Road Safety Bill [HL]

I support what the noble Lord, Lord   Bradshaw, said about speed limits. However, the noble Baroness said that nobody would want to   walk across a dual carriageway. There are dual carriageways in towns and urban areas where the only way of getting to the other side is to walk across. Therefore, there need to be speed limits. On this business about not being able to slow down when one gets to a lower speed limit, with the greatest respect, if you cannot slow down safely, you are going too fast anyway. You should put your foot on the brake gently. The noble Baroness shakes her head—but it is as if people find it difficult to comply with speed limits. If you do not know what the speed limit is, the safe thing is to reduce your speed to 30 until you see a sign. It is quite simple, and it is actually a lot safer. I have to admit that we are getting slightly off the subject of the amendment, but I am worried not only about these amendments but those to Clause 3(2). So many of the issues listed there, and in these amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, are to some extent very subjective. The more things that are listed as conditions, the more arguments there will be about whether you should get two, three or four penalty points. I shall be interested to hear what my noble friend the Minister says in his response, but I personally think that the fewer conditions, the better. If the speed limit says 30, whatever the circumstances, that is the maximum speed at which you go—and if you go over that, it is your own fault.