Government is considering relaxing rules limiting the level of tint on vehicle windows.

And legislation to enable vehicles to be impounded in private lots was approved in the House of Assembly, despite resistance from the Opposition.

Speaking in the House of Assembly, Transport Minister Shawn Crockwell said that Government recently moved to allow darker tint on public service vehicle windows, and are looking at extending the policy to the general public.

“We recently allowed public service vehicles to have darker tint, 20 percent in the rear and 25 percent in the front,” he said. “The Government is minded to allow that for public vehicles.

“Right now they have to abide by the law as it stands, but hopefully in short order we will allow darker tint.”

Laws limiting the tint on vehicle windows were passed in 1991.

According to existing legislation a vehicle’s front windscreen should allow the passage of 70 percent of light.

The Motor Car Amendment Act 2014 establishes a permit fee for businesses seeking to run authorised impound lots and expands the list of offences for which a vehicle can be held in such a facility.

Under legislation passed in 2008, vehicles could be impounded if the driver is unable to produce a driver’s licence, or if the vehicle is either unlicensed or uninsured.

However, Mr Crockwell said the legislation did not include a permit fee, which prevented any private enterprises from operating impound facilities.

He explained that the new legislation would introduce that fee while expanding the list of offences in which a vehicle could be impounded to include impaired driving, refusing a sample for drug/alcohol testing, driving while disqualified and failing to give a name.

It would also allow vehicles to be impounded if they are being driven while unsafe to operate, extremely noisy or have excess tint.

Mr Crockwell said that at least one entity is already in a position to operate an impound yard as a result of a request for proposal put out by the previous administration, and could be up and running soon after the amendments are approved.

Several Progressive Labour Party MPs, however, expressed concern about Government’s “hard handed” approach to relatively minor offences, questioning the reasons for the legislation.

Deputy Opposition Leader Derrick Burgess said that while he supported most parts of the bill, excess tint was no reason to impound a vehicle, saying: “You only want to impound a car if it’s a health or safety issue, or if it’s uninsured.”

His concerns were echoed by Shadow Attorney General Kim Wilson, who said the legislation lacked a mechanism to appeal subjective decisions such as excess noise, while Shadow Economic Development Minister Wayne Furbert suggested the legislation was motivated by commercial interests rather than for the good of the public.

“This is not based on any safety reasons, it’s based on commercial reasons,” he said.

Responding to the comments, Mr Crockwell reiterated that the root legislation was passed by the Progressive Labour Party, and the purpose of the new amendments was to correct a deficiency while expanding the legislation’s powers as suggested by the police service.

“We think it was wise when the PLP brought it in 2008 and we are expanding on it,” Mr Crockwell said. “We still think it’s wise today.”

He also added that police already have the ability to impound a vehicle in their own facilities — even in the case of a vehicle with excess tint — and have done so for many years.