Government considers inviting evidence for lifetime bans on dangerous drivers who kill

In France, police are able to confiscate your vehicle and/or licence at the roadside for serious offences: <linky>
- serious road accident
- refusal to stop for the police
- driving while uninsured/unlicensed/under influence
- driving at more than 30mph over the limit

At trial, you either get your vehicle back or it is scrapped or sold.

When this catches Brits on autoroutes, there is much harrumphing from the Daily Fail.

Question: why not here too? Enough of this 'I need my car' crap.

A note that there is also currently a Parliamentary Enquiry into accessible transport, which will tend to focus on detailed but important technical things, perhaps like drop kerbs, tactile paving, kneeling and accessible train stations (which is nonetheless a biggie).

But strategic points like a road system which uses uncontrolled crossings across multiple lanes at traffic islands designed for maximum speed entry and exit, requiring N KSIs before a safe crossing is put in, and non-adherence to national guidelines also need to be made.

Plus there is an overlap between anti-disabled barriers and anti-cycling barriers, which is relevant. An important debate will be about bicycles as mobility aid, and potentially a mode on e-bikes, trikes etc for use on pavements at N mph (4 mph would be the same as mobility scooters).

There are also various virulently anti-cycling groups around, which will be trying to set it up as disabled vs cyclists, especially around bus stop bypasses which for some are a fixation.

Enquiry and evidence submission link is here:
https://committees.parliament.uk/work/6805/accessible-transport-legal-ob...

Completely understand the sentinment however don't think in reality it will make a huge difference. 

You only have to watch Traffic Cops on TV to get a sense that a large percentage of them either don't have licenses anyway or have been banned before. 

Scrotes are always scrotes!

The following limk sums things up far better than I ever could.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/why-should-government-review-road-traf...

It contains the classic :

"The need for such a review appeared to be acknowledged back in May 2014, when the then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling MP announced the Government’s intention to launch “a full review of all driving offences and penalties”, stating that he “wanted to make our roads safer”. The review didn't happen."

May 2014! And in Feb 2023 “That is why the government is considering a Call for Evidence on motoring offences."

Considering a call for evidence! Government in this country has become the art of kicking cans down the road to concentrate on vote winning slogans.

The only positive I can take from this is "...it will include....the offence of failure to stop and report." which needs a serious overhaul. Having said that they have had two chances to debate this already but have declined to act because of the problem of not stopping when a wing mirror has been damaged. This is obviously an intractable problem. Utter shambles.

As usual - prevention is hugely better than attempts at redress.  Though we can certainly do better I think there's a limit to "police it safer".

I would like to see this as part of the comprehensive review of road law...

Lastly - before you can go to criminal court, you need to have located a defendant.

There's a chain to follow before this could have an effect.  The police have to decide to do something (rather than saying "accident" or "probably brought this on themselves").  Next they have to locate evidence.  Then they have to pass this to the CPS or at least ask for advice. (There is at least one case where police simply didn't to this).

Then the CPS have to decide to run it.  Then they have to select an appropriate charge.  The default seems to be "we'll take the lowest category of offense if the other side will plead guilty - and probably that anyway because we don't think we'll succeed beyond that in these cases".

We haven't got to court yet...

Like all these efforts if it could be done as well as something more effective it would seem to make sense.  I just wonder whether it will have much effect - for reasons others have pointed out in the comments - even when things do get this far.

So many fixes needed:

- momentary lapse defence should be banned;

- the distinction between careless and dangerous should be codified so there are practical tests a judge and jury can use, for example, a major fail on a driving test should be considered dangerous, a minor, careless. So simply exceeding the speed limit could be dangerous rather than careless in the event of an incident.

- drop the exceptional hardship excuse for avoiding a ban. It takes multiple offences to tot up. The failure to mend your ways should be taken as evidence that opportunities to reform have already been ignored.

- deliberate threats and acts of violence using a vehicle should have punishments scaled as if it were an offensive weapon such as a knife or gun.

"We are strengthening legislation, and how it is enforced" - HoHo I wish.

At least 35,000 drivers have over 12 points on their licence and have kept their licence having pleaded exceptional hardship. <Linky>

And the judicial system can't even say "Tough, should have thought about that before driving".

This is Government window dressing ...

Sooo many caveats. Nothing is gonna happen. 
let's face it they've pushed legalisation of escooters back to 2024. 
There is no chance these sorry sacks or Tory arse will do anything. 

So no action then. By the time it launches we'll be in the final year of this current Parliament and it will die or get kicked into the long grass.