The Government has outlined a series of changes to the Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) qualification.

It follows a consultation outlining a series of proposals, which closed in April, with the Department for Transport (DfT) receiving more than 1,100 responses.

Having considered these views, the Government has decided that the Driver CPC will benefit from reforms to increase flexibility when renewing and regaining the qualification.

It says that it will consult further on introducing a new periodic test as an alternative to 35 hours of training, for drivers looking to renew their Driver CPC. This, says the Government, would also be available for drivers looking to return to the sector and will form an accelerated return pathway for them.

It has also announced that it will reform training by reducing the minimum course length from 7 hours down to 3.5 hours and decouple e-learning from trainer-led courses.

Furthermore, it says that it will develop, with the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), more core course content and encourage informal assessment at the end of modules.

Changes for training reforms will be brought into force through secondary legislation using powers within the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act.

The intention is to bring forward this secondary legislation next summer, but this will not include the introduction of the new periodic test.

Proposals for periodic testing will be brought into force at a later point which could be via secondary legislation or further to a slot in an appropriate bill, and will be the subject of further consultation, said the DfT.

The Driver CPC, which was introduced in 2007, is a qualification that professional drivers of certain goods or passenger carrying vehicles are required to hold in addition to their driving licence.

In the UK, except in the case where a driver had ‘acquired rights’, it is initially obtained by completing four test modules consisting of a two-part theory test, case studies, a practical driving test and a practical demonstration of vehicle operation. 

It is then renewed by completing 35 hours of periodic training every five years. Completing 35 hours of training allows a driver to drive for commercial purposes for five years.

The main objectives of DCPC, when introduced, were to improve road safety and the safety of the driver, including during operations carried out by the driver while the vehicle is stopped and to raise the professional recognition of drivers, thereby attracting greater interest in the profession and increasing the number of drivers.

As a result of the acute driver shortages in 2021, the Government announced a policy review into the Driver CPC in November 2021. 

The review sought to assess how the qualification could be reformed to reduce the burden on drivers and ensure it did not act as a barrier to working in the sector.

The outcome of this review, published in March, proposed ways in which the qualification could be reformed, which were put to public consultation.

Publishing the results of that consultation today (Tuesday, December 12), it found that a third (33%) of respondents reported that the Driver CPC was either effective or very effective at improving road safety, compared to 38% of respondents saying it was either ineffective or very ineffective.

These numbers are influenced by the number of drivers responding being larger than other groups – 63% of respondents were drivers. 47% of drivers said it was ineffective or very ineffective at improving road safety.

Amongst all other groups, more respondents felt that the existing qualification was effective or very effective (52%) compared to being ineffective or very ineffective (23%).

This was most prevalent for trainers with 69% believing it was either effective or very effective at improving road safety.

The results for operators were more marginal with 38% saying it was effective or very effective, against 31% who thought it was ineffective or very ineffective and a further 31% thinking it was neither effective nor ineffective in improving road safety.

In terms of professionalism of drivers, results were similar to those for road safety with 31% of respondents saying that the qualification was effective or very effective at improving professionalism of drivers and 39% thinking that it was either ineffective or very ineffective.

Again, drivers were more likely to think that Driver CPC was ineffective or very ineffective at improving professionalism (45%), while for all other groups, more respondents believed it was effective or very effective (38%) compared to ineffective or very ineffective (23%).

This was more prevalent amongst trainers with 64% believing it improved professionalism.

For operators, 38% felt that it had been effective or very effective in improving professionalism of drivers, with 33% responding it was either ineffective or very ineffective.

Drivers who said it was not meeting its aims most commonly stated a lack of new content which means repetition of what went before.

Some also reported that they do not believe it provides good value in terms of time spent or cost.

Some operators who felt that the Driver CPC was not meeting its aims raised concerns that the training content is quite generic and not specific enough for their drivers.

However, this was contrasted by some including Wincanton and the Road Transport Industry Training Board (RTITB) who both felt it was either effective or very effective in improving road safety and the professionalism of drivers.

Wincanton explained that since the qualification’s inception “driver training has improved, and this flows through to standards of driving and associated compliance”.

Almost half (48%) of respondents said that it should be reformed, 39% that it should be abolished and 12% that it should stay the same.

Support for abolishing the Driver CPC was mainly among drivers (54%), which was contrasted by only 13% of all other respondents who were not professional drivers. 72% of all other respondents who were not professional drivers were in support of reform.

Reacting to the Government announcement, Jim Kirkwood, CEO of TTC, a Driver CPC periodic training provider, said: “These changes, which recognise that time is money but not at the cost of safety, will protect drivers and fleet operators striving to achieve best practice and improve operational efficiencies.

“We anticipated that the Government’s consultation would ultimately lead to a step-change in the process of renewing and regaining DCPC qualifications, but we are particularly delighted with the increased flexibility with which drivers will soon be able to achieve the required 35 hours of periodic training."

He continued: “Decoupling e-learning from trainer-led courses is another significant move that will vastly improve the convenience for drivers who will be able to undertake their training, around their work and personal schedules with greater ease.

"This, combined with the shorter trainer-led courses makes it easier for drivers to remain DCPC compliant.”

Supporting the DfT’s decision to consult further on the introduction of a new periodic test as an alternative to 35 hours of training, he added: “Moving to periodic testing as an alternative for domestic drivers would be a significant shift and not one that can be implemented without ensuring that any new testing framework is robust and doesn’t put drivers, operators and other road users at risk.”

Nick Butler, director at Drivetech also welcomed the Government's plans to work with the DVSA to encourage end-of-module informal assessments.

"As experts in the driver training field, we know that flexible learning can build a more dynamic and effective learning experience for drivers.," he said.

“We hope that the upcoming consultations and discussions will strike the right balance between flexibility and high standards, paving the way for a future where drivers are not only well-prepared but can also thrive in an environment that values adaptability and expertise.”