Road Safety Bill [HL]

I hope that I may respond briefly to that point before the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, speaks to his amendment. I take on board the points that have been made. However, the reasoning behind our present position is that being in control of the vehicle is the crucial issue which makes one responsible before the law. It is not a question of driving because the concept of driving is not defined in law. Being in control of the vehicle is the crucial matter. That is why under our drink-driving laws we are able—with, I am sure, the common agreement of all Members of the Committee—to insist that a person can be held culpable even if they have the keys of the vehicle but do not have the engine switched on because of the potential threat to wider society which can be attested by the court. Of course I accept that there may be a positive side to the matter. Inevitably, the law is there to identify what is not permissible. Through the Highway Code we could identify certain features enabling good behaviour to be interpreted in different ways. I shall have to reflect further on the matter. I certainly shall return to it. I recognise the strength of the debate. However, I hope that the Committee will recognise that we cannot accept the amendment. I hope that the noble Lord will withdraw it.