Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, I should like to address my remarks this afternoon to one specific problem of road safety which is becoming the bane of many people’s lives in my part of the world in north Yorkshire—namely, motor bikers. The areas around and in the North Yorkshire National Park are now regularly plagued by hosts of these machines on most weekends and bank holidays and they are literally making people’s lives a total misery. The noble Lord, Lord Davies, referred to what I think he described as a ““national motorcycling strategy””. It appears to have had no effect on these particular motor cyclists. My noble friend Lord Hanningfield talked about these bikers—and I am interested to hear that a similar problem exists in Essex—as being 40 years of age and older. I would concur with that. It is extraordinary that when you see a group of 20 or 30 bikers in, say, Helmsley Square, and they take their helmets off, most of them have grey hair and grey beards. I think that they see their bikes as a source of eternal youth. However, I am absolutely certain that that is not how the residents regard them. This Bill, much of which I support, introduces a number of steps to outlaw devices which prevent speed cameras operating. However, in north Yorkshire we appear to have a device that prevents the operation of any fixed speed cameras at all—namely, the police. That is perhaps surprising given that the evidence from the independent review of the safety camera programme by University College London and the PA Consulting Group found that cameras significantly reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured at camera sites—a point that has been made by other noble Lords. Many of these bikers are tragically killed—one was killed recently just outside my house—and many are injured. Yet there seems to be a strange reluctance by the police to tackle the problem. Like others, I take the view that many speed cameras are unnecessary and are simply designed as revenue earners. In north Yorkshire, however, communities plagued by these bikers have specifically requested cameras because of the problem. But the option appears to have been denied to them. The activity of this group of bikers is known as ““destination speeding””. It is deliberate, extreme speeding either by individuals or by packs of 15, 20 or even more. They travel large distances to race their super-powered machines across the county’s roads as though they were at Brand’s Hatch with little or no fear of being caught. They overtake on blind corners in order to keep up with the ones in front, or in the rare event when they are stuck behind a car, they seem to sit only a few inches from the vehicle’s tail, which is very unnerving for the driver concerned. They drive in a menacing and threatening way which upsets local residents and visitors alike. There was an incident only the other day in my neighbouring town of Middle Ham, which some noble Lords may know is an important area for race-horse training. Strings of race horses were going out on to the gallops. Twenty or so of these bikes came through and the horses went everywhere. It was absolute mayhem and these chaps did not slow down at all. No one can appreciate why, along with the Department for Transport guidelines, local feelings are being so blatantly ignored. It seems quite wrong to have such a wide variation in the interpretation of the guidelines throughout the country. All that happens is that this menace is exported to areas where these bikers know they can get away without prosecution. The Bill’s introduction of graduated fixed penalties should be welcomed. The idea has a logical ring to it and could go some way towards deterring the problem to which I am referring, but that will happen only if the people are caught. This time of the year—summer—in north Yorkshire is the main season for destination bikers. I have been told that there are roads through the national parks on which bikers actually boast about reaching speeds—it is hard to believe—of 180 miles an hour. I know that that is eight miles an hour short of the figure cited by the noble Viscount, Lord Tenby, but 180 miles an hour in a national park is really quite breathtaking. I am not one who subscribes to the theory that life in a national park should be preserved in aspic, or that everyday life should be compromised simply because of a boundary, but there is a limit—or not, as the case may be. The noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, mentioned speed limit reductions on some country roads. In some circumstances that may be justified, but there is no point reducing the speed limit if the present speed limits are not being checked out. That is pointless. Those who so wantonly undermine the principles of the national park ethos deserve special attention. I am not in any way anti-biker, far from it, but those people—I use my words carefully, and I do not think   that I am exaggerating—are wanton criminals endangering not only their own lives but many others besides. It is simply unjust and unrealistic to bracket those dangerous criminal sociopaths in the same category as a driver out with his family who may have thoughtlessly driven at 68 miles an hour in a 60 mile an hour stretch of road or, indeed, my poor secretary, who got done the other day in Kendal for doing 33   miles an hour in a 30 mile an hour zone. The Bill also introduces retraining courses, and I have no objection to them in principle. However, for the deliberate speeder—such as the bikers to whom I refer—the opportunity to trim a few points off the penalty might seem a good idea, but it will have no lasting effect on their behaviour. Frankly, offering them retraining courses is like teaching good manners to a mugger. He might learn the etiquette—he might even mug you more politely—but he is still a mugger and, sadly, the victim still remains the victim. I appreciate that the acts of speeding and of installing noise enhancement boxes to exhaust systems—another problem—are both illegal and so the police have the powers to deal with them. I know that the Minister will say that. But why is it not being done? Why are they not taking action against those people? We know that urban policing takes priority over   rural areas—that is a fact—and that that is a contributory factor to the problem not being addressed with greater commitment. No doubt the problem is further enhanced by the fact that crime detection targets are easier to achieve by concentrating on urban areas to the detriment of rural dwellers. Furthermore—and this statistic has already been mentioned by at least one noble Lord—in England, when the Government came to power in 1997, they inherited 9,200 road traffic officers, I think; that figure has now dropped to about 6,280. Whatever the reason, do the Government intend to take the problem of these lunatic bikers seriously and have regard to the genuine anger and frustration in the areas to which they come and interfere with people’s lives? I will certainly consider whether appropriate amendments can be introduced to the Bill to help to address that problem but, in the mean time, I hope that the Minister will take a helpful and constructive approach to trying to deal with it. Finally, I seek the Minister’s clarification on a different matter. In the Explanatory Notes, on page 10, under the heading,"““Speed assessment equipment detection devices””," there is an anomaly, for which I should be grateful for an explanation. The note states:"““The amendment defines a ‘speed assessment equipment detection device’ as ‘a device, the purpose, or one of the purposes, of which is to detect or interfere with the operation of equipment used to assess the speed of motor vehicles’. The precise subset of the devices which will be prohibited will be identified in the regulations under section 41 of the RTA but it is not intended to include in the provision those devices that only contain information about camera site locations””." Is the intention behind the Bill that it will be an offence to have a device that interferes with the working of speed detectors, or is it also the intention for machines in motor cars devised to detect the presence of a speed camera to be made illegal? If the Minister could explain that to me, I should be extremely grateful.