Road Safety Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 100:"Page 24, line 38, leave out ““““6”””” and insert ““““3 to 6””””" The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is rather different from my last amendment, where I wanted to remove things from the courts. With this amendment I want to give something back to them. Clause 22 of Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 would make it mandatory to increase the number of penalty points from three to six for the offence of failing to provide information about the identity of a driver. We are concerned that such a move would severely reduce the discretion of the courts, as I have said. By simply moving from three to six points and giving the courts no discretion, and no ability to consider the circumstances of the case, means that injustices could occur. The amendment does not seek to require an ultra-lenient option—no-one wants to reduce the severity of these cases—but gives the courts the discretion to decide, in the circumstances of the case, whether they should give between three and six points. For example, we may be faced with a scenario where multiple drivers may use one vehicle—I am thinking of perhaps the Royal Mail, or one of the large utilities where it is possible that one vehicle is used by numerous persons during the course of a week, or even a single day. If an offence occurs and a request is subsequently issued to provide details of the driver, it may be difficult for the registered owner of the vehicle to be able clearly to identify which individual was driving the vehicle at the time the offence was committed. The amendment merely seeks to introduce an element of common sense and discretion to the courts, which would allow them the ability to set the number of penalty points to be awarded by taking other circumstances into consideration. I beg to move.