Draft Road Transport and Safety Bill 2014

The first impression formed upon reading this draft bill is that it is multiple bills concatenated into one. There is also an indication of centralization of power which does not bode well for effective implementation as well as buy in from the states. As VVR mentions above, there are several authorities and forces being set up by the bill. The report of the committee on road safety in 2009 timeframe -see link provided by VVR above, has strongly influenced the draft and is prerequisite reading to understand things better.

So there is talk of seeing up a Vehicle Regulation and Road Safety Authority. According to the aforementioned 2009 report, there are similar agencies in US, UK, Sweden, Australia etc. There is also state road safety authorities planned, to be setup and funded by the states! It somehow reminds me of the pollution control boards. We all know how well that setup works.

This vehicle regulation and road safety authority oversees a Unified Driver Licensing System, a Unified Vehicle Registration System, and basically, according to the bill, removes all situations adverse to road safety. The National Road Transport and Multimodal Coordination Authority, both at center and state cover public passenger transport, public goods transport and National Freight Policy. The rest of the bill talks about an Infra and Multi Modal Facilitation Authority, Road Safety & Traffic Management, Insurance, Claims Tribunal etc. As well as a dedicated National Highway Traffic Regulation & Protection Force.

Now with all this, 305 pages appears rather inadequate. Questions that appear really open include how these new agencies will be effective. How will they map and work with each other. What is suitable funding level and how will the be adequately funded? Will this new setup adequately eliminate the corruption and lack of enforcement that lead to the problems faced, at least substantially. What is the existing framework that is being replaced etc.

I am going straight into second gear.  The first chapter, which is titled preliminary has only one line which I am not sure of the implication of. All copy paste from the bill draft are italicized.

• Grants or loans made by the central government to the national authority after due appropriations by parliament, which goes into the road safety fund.
• A portion of the insurance premiums collected in the country, exact fraction to be specified by the central government.A
• Any other sources that the central government will specify

State Authority:

• State has to appropriate as per this law

• Central government may take some money from the national safety fund and give to the state safety improvement plan

Comment: This is the weakest portion of the law.  There is no estimate of the funding requirement.  The state safety authority funding is left to the states.  So you have a funny situation where the center is thrusting a requirement on the states.  But there is no clarity on how the state will fund the state level agency, which it appears has a significant role in taking the intended legislations to the ground level?

In municipalities and in some states panchayats also do road building.  How will these state level actions percolate down? Despite all the noise, local government is once again not discussed here except for some cursory lines.

In summary - a national authority is being setup.  It is not clear how the authority will impact safety in the broad mandate provided to it.  Maybe a good method would be to take a step back and discuss what steps are required to acheive road safety and map it back to this authority.

The functioning of the national authority should have more transparency and efficiency.  Current definition still reads as too long.

A state authority is mandated and dumped on the states

Funding remains a question for the proposed authority

As I type this, am seriosuly wondering if this is becoming one of those notes to self documents without any readers.  Nevertheless, I shall continue to plough my lonely furrow

This section appears to want to bring into place a "unified" driving license applicable throughout India, all enabled on a software platform, sort of like "Core banking".  So presumably, one can go and apply for a renewal or modification in any suitable office across India and your driving "record" is accessible across India.  Overall, that seems like a good and necessary objective.  So Kudos.  The DL system is also governed by the Vehicle Regulation and Road Safety Authority

Suggestion: I would love for Section 62 to state that a Driver's license is a privilege and not a right.  This should become like a mantra.

Section 63 insists that one person should have only one driver's license. If multiple licenses are found, then all licenses will be invalidated and the person would be treated like a person driving without a license.

Section 65 introduces a requirement for additional training for drivers of transport vehicles and school buses. Does transport mean only good or does it also include public transport?

Under section (66) - Grant of license, I found the following sections to be of interest.

I call sub section 3, the anti harassment clause, provided details of section 2 are well defined and publicised. Looks like a learners for 9 months is mandatory.  THe requirement for a certificate from a school or establishment is another tricky one.  How to make these schools accountable and not like the current hole in the wall type operations? Section 67(10) has a clause which caught my attention with regard to accountability. It states:

Dear VVR... thanks for your input.  I agree that we have to digest this bill and then get together to hash out an appropriate response.

Srivathsa - you bring out a very good point.  One aspect I find troubling is that road safety appears to have been divorced from road engineering in this bill.  This bill is essentially a replacement for the the Motor Vehicles Act '88 with some modifications; which is an un-necessary compartmentalization possibly.  

You also brought up the topic of the objective of the bill.  This is the objective statement:

The broad vision for the unified registration system with details to come in other regulations proposed is given in section 85.  The act gives a lot of time for the registration system to come into place once the act is passed.  First the national authority has to be setup and then the regulations have to be drafted and then implementation has about three years allowed. The national registration authority should hypothetically permit a comprehensive, integrated electronic record and easy transfer of vehicles across India.

(85) Unified Vehicle Registration System.

1.The National Authority shall develop the roadmap for the Unified Vehicle Registration System within one year of the date of this Act coming into force and shall implement the said roadmap within three years of this date.

2.The National Authority shall design a Unified Vehicle Registration System in accordance with regulations, such that:

a)it enables the submission of applications for registration from anywhere in the country, either electronically or at the competent authority for vehicle registration in the country;

b)it facilitates the collection of uniform standardised information including information authenticating the identity of the applicant for the vehicle registration, whether through biometric or any other equivalent unique identification technology, identified by the National Authority, and provides for different types of applications for different types of vehicle registration;

c)it facilitates the grant of registration in a transparent, time-bound and efficient manner; and

d)it facilitates the grant of registration in such form and format and containing such information as may be specified by the National Authority.

e)It appropriately integrates various stakeholders including manufacturers, insurance firms, centres of fitness certification, revenue departments of the Central and state governments, enforcement agencies, consumers and motor accident claims tribunal to both provide and share information in order to meet the objectives of this Act.

f)The system shall be developed to ensure that the distribution of revenue to the states and the local government is facilitated in a seamless manner and protects against revenue leakage.

3.Each State Authority in consultation with the National Authority, within two years, shall develop a roadmap to implement a unified vehicle registration system, within one year.

4. The migration to the unified vehicle registration system for all motor vehicles or trailers or semi-trailers or mobile machinery shall take place within three years from the date this Act comes into force.

Suggestion – Section 85-f on distribution of revenue to states and local government in a seamless manner is an important one, which needs to be articulated better.  A good chunk of revenue from vehicles should be invested more at the local level to provide suitable infrastructure.  Centralizing this system should not mean that revenue sharing be dependent on the whims of a central authority.  It is best if the authority prescribes the standards and keeps out of the way.

Also important that the registration system is well funded, staffed and able to keep everything working quickly and up to date such as address change and other details.

State authority seems to have a role in vehicle registration system, but this was not prominently listed in suties of the state authority.  This requirement for all vehicles to re-register in the new system has to be properly implemented.  It should be through while remaining low hassle for law abiding citizens.

(86) Taxation of Motor Vehicles.

1.The Central Government shall develop the principles on which taxes on motor vehicles are to be levied.

2.       The National Authority shall develop an electronic platform and ensure that the collection, distribution and reconciliation of revenue between states, local government is facilitated in a seamless manner.

2.

The details are going to decide how this part works.  Shouldn’t states have some autonomy in fixing taxation rates or is it entirely going to be dictated by the national authority?  I am a fan of some autonomy.  Even though it can mean disparity and confusion, some autonomy makes it easier for states to tailor policy… such as minimizing taxes on public transport or raising taxes on a certain class of vehicles to discourage use.

88(3) A motor vehicle or a trailer or a semi-trailer or a mobile machinery will be registered or given a valid certificate of registration only if such motor vehicle or trailer or semi-trailer or mobile machinery is insured as per the provisions of this Act.

Is this insurance requirement an existing provision now?  Should High Security Plates be used for number plates? Ideally, the number plate should be issued by the agency in a standardized form and not involve any other method being used currently with a variety of plate designs and painted numbers. The other suggestion would be to link the registration to a proof of ownership…a title so to speak, which will force people to be more diligent in recording sales and movement.

(89) Registration, where to be made.

Subject to the provisions of section (93), section (94) and section (107), every owner of a motor vehicle or trailer or semi-trailer or mobile machinery shall ensure that the vehicle is registered by the competent registering authority in whose jurisdiction the person is resident or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept.

(90)(3) The application for registration shall be accompanied by such proof of parking space as may be specified by the State Government of the State within which the competent registering authority, being applied to, is located subject to a notification to this effect provided by the appropriate State Government or Municipality or Panchayat

With this unified registration system, it would be good to specify why the requirement of registration in a jurisdiction where ordinarily resident is valid.  There may be good reasons, but should be spelt out.  I also found the provision for parking space as a requirement for registration interesting, though probably hard to implement.

(91) Third party insurance, valid vehicle fitness and manufacturer’s information.

1. No motor vehicle shall be registered or certificate of registration renewed, unless there is in force, in relation to use of the vehicle, a policy of insurance, a valid certificate of fitness and a unique identifier provided by the vehicle manufacturer to the unified vehicle registration system.

Fitness certificate is another interesting concept.  This already exists for transport vehicles.  Guidelines for this should be spelt out clearly to avoid harassment, vagueness and ease of appeal.

(92)

4. No person may drive, or cause or permit to be driven, a motor vehicle with a beacon or a motor vehicle with a high decibel horn, other than such persons authorised to do so in the course of duty, in accordance with notifications published by the Central Government in this regard from time to time

Horns and crazy flashing lights are a menace.  Defining the allowable type of horn – sound and dB level is important.

(97) Change of address.

1. If the registered owner of a motor vehicle or trailer or semi-trailer or mobile machinery ceases to reside at or changes the place of business from the address recorded in the certificate of registration of the vehicle, the owner shall, within ninety days of any such change of address, communicate, either electronically via the internet or otherwise, in such form and accompanied by such documents as may be specified by the National Authority, the owner’s new address, to the competent registering authority within whose jurisdiction the new residence or place of business is located.

2. On receipt of such communication, the competent registering authority may, after making such verification as it may think fit, cause the new address to be entered in the certificate of registration.

Will a new mark of registration be given.  How about inter state transfer? Will taxes be adjusted?  It would be good to separate registration identification from state registration and tax payment.  In fact, the displayed number should be related to tax payment.

(98) Transfer of ownership of vehicle.

Where the ownership of any registered motor vehicle or trailer or semi-trailer or mobile machinery is transferred, the transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer, and in such manner and with such accompanying documents as may be specified by the National Authority, report the transfer to the competent registering authority within whose jurisdiction the transferee has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, so that particulars of the transfer may be entered in the certificate of registration.

What happens if the transferee does not report transfer.  Need to define sufficient proof of ownership/title.  Right now, it is all a bit vague. In fact, as part of a sale, with a uniform system, there should be a provision to quickly report a sale such that the seller ha clear assurance on the transaction being recorded.

100(5) . Where the colour of the vehicle has been changed or any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle or a trailer or a semi-trailer or mobile machinery or by reason of replacement of its engine or chassis, the owner of the vehicle shall, within fourteen days of the making of the alteration, report and update the alteration in the unified vehicle registration system with the specified fee in order that particulars of registration may be updated.

All these provisions are good, however, it is essential to make sure that provisions are enforced to keep the database up to date.  Otherwise, we will once again have a totally messed up system in short order.

 (107) Registration of vehicles belonging to the Central Government.

Once again, special provision for central govt vehicles.  I think this should be removed.

(108) Information regarding stolen and recovered vehicle.

Puts onus on owners, police etc. to keep the registration authority updated on stolen vehicles, to ensure that information on stolen vehicles is up to date in the database.

Former Addl Comm Police had an op-ed in the Times of India commenting oin the new law. His article titled "Law tmust enhance road safety, not revenue" accessible here critiqued the oush for oversize fines. While agreeing that improvements are desperately needed in the sector, Mr. Sood points out that high fines increase the tendency to a negotiated un-official settlement. In a telling comment, his opinion can be summarized as "Half-baked policies made without putting in place an objective and transparent implementation system take decades to be rectified and achieve its goals."

Sood points out that without a good enforcement system and methods to use technology to track driver behaviour (a history) will probably be more effective than high fines.  In defence of aspects of  the bill, there are sections which refer to driver history and a system to capture it, but ones does not get a feeling that the frsmework has been sufficiently thought through.

The national authority also has the role of Infrastructure and Multi-Modal Facilitation

Definitions:

1.Transit Improvement Infrastructure shall include:

a.The development of bus, truck & multimodal terminals, interchanges, transfer and depot facilities;

b.Development of parking places;

c.Development of rest areas;

d.Traffic calming controls and other safety related infrastructure;

e.Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and viewing areas;

f.Construction of over bridges and underpasses, grade separators;

g.Construction of grade and grade separated pedestrian facilities;

h.Facilities for non-motorised transport like footpath, cycle tracks.

2. “Integrated Freight Transport Hub” means an operational place on roads and highways that is designated as such and equipped with adequate facilities and equipment, and capable of functions such as providing paid services to the public, warehousing, information transaction centers, yards, parking spaces and roads, in connection with all aspects of freight transport.

3. “Intermodal Transport Facility” means an Integrated Freight Transport Hub connected by road with at least one other mode of transport

Section 178 – In connection with Freight Transport Hubs and Intermodal transport Facilities, the National Authority will identify locations, develop guidelines, develop procedures for licensing operators of such facilities. The operators will have liabilities as per license and will assist in providing data to state transport authorities for dynamic data availability

Section 179 –Road infrastructure development work such as standards for design and construction and classification of roads, specification of standards for infrastructure, service levels, etc. for different classes of roads, development of rest areas along highways with NHAI, disabled friendliness of infra.  The authority also has to develop guidelines for road safety and traffic management as well as “achieve” reduction of congestion in urban areas.

Section 180 – Transit improvement infrastructure performance program – by the national authjority to monitor and quantify performance of infrastructure to ensure that improvements and infrastructure is being used to meet the targets set in the state’s transit improvement plan.

Section 181 – Highway safety improvement program – Another monitoring and evaluation framework to evaluate steps, actions by NHAI towards highway safety improvement.

Section 182 – City safety and traffic management improvement program: Another monitoring and evaluation framework for larger cities to make sure that investments are made towards improvement of the targets set.

Sounds like a nice wish list, but how will all this translate into action on the ground since budgets, implementation etc. is in the hands of other branches of the government or agencies.  Looks like a case of giving responsibility to study, but none of the power.  At any rate, this seems to be directed at centralizing everything in the hands of a central/national authority.

Section 183 and 184 – Annual reviews of state compliance and periodic updation of standards. Nothing of much value.

The word on the street is that the government wants this bill passed in the Winter session.  While the desire to quickly pass legislation is refreshing, in the case of this bill, one is not sure that it is quite ready for passing yet.  The bill proposes a lot of new bureaucracy and several new measures.  Many of the new measures are welcome and to be appreciated.

However, one gets few over whelming impressions which have to be relooked.

A. Significant new bureaucracy at the national and state level without clarity on funding and functions

B. A distinct impression on centralization of functions

C. Lack of clarity on the proper incentives and influencing powers of the new bureaucracy

D. A broad based legislation that is leaving many details to be figured out for later.

The next step is to sit down and generate clear feedback to be submitted to MoRTH.  It may be better to do that face to face rather than over here.  Would it be possible to do this exercise next weekend, say Saturday? Who would be interested to participate.  Where do we do it?

Version 4 does seem to have incorporated some of our suggestions from a first reading, and some details have been better fleshed out.  It is hard to comment further without a detailed comparitive reading.

Any volunteers?