Scottish Drink Drving Chages

[TooMany2cvs]

Nigel Worc's said:

yes they are, they are proposing to ban someone from driving on the roads of England & Wales for driving below the drink drive limits in England & Wales.

<bangs head against table>

<three guesses whose, btw>

[gowmonster]

Nigel Worc's said:

TooMany2cvs said:

But the "jocks" aren't changing ANYTHING in the rest of the UK. You can drive on roads in England, Wales or NI with a blood alcohol between 50 and 80 with impunity. The "jocks" are only changing the limit in Scotland.

yes they are, they are proposing to ban someone from driving on the roads of England & Wales for driving below the drink drive limits in England & Wales.

If they want different rules, then they should only have authority regarding driving on the roads they control.

I suspect it hasn't been an issue until now, as rather sensibly the rules have been the same.

It is going to become very silly if we allow different regions of the UK to have different traffic laws, and then impose sanctions covering the whole of the UK.

yes they are, they are proposing to ban someone from driving on the roads of England & Wales for driving in scotland above scotland's drink drive limits, but below the drink drive limits in England & Wales.

[agtlaw]

gowmonster said:

yes they are, they are proposing to ban someone from driving on the roads of England & Wales for driving in scotland above scotland's drink drive limits, but below the drink drive limits in England & Wales.

I have little doubt that there will be a legal challenge in due course. An English driver banned in Scotland/UK for 22-35ug in breath would be a likely candidate.

[Jonleeper]

MagneticMeerkat said:

sim72 said:

To be fair, it is a good point. Worcestershire does not have differing laws to the rest of England. Scotland has passed a law which is different from the rest of the UK. Now I can quite understand that if you're caught with, say 60mg in Scotland, you get a ban from Scottish roads. But why should that ban apply in England and Wales, where it's not an offence? I strongly suspect the first one of these that goes to the EHCR will lose.

Worcestershire DOES have different laws to elsewhere in England!!!!

As do other counties such as Essex. I use Essex as an example because I live there. And it's an awesome county but I digress.

For example, in Essex, it's legal for any tax exempt vehicle to use a council car park for free. Therefore a vintage car doesn't have to display a ticket. I don't know why this is, but it's a byelaw peculiar to Essex. Try that elsewhere and you'll get fined.

Continuing the theme there are legal ramifications attached to crabbing on the Mersea Island pontoon. Like where one can crab etc.

None of this applies in Worcestershire. I'm sure they have their own byelaws.

The problem with your example is the Essex are not imposing their punishments on other counties. If I break the Essex byelaw on crabbing on the Mersea Island pontoon and am banned from crabbing there, accepting that this might not be the punishment but it is one that mirrors the topic, I am not banned from crabbing in the rest of the UK. The punishment is constrained to areas controlled by the issuing body, ie Essex.

MagneticMeerkat said:

Ditto Scotland can, and will, have a lower drink driving limit.

No-one, or no-one that I can see on this thread, is arguing that Scotland cannot, or even should not, impose a lower limit and punish people who break that new lower limit. What they are saying is that the punishment should not be carried over into an area where the new Scottish law is not in force and the act is not illegal.

[Nigel Worc's]

agtlaw said:

gowmonster said:

yes they are, they are proposing to ban someone from driving on the roads of England & Wales for driving in scotland above scotland's drink drive limits, but below the drink drive limits in England & Wales.

I have little doubt that there will be a legal challenge in due course. An English driver banned in Scotland/UK for 22-35ug in breath would be a likely candidate.

Why is the Legal profession in England & Wales allowing this to happen ?

Why isn't the legal profession in England and Wales saying "hang about a minute Scotland, you cannot do this" ?

[ging84]

agtlaw said:

I have little doubt that there will be a legal challenge in due course. An English driver banned in Scotland/UK for 22-35ug in breath would be a likely candidate.

But would any legal challenge have any chance of success?
If i moved to the isle of man where national speed limit is still unrestricted i believe, would i have a shot at challenging driving bans/convictions for exceeding the national speed limit on the mainland?

[Corpulent Tosser]

ging84 said:

agtlaw said:

I have little doubt that there will be a legal challenge in due course. An English driver banned in Scotland/UK for 22-35ug in breath would be a likely candidate.

But would any legal challenge have any chance of success?
If i moved to the isle of man where national speed limit is still unrestricted i believe, would i have a shot at challenging driving bans/convictions for exceeding the national speed limit on the mainland?

I would hope a challenge would have a chance of being successful.

The IOM has its own driving licence, but a UK ban applies there due to an agreement between the governments, in Scotland on the other hand we drive on a UK licence, so I can see reason to contest a ban from driving in England and Wales for something which is not illegal there.

[TooMany2cvs]

So when did drink-driving become legal in England and Wales? It's merely a question of a different limit, not a different offence. It'll go on your licence as a DR10, same as if you drink-drive anywhere else in the UK.

[Corpulent Tosser]

The fact remains that a ban would apply to a UK driving licence for an action which is not illegal in UK, only Scotland.

I do not think that is correct and hope it is challenged in an English court.

[tex200]

Clearly the sensible thing to do is for Westminster to drop the limit for England and Wales.

And a quick chat with N.I. to make sure the whole UK is doing the same.

After that, the only people left complaining are the ones who enjoy drinking and driving surely?

[Corpulent Tosser]

Why would that be sensible?

Is it really necessary for the government to waste time debating and passing a bill to change a law which doesn't need changing? Are there not more pressing matters for government to be debating?

[TooMany2cvs]

Corpulent Tosser said:

Is it really necessary for the government to waste time debating and passing a bill to change a law which doesn't need changing?

No, it isn't necessary - because the actual law would not require changing.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/sectio...

Only the "prescribed limit" needs to be amended, and that would not require legislation to be passed.

There are plenty of other pieces of the Road Traffic Act which don't apply across the entire country. The Dangerous Driving sections don't apply to Northern Ireland - they have their own legislation (I presume) to cover similar. Yet a ban for DD10 would apply in NI, and a ban for the NI equivalent would apply in GB.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/I...

[agtlaw]

tex200 said:

Clearly the sensible thing to do is for Westminster to drop the limit for England and Wales.

And a quick chat with N.I. to make sure the whole UK is doing the same.

After that, the only people left complaining are the ones who enjoy drinking and driving surely?

NI is considering the same limit as Scotland (22 in breath), and lower limits (9 in breath) for provisonal drivers, etc. Draft legislation proposes a 6 month ban for anyone convicted of the lower limit offence.

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/Assembly-Business/Leg...

[Corpulent Tosser]

TooMany2cvs said:

No, it isn't necessary - because the actual law would not require changing.

I would change that sentence to read the law doesn't require changing, there is nothing wrong with the current limits, they just need to be enforced.

It is change for the sake of being seen to do something.

[tex200]

Corpulent Tosser said:

, there is nothing wrong with the current limits, they just need to be enforced.

.

Are people regularly failing breath tests and being sent on their way? Do you have a reliable information to back this up?

[Corpulent Tosser]

tex200 said:

Corpulent Tosser said:

, there is nothing wrong with the current limits, they just need to be enforced.

.

Are people regularly failing breath tests and being sent on their way? Do you have a reliable information to back this up?

Not that I am aware of, maybe my use of enforced confused you of my meaning, I did of course mean that there should be more checks that drivers are not exceeding the limit, every year around Christmas there are additional checks done on drivers, why just then, this should be the norm, if regular drink drivers knew there was a greater chance of being caught they might think twice about doing it, changing the limit will not stop the habitual drink driver from continuing to drink drive.

My point being is there is nothing wrong with the current limit (IMO) I do not think the new limit will make a difference to road safety, though it will lead to more prosecutions and more lives changed for the worse for doing something which is perfectly legal in the rest of UK.

[TooMany2cvs]

Corpulent Tosser said:

My point being is there is nothing wrong with the current limit (IMO)

As you say, in your opinion.

The problem with that is that you aren't part of the Scottish government, and the opinion of the people who are differs from yours.

[Corpulent Tosser]

TooMany2cvs said:

As you say, in your opinion.

The problem with that is that you aren't part of the Scottish government, and the opinion of the people who are differs from yours.

Yes indeed, the people who are paid to represent me, to look after the interests of the country, this and again it is my opinion, is an easy change to make as few MSPs will be prepared to put their heads above the parapet and be seen to endorse drink driving, but there are issues which actually need addressed - this (again IMO) is not one of them, but it makes the SNP look as if they are actually making a difference.

I just hope the legality of revoking the UK driving licence of an English visitor for something which is perfectly legal in England is challenged successfully.

[TooMany2cvs]

Corpulent Tosser said:

Yes indeed, the people who are paid to represent me

So vote for somebody who's against it, then. If enough of your fellow electorate agree with you, then your preference will prevail. Welcome to democracy.

[quote]I just hope the legality of revoking the UK driving licence of an English visitor for something which is perfectly legal in England is challenged successfully.

It might very well be legal to drive in England or Wales or NI above the new Scottish limit, and if you do so in England or Wales or NI, you won't be banned for it. OTOH, if you do it in Scotland, you will - because it'll be illegal IN SCOTLAND, which is where you're doing it. 70mph is legal on some roads, but that doesn't mean you can't be nicked for doing 70 in a 30.

It's really not a very hard concept - drink-driving is not legal anywhere in the UK. RTA88 will not need changing. B'sides, as I also already pointed out, there are other bannable offences in RTA88 which actually don't apply to all of the UK, so even if drink-driving wasn't legal in England or Wales, that doesn't mean that a Scottish court can't ban you for drink-driving IN SCOTLAND. And any UK ban applies nationally. Being banned for doing 70 in a 30 doesn't just ban you from driving on 30mph roads.

[Corpulent Tosser]

TooMany2cvs said:

It's really not a very hard concept - drink-driving is not legal anywhere in the UK.

On the contrary, it most certainly is.