Hansard

I am pleased to speak on behalf of Scottish Labour in this debate on the Automated Vehicles Bill, and I am grateful for the work that the two committees have done in considering the bill’s implications.

The Automated Vehicles Bill, which was introduced by the UK Government last year, is intended to regulate the use of automated vehicles and to

“set the legal framework for the safe deployment of self-driving vehicles in Great Britain”.

There should be little argument as to whether the proposed legislation must be put in place. The pace of technology greatly outstrips the pace of legislation, so it is welcome that the UK Government recognises the development of automated vehicle technology and is seeking to ensure that we have in place an initial framework of regulation to govern that.

It is also important to note that the bill does not in itself allow automation to happen. Progress in automated vehicle technology will happen with or without the bill, so it is necessary that we have in place some form of regulation that sets the parameters of what is considered safe in the field.

I am aware that the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee considered the Scottish Government’s concerns about clause 50 of the bill. According to the committee’s report, the Scottish Government objects to clause 50 as it

“gives the Secretary of State a regulation-making power to clarify the application of other legislation to the ‘user-in-charge’ of an automated vehicle.”

The report goes on to note that

“The Scottish Government’s objection to this clause is that the power can be exercised in devolved areas without the UK Government having to seek the consent of, or consulting, the Scottish Ministers or Scottish Parliament.”

I note that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee also commented on that aspect, highlighting

“the apparent contradiction between the statement in the DPM that the Scottish Parliament will be able to scrutinise the use of this power and the absence of any mechanism in the Bill that would enable such scrutiny”.

As a supporter of devolution, I believe that it is important that, if legislative powers are to be exercised in an area of devolved competence, the Scottish Government must have the opportunity to scrutinise that. I am disappointed that the bill includes no mechanism to enable that and that there has been no resolution to the issue through co-operation between the UK and Scottish Governments. I urge both Governments to work together to resolve that important issue, no matter how small its application might be in reality.

The topic of the bill lends itself to greater discussion of the role of automation in our future economy. As I have already stated, the bill does not allow vehicle automation to take place; it merely sets out a regulatory framework for it. However, if the automation of vehicles is to increase in the near future—as the necessity of introducing the bill seems to suggest will happen—it is crucial that we consider the impact of automation on workers who are employed in driving roles and in other areas.

Although the discussion on a just transition for workers relates to industries that are impacted by net zero targets, it needs to be widened to include workers who will be impacted by the greater introduction of automation and the question of what our plan as a nation is to protect livelihoods in the face of technology that will remove the need for workers in certain sectors.