Road Safety Bill [HL]

My noble friend Lady Gardner is about to rise, but I looked at this series of amendments and I am happy that they are all grouped together because I am very interested in Amendment No. 77 in the name of my noble friend Lord Attlee. My neck of the woods is Scotland. I understand that, in spite of all the devolved activities, this matter applies—my noble friend Lord Dundee tells me that it does. I see that the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, is beaming as he has already expressed great knowledge of Scotland, so I presume that the matter must apply to Kirriemuir as much as it applies to Alloa or anywhere else. I have one question for the noble Baroness about villages, although I have an idea what she means. In my county of Angus and in my particular area in Scotland we have very little or no lighting. As far as concerns Amendment No. 77, the speed limit has been extended by about 400 yards beyond the last light and the last house. As you drive along that road for 200   yards you cannot see that there is a limit. There are smart-alec police and safety people, ““You should know that you should go at 10 miles an hour and you will not run over a snail””, and you lose your licence. That is fine because you should have known the limit. But we can do better than that and I think that Amendment No. 77 is the answer. I looked at national speed limits for villages, as so well described by the noble Baroness Lady Scott, but can she or anyone else please explain why subsection (2) of Amendment No. 78 states:"““A ‘village’ for the purposes of this Act shall be a settlement of 20 or more houses  . . . along more than 600 metres””." Should that not be ““less than 600 metres””, because more than 600 metres would mean that there could be 19 houses in 600 metres and the 20th could be another kilometre away and that would classify, according to subsection (2), as a village. That is for the purposes of the law—for me, the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, and others. We would lose our licences because that would be laid down in law. I have an idea what a village is, as I suspect Suffolk County Council does. I suspect that Angus Council also has a very good idea of what a village is. If the noble Baroness narrowed down the definition, we might understand it. I can quite understand 30 miles per hour. That ought to be well signed so that people understand what they are about. We then come to Amendment No. 79. I am afraid that I did not hurry along to Clause 27 of the 1984 Act when looking at Item No. 1(i) and Item No. 1(ii) in the table. What are these roads supposed to be? The noble Baroness spoke about country lanes, but there again we have a problem. What is a country lane? I can take the noble Baroness to Scotland; I can take her to Wester Ross. I have just attended a dinner dance there with my noble friend Lord Gray of Contin. Huge tracts of road have been paid for by the European Union. They display the lovely European sign—blue with yellow stars. They do not have white lines down the middle of them. Perhaps not I or others will be going along them, but foreigners. I was up there two years ago and was overtaken by German camper vans. I was doing 60 mph—not that I was worried about the satellite or the speed cameras. People were overtaking me, quite safely, at considerably higher speeds. I worry just a trifle about blanket or semi-blanket limits for country lanes or rural lanes. Can the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, and her colleagues who have put down the amendment think, first, about what is a ““village”” and, secondly, a country lane. I have an idea what a country lane might be in Suffolk—I have driven a few miles in that county—but there are huge tracts of northern England or Scotland to which this legislation will apply. If people are driving at 45 or 50 mph on a completely empty road, should they be hounded off the road and have points on their licence, with the prospect of being off the road for a year if they do it twice or three times? I worry just a little about that. Of course I understand the need to slow down in what the noble Baroness called ““villages””. I too have seen her figures of 30 to 40 mph on television and I am interested in them. Having been involved in a skiing crash at 30 mph, I would not like to be struck by a car at that speed. Had it been at 40 mph, I would have been more seriously injured. The noble Baroness has made a good effort, but can she explain ““village””? I ask her to check ““more than””. I think that the amendment should state ““less than 600   metres””. Did she intend that? One cannot say that it is just a misprint. I am sure that those who drafted it took good care. If the noble Baroness or the noble Lord, Lord   Bradshaw, could explain also Item Nos. 1(i) and 1(ii), I would be very grateful because I do not want to lose my licence. Even the noble Baroness admitted that before she imposed 30 mph limits in Suffolk, people were going, legitimately, at 60 mph. If that was legitimate and not dangerous, I think my point is made.