Skip to main content

1-20 of 159 results for subject:Roads

Legislation X
Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
Subject X
Alcoholic drinks

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More
Alcoholic drinks (159)

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Road Safety Bill (HL). Committee stage fourth sitting (afternoon). Clauses 11 to 15 agreed to, clause 11 as amended. Clause 16 disagreed to.

Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Date
23 March 2006
Reference
SCA
House
House of Commons

Road Safety Bill (Bill 113 of 2005-06). House of Commons Library Research Paper 06/13

Type
Commons Briefing papers
Date
2 March 2006
Reference
RP06-13

I am amazed at the notion that all these ancient lorries are trundling along our roads, or certainly where the noble Lord who has just spoken lives, as I have not noticed that. Having tried to buy an old lorry to help cart grain on my wife’s farm, I know...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c483
House
House of Lords

My name is attached to Amendment No. 46 because it appears that the presence of an alcohol lock in a car—we have not actually seen such a device yet—does not prevent just anybody blowing in to it. If they did so, as the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, has said, a...

Member
Lord Bradshaw (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c425
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now again resolve itself into Committee on this Bill. Moved, That the House do now again resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Davies of Oldham.) On Question, Motion agreed to. House in Committee accordingly. [The CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Lord Brabazon of Tara)...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c424-5
House
House of Lords

It makes no difference.

Member
Lord Howie of Troon (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c450
House
House of Lords

Could we think a little bit about secondary legislation? Secondary legislation is a well known hidey-hole for the Government. We debate things during the progress of the Bill, and then secondary legislation comes before us. We are very limited in what we can do with it. We can talk about...

Member
Lord Howie of Troon (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c449
House
House of Lords

This has been a fascinating debate, which has led us through some technical areas, but some clear principles have been adumbrated. Although the amendments come from different perspectives, the objectives of the noble Earl, Lord   Attlee, are somewhat different from those relating to the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c455-6
House
House of Lords

Once again consensus has not broken out. The intent of the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, appears to be to increase the speed limit for HGVs from 40 to 50 miles per hour on single carriage roads. As the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, said, such a change would...

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c483-4
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister for her clear recognition of the fact that 20 mph zones have already proved their worth. Those zones have also saved many   lives. On the other hand, a default speed limit still gives local authorities flexibility, as the noble Lord, Lord   Berkeley, emphasised. Local authorities are free to...

Member
Earl of Dundee (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c466
House
House of Lords

moved Amendment No. 67:"After Clause 16, insert the following new clause—"    ““DEFAULT SPEED LIMIT (1)   The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27) is amended as follows. (2)   In section 81 (general speed limit for restricted roads), for subsection (1) substitute— ““(1)   It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a...

Member
Earl of Dundee (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c461-2
House
House of Lords

Lord Hanningfield moved Amendment No. 51: After Clause 14, insert the following new clause— "RETRO-REFLECTIVE MARKINGS In the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52), after section 80 (approval marks) insert— "80A RETRO-REFLECTIVE MARKINGS The Secretary of State may by regulations made by statutory instrument require the fitting of retro-reflective tape...

Member
Lord Hanningfield (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c436-7
House
House of Lords

It is impossible for a lorry travelling at 40 miles per hour to follow a car travelling at 60 miles per hour. That lorry could not run into the back of the car because a vehicle travelling at 40 miles per hour cannot follow one travelling at 60 miles per...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c484
House
House of Lords

I will think about that in the fullness of time.

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c484
House
House of Lords

Following on from that argument, why is the noble Baroness content for an HGV to travel at 50 miles per hour on a dual carriageway when a car can travel at 70 miles per hour on the same road?

Member
Earl Attlee (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c484
House
House of Lords

We are talking about single carriageways. We are talking about a car stopping in an emergency when travelling at 60 miles per hour and a shunt occurring. However, I shall read Hansard as regards the car travelling in front. Noble Lords should bear in mind that, because of their size...

Member
Baroness Crawley (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c484-5
House
House of Lords

I agree with where my noble friend is coming from. The fact is that the police accept 80 miles per hour in good conditions, yet they have the ability to prosecute on the absolute offence of 70 miles per hour if they detect a motorist driving at 80 in bad...

Member
Earl Attlee (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c473
House
House of Lords

This proposal is, no doubt, quite tempting. Superficially, it could certainly be popular. There is a certain mantra which goes with it, about modern vehicles clearly being capable of going at 80 miles per hour. Many people already drive at 80 miles per hour—certainly, at least, on the relatively empty...

Member
Earl of Mar and Kellie (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c473-4
House
House of Lords

I believe that the effect of my noble friend’s amendment would be to increase the frequency and severity of collisions. Not least are two   particular aspects of concern. First, there is the differential between 80 and 90 miles per hour. If the   motorway speed limit became 80 miles per hour, then motorists...

Member
Earl of Dundee (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c473
House
House of Lords

I strongly support this amendment. It seems to me to be a matter of common sense, and puts a little faith in the good sense of British motorists. That is long overdue as they are so often much maligned.

Member
Lord Cobbold (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
4 July 2005
Reference
673 c473
House
House of Lords