That was an interesting and rather wide-ranging debate, and I have a number of interesting and specific questions to answer. I hope that I can defend the clause as well, as it is important that it stands part of the Bill.
First, on the question asked by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, the police can already use fixed penalties. They do not take away the right of the recipient to request a court hearing. Secondly, because the same system is operated by a different group of accredited agents, that does not invalidate the point that the noble Baroness made that a warning could be issued to the offender. That is exactly her point. The police would say, ““You have to put those three things right or condign punishment will be invested on you””. It is not intended to change the structure in that respect at all.
The noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, asked me about the funding issue. There is no netting-off with regard to that. The officers are not going to be funded by the proceeds of the fixed penalty notices that they would be issuing.
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 June 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c53 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:42:59 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260214
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260214
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260214