David Williams, chief executive of GEM Motoring Assist, is urging ministers to “stop making pointless proposals” about big rises in court fines and "focus their attention on providing better enforcement of existing laws".
Responding to recent “headline-grabbing” remarks by Jeremy Wright, justice minister, David Williams MBE (pictured) said: “You have to catch offenders before you can fine them, and current levels of police enforcement on the UK’s roads are woefully inadequate.
“Besides, any new legislation would require time for debate in Parliament, but there is currently no current timetable for any such discussion.
“GEM believes it is vital that there are more speed controls, more drink and drug drive checks, more seatbelt checks, more mobile phone checks, more vehicle safety checks, as well as an increase in police patrols to identify and deal with unsafe driving acts.
“This will serve as a welcome deterrent and will see higher levels of compliance with road traffic rules.
“The direct result of better compliance will be less use of court time for motoring offences, and – crucially – fewer deaths and serious injuries on our roads.”
GEM Motoring Assist
GEM Motoring Assist is a trading name of The Guild of Experienced Motorists, established in 1932, as an independent driver-based road safety association. GEM’s stated aim is to improve safety for all road users through the sponsorship and initiation of accident prevention measures throughout the UK, and to provide motoring and safety information to its own members.
The “attention grabbing” headlines, as I recall, were proposals that drivers should face the option of fines up to 100 times greater if they defend themselves in court and lose than if they pay the fine whether guilty or not. Call that justice?
Idris Francis Fight Back With Facts Petersfield
0
Usually they are though, Eric. Drink driving; seatbelt wearing; defective tyres; compliance with traffic signals; driving without due care etc. etc. Just a few examples of laws, the compliance of which I’m sure most would agree are beneficial to road safety.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
Hugh
Once again, you are assuming that law enforcement, compliance and safety are automatic bedfellows. They perhaps ought to be but they are not.
Eric Bridgstock, Independent Road Safety Research, St Albans
0
Might he not have just used his common sense? It’s not the most difficult of concepts to understand after all.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
I don’t think he does – just guess work.
Pete
0
Could Mr Williams let everybody know what evidence he has that shows “The direct result of better compliance will [be] crucially – fewer deaths and serious injuries on our roads.”?
Duncan MacKillop, Stratford on Avon
0