I support the amendment of the noble Earl, Lord Dundee. For a long time the courts have taken an unduly lenient view of those who leave people injured for life as a result of their negligent driving. There seems to be both a reluctance on the part of the Crown Prosecution Service to bring the most serious charges— and often to bring the lesser charge, which can be tried in the magistrates’ court—and for the magistrates’ court to take the driver’s point of view rather than that of the person who has suffered injury.
This is a very serious issue. I hope that when the Minister replies he will tell us that the Government will pick up the results of the consultation, which was debated in Westminster Hall, and that it is their intention to introduce into the Bill either the amendments proposed by the noble Earl or something similar. I cannot think of many cases where you can behave in such a negligent and dangerous way and be dealt with in such a lenient way, often in a magistrates’ court. You may not be disqualified even though you have left someone grievously injured for the rest of their life.
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bradshaw
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 4 July 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Road Safety Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c520-1 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:54:10 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_261014
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_261014
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_261014