Proceeding contribution from Earl Attlee (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 4 July 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Road Safety Bill [HL]
I would not go so far as making it a requirement for all vehicles, but would suggest that it applies to all new vehicles immediately and after five years to all HGVs. The reason for that is that when the vehicle is operated by its second owner it is more likely to become involved in operations that are not reckless but where an accident is more likely to occur. Marks and Spencer is going up and down the motorway. The second operator is more likely to be involved in potentially difficult situations. I support the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 673 c438-9
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Alcoholic drinks Breathalysers Cars Cameras Bicycles Licensing Fixed penalties Exemptions Driving under influence Large goods vehicles Police Protective clothing Lighting Motorways Safety Safety measures Roads Road signs and markings Speed limits Road traffic offences
- Legislation
- Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:29:22 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260852
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260852
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260852