied by power-driven vehicles which are not motor vehicles within the meaning of this Convention.

Annex 5 TECHNICAL CONDITIONS CONCERNING MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAILERS 1. Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 3, paragraph 2 (a) and Article 39, paragraph 1 of this Convention any Contracting Party may, with respect to motor vehicles which it registers and to trailers which it allows on the road under its domestic legislation, lay down rules which supplement, or are stricter than, the provisions of this Annex. All vehicles in international traffic must meet the technical requirements in force in their country of registration when they first entered into service. 2. For the purposes of this Annex, the term ‘trailer’ applies only to a trailer designed to be coupled to a motor vehicle. 3. Contracting Parties which, in conformity with Article 1, sub-paragraph (n), of this Convention, have declared that they wish to treat as motorcycles three-wheeled vehicles the unladen mass of which does not exceed 400 kg, shall make such vehicles subject to the rules laid down in this Annex either for motorcycles or for other motor vehicles.

Now it’s my belief that the climate extremists in government will want to use this to help them towards net-zero, which of course they deny. They will use the stringent EU rules on emissions to get the hydrocarbon vehicles off the road, and as we know even brand-new vehicles struggle with these emissions tests. This will force us into all electric or hybrid vehicles, that’s those of us who can afford one, and the rest of us who will be mostly pensioners I suspect will be on yer bike, public transport or shank’s pony. There is even a certain deputy who seems to be in a hurry to begin MOTs. No one can tell another jurisdiction what to do or how to behave.

The people of Guernsey need to wake up. This is added pressure put upon pensioners and young families who are already struggling under the burden of day-to-day living. MOTs will not fill the States coffers, in fact it will mean a loss of revenue because as they pull old cars off the road there will be less revenue from hydrocarbon taxes, and all because we were told untruths. That’s why the decision taken in 2018 on MOTs needs to be revoked. I hope that there is a deputy out there who would like to take up the cause on our behalf.

M BOURGAIZE

Deputy Adrian Gabriel, vice-president of the Committee for the Environment & Infrastructure, responds:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your reader’s letter in which there are a number of misconceptions that are important to address in the interests of accuracy.

It is not correct, or even possible, that the Vienna Convention was extended to Guernsey by a single deputy acting alone.

In 2018, a policy letter was jointly brought to the States by the Committee for the Environment & Infrastructure and the Policy & Resources Committee, following the UK’s decision to leave the EU. This asked the States of Deliberation whether it agreed that the Vienna Convention should be extended to Guernsey and to put in place the necessary measures to demonstrate compliance with the convention. This was approved by a majority of States members.

It is also not correct that the Vienna Convention only requires vehicles travelling off-island to comply with certain technical standards. One of the main ideas behind the convention is that anyone travelling within jurisdictions that have signed up to the convention can have confidence that the vehicles on the road in that jurisdiction meet certain prescribed safety standards. This means that when we welcome visitors to Guernsey, they can be assured that they aren’t going to be sharing a road with a vehicle that doesn’t comply with these standards and potentially pose a risk to them and others.

Finally, the Vienna Convention has no role at all in removing petrol and diesel vehicles from the road. It is about ensuring that any vehicle, whether they are petrol, diesel, hybrid or electric, meets certain standards, mostly relating to safety.

The States voted to support the Vienna Convention’s extension to the island partly because not being part of it would have severely inhibited off-island travel for anyone in a motor vehicle.

As we are now signatories, we are obliged to introduce a proportionate, Guernsey-appropriate form of periodic vehicle testing, which will be introduced in a phased approach. The first phase of testing and inspection has been in place for a significant time, as all public service vehicles are subject to an annual inspection for the safety of their passengers and operators.

As directed by the States we have continued to move forward with this work, while consulting with the local motor industry along the way. We will provide more information on the progress of this work when there is a further update to give.