Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B1096 – Drink Driving Penalties Bill 2017 Watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    B1096 – Drink Driving Penalties Bill 2017, TSR Conservative Party
    A

    BILL

    TO

    increase the penalty for being caught in charge of a vehicle whilst over the legal limit, or driving or attempting to drive a vehicle whilst over the legal limit.

    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

    1 Definitions
    (1) Being in charge of a vehicle: this is when the person is not necessarily driving the vehicle, but are in the vehicle on the public highway/public place.
    (2) Legal limit: 35 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath.

    2 Punishment for being in charge of a vehicle whilst over the legal limit, or unfit through drink
    (1) In addition to the current penalties, the person will be subject to:
    a. Minimum 50 hours community service.

    3 Punishment for driving or attempting to drive a vehicle whilst over the legal limit, or unfit through drink
    (1) In addition to the current penalties, the person will be subject to:
    a. Minimum 100 hours community service.
    b. A minimum £5,000 fine.
    (2) If the person has over 105 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath (3x the legal limit):
    a. A minimum 3 month prison sentence.

    4 Commencement, short title and extent
    (1) This Act shall come into force on 1st March 2017.
    (2) This Act shall be named the Drink Driving Penalty Act 2017.
    (3) This Act extends to all of the United Kingdom.

    Notes
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Whilst the number of drink drivers that cause fatal crashes is decreasing, it's still a number of unnecessary deaths that can be avoided, by deterring drivers from doing it, one way, through larger incentives not to.

    This Bill keeps the current penalties which are in place, but adds additional minimum penalties in the form of community service and financial penalty as a further incentive, as at the moment, if someone is caught drink driving and hasn't caused a crash, there is only the ban, and a relatively small financial penalty, which clearly isn't working as well as it could.

    These are the current punishments:
    Being in charge of vehicle while above the legal limit or unfit through drink You may get:
    - 3 months' imprisonment
    - up to £2,500 fine
    - a possible driving ban

    and

    Driving or attempting to drive while above the legal limit or unfit through drink You may get:
    - 6 months' imprisonment
    - an unlimited fine
    - a driving ban for at least 1 year (3 years if convicted twice within 10 years)

    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Aye. Solid bill addressing a very serious issue.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    A wholehearted Aye from me.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I am voting nay solely based on the £5,000 fine. I believe it should be a fine which should be very considerable to all persons, but that needs to be means-tested. A drink-driving fine doesn't gain anything by bankrupting a poor person.

    edit: however, I should note I am very sympathetic to increasing the penalties for drink-driving, which ultimately I feel to be a really scummy thing to do and something which is underrated in our current penal system, largely punishable merely by disqualification from driving.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Can you clarify

    1 (1)

    The vagueness of the clause means you could be penalised for telling a taxi driver where to go? It should expressly state driving, attempting to drive or supervising a learner driver.

    Unless I'm missing something?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I vote nay. As said above, hefty fines only increase the amount of criminals on the streets as many will turn to crime with such a debt. Focus should be made on rehab and punishment not unrealistic financial sanctions
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I am voting nay solely based on the £5,000 fine. I believe it should be a fine which should be very considerable to all persons, but that needs to be means-tested. A drink-driving fine doesn't gain anything by bankrupting a poor person.
    The bill is solid barring the fine which has been outlined in the above post.

    Remove that item and replace it so that it's a lower amount or have it means tested - this way the bill yields much more merit.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I'm voting aye, and have no concerns with the fine; people seem to be forgetting that this isn't a tax that people are forced to pay, it's a punishment for idiocy that puts other people on the road's lives at risk.

    Excellent bill.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    So 50 hours' community service for being a passenger in a vehicle whilst drunk? This literally criminalises going home from a drunken night out by any other means than walking.....

    Also, tell me mobbsy91, would you use the phrase 'The person are in the vehicle.'?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I am voting nay solely based on the £5,000 fine. I believe it should be a fine which should be very considerable to all persons, but that needs to be means-tested. A drink-driving fine doesn't gain anything by bankrupting a poor person.

    edit: however, I should note I am very sympathetic to increasing the penalties for drink-driving, which ultimately I feel to be a really scummy thing to do and something which is underrated in our current penal system, largely punishable merely by disqualification from driving.
    But if it's means tested, then any incentive through the monetary penalty goes out the window...
    (Original post by DanE1998)
    Can you clarify

    1 (1)

    The vagueness of the clause means you could be penalised for telling a taxi driver where to go? It should expressly state driving, attempting to drive or supervising a learner driver.

    Unless I'm missing something?
    No, it's the same as it currently is. It's so that someone who is in the driving seat with the keys in the ignition/engine on sitting there can be prosecuted (note the lesser punishment). This Bill doesn't introduce a punishment for being in control, as it does already exist. It may also be worth saying that the law does take into account if there is a legitimate reason for someone to be in the drivers seat whilst under the influence... with you saying that though, may make it a bit clearer in second reading or division!
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JooW)
    I vote nay. As said above, hefty fines only increase the amount of criminals on the streets as many will turn to crime with such a debt. Focus should be made on rehab and punishment not unrealistic financial sanctions
    I'd be more than happy to instigate mandatory drinking lesson/session which aims to educate the idiots out there that drink drive...!
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    I'm voting aye, and have no concerns with the fine; people seem to be forgetting that this isn't a tax that people are forced to pay, it's a punishment for idiocy that puts other people on the road's lives at risk.

    Excellent bill.
    Punishment needs to be considered in part by its deterrent effect on the guilty. In part, this is too big as a deterrent effect - simply ruining someone's life with debt doesn't really provide much more of a deterrent than a proportionate one; likewise rich people ought to have a (substantially) greater fine.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    So 50 hours' community service for being a passenger in a vehicle whilst drunk? This literally criminalises going home from a drunken night out by any other means than walking.....

    Also, tell me mobbsy91, would you use the phrase 'The person are in the vehicle.'?
    See above about the definition, will be made clearer in next reading/division!

    Where??
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    But if it's means tested, then any incentive through the monetary penalty goes out the window...

    No, it's the same as it currently is. It's so that someone who is in the driving seat with the keys in the ignition/engine on sitting there can be prosecuted (note the lesser punishment). This Bill doesn't introduce a punishment for being in control, as it does already exist. It may also be worth saying that the law does take into account if there is a legitimate reason for someone to be in the drivers seat whilst under the influence... with you saying that though, may make it a bit clearer in second reading or division!
    It certainly would be a good opportunity to make it much clearer. I understand the reasoning but I just think it gives too much scope in RL too now I'm away of the RL circumstance
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    No, I support increasing fines but if penalties are going to be toughened, the limit for should be lowered to match Scotland, or be lower.

    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I am voting nay solely based on the £5,000 fine. I believe it should be a fine which should be very considerable to all persons, but that needs to be means-tested. A drink-driving fine doesn't gain anything by bankrupting a poor person.

    edit: however, I should note I am very sympathetic to increasing the penalties for drink-driving, which ultimately I feel to be a really scummy thing to do and something which is underrated in our current penal system, largely punishable merely by disqualification from driving.
    If a poor individual does not want to be bankrupted by needing to pay a fine, the poor individual should not have broken the law: it is simple.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Perhaps I should point out, that being a passenger in a vehicle is quite obviously not being in charge of it...
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    The bill is solid barring the fine which has been outlined in the above post.

    Remove that item and replace it so that it's a lower amount or have it means tested - this way the bill yields much more merit.
    I do not see the fairness in giving a lesser punishment to a poor individual who breaks the law when a wealthy individual who breaks the same law is treated more harshly.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanE1998)
    It certainly would be a good opportunity to make it much clearer. I understand the reasoning but I just think it gives too much scope in RL too now I'm away of the RL circumstance
    If you look in the notes, you'll see that currently someone in charge of the vehicle still has hefty penalties so even if I removed that section, the current penalties would still apply, as they should...
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 18, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.