---

Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 6A, as an amendment to the Motion that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 6, leave out ““agree”” and insert ““disagree””. We return to probably the most contentious clause in the Bill. I will keep my comments mercifully short because we know the arguments quite well and other noble Lords wish to participate in this debate. Of course we all offer our deepest sympathy to families who have lost a loved one, but I passionately believe that we have a duty to frame a law that is workable and will deliver justice. Under the clause, a prison sentence can be imposed for something that was purely an accident and simple carelessness. Jail is not a suitable punishment for an act of carelessness. The provision will result in the criminalisation of many ordinary members of society. Of vital importance is the absence of criminal intent which is necessary in the conviction of other crimes that carry similar custodial sentences. Careless driving is very different from dangerous driving and from carelessness resulting from taking drink and drugs, even though the effects of those offences may be similar. Under the current wording, a person would be guilty of careless driving if their driving fell below what would be expected of a careful and competent driver. That is markedly different from the test of culpability for dangerous driving. To be convicted of dangerous driving, a driver must have been driving in a way that, to a competent and careful driver, would be obviously dangerous—in other words, doing something that they know they should not be doing. There is no such requirement for the new offence of causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving. Instead, a person may commit the offence not only without intent but without even realising the nature of such carelessness. We are not arguing for this new offence to be struck from the Bill; we are trying to ensure that the punishment fits the crime. Importantly, the punishment should reflect the standard of driving, not the consequences. We therefore cannot and will not support this excessive punishment proposed by the Government. A custodial sentence is a completely disproportionate punishment for such an offence. This amendment therefore seeks to remove the custodial element from the Bill. Furthermore, it should be left to the courts not the Government to decide the severity of the punishment and the actual offence committed. Moved, as an amendment to the Motion that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 6, leave out ““agree”” and insert ““disagree””.—(Lord Hanningfield.)