Over 900 restaurants nationwide. Find your nearest now
Motorists could lose their licence after only two speeding offences under safety measures to be announced today. The government proposal would see drivers caught significantly over the limit given six penalty points. A driver with 12 points on their licence is disqualified automatically.
Currently, most motoring offences are dealt with by a standard fixed-penalty notice of a fine and three penalty points. Only a court can impose a penalty of more than three points for a speeding offence.
The new system, which was revealed by The Times last year, would see drivers receiving six-point penalties without a court hearing.
Drivers caught at 50mph in a 30mph zone, 60mph in a 40mph zone, and between 90mph and 100mph in a 70mph zone, could all be liable.
Under the proposed two-tier system, however, those who exceed the speed limit by only a few miles an hour would incur two penalty points. This means that drivers repeatedly caught just over the limit would not be banned until their seventh offence.
Ministers believe that a “sliding scale” of punishments for speeding offences is necessary to reduce the death toll on roads. Last year 2,946 people died, 57 of them children.
More than 1.1 million drivers are already on the brink of a ban, with six or more points on their licence.
Motoring groups expressed concerns that the new guidelines could drastically increase that number. The Institute of Advanced Motorists was worried that the new system could result in some drivers being banned for two offences in one trip.
“If a driver went through two cameras at excessive speed during one journey, they could automatically lose their licence under the proposal,” a spokesman said. It also expressed concern that introducing a two-point penalty would undermine the Government’s message that even small breaches of the limit can kill.
Ministers are expected to promote speed awareness courses as an alternative to the loss of three points. They are reluctant to reduce the number of penalty points for speeding in a 30mph zone. Research has shown that a pedestrian who is hit by a car at 35mph is twice as likely to be killed as one hit at 30mph.
The new speeding guidelines are set out in a Road Safety consultation paper from Jim Fitzpatrick, the Transport Minister. It is expected to run for several months before ministers enshrine the proposals in law.
The Government will also announce that it has backed away from lowering the drink-driving limit, which will remain unchanged. Britain has one of the highest limits in Europe at 80mg of alcohol to 100ml blood. Doctors and road safety campaigners had backed a cut to 50mg, enough to put someone over the limit after a single drink. Ministers are understood to want to concentrate on the small number of people who drive while well over the legal limit.
As part of the shift in emphasis, ministers will expand the “High Risk Offenders Scheme” targeting persistent drink-drivers. This could see friends encouraged to tell police about those who frequently drive while drunk.
Cathy Keeler of Brake, the road safety campaign group, welcomed the prospect of increased penalties for the worst speeders but said that she was worried about a two-point penalty, because it could reduce the punishment for speeding in built-up areas.
— Foreign embassies refusing to pay the congestion charge in London have racked up a bill of more than £23 million. Yesterday’s disclosure will intensify the continuing battle over the £8 daily charge between Transport for London and the embassies, which claim that they are exempt from paying it because of diplomatic immunity. The US is the biggest debtor, with its embassy owing more than £2.7 million.
Money Central: the 10 most expensive places to park in the world
The vast majority of the UK driving population are sensible. Why pitch traffic policies at the lowest common denominator? This destroys respect. Unnecessarily low speed limits on good roads and overly fussy traffic lights don't help. Likewise, shouldn't the speed limits in built up area be 20mph?
Ian, Manchester, UK
Clarkson is right: your speed limit should be directly proportional to your IQ. Politicians would need a chauffeur to legally travel faster than a pushcart. Check out the results of imposing speedlimits last year in Australia's Northern Territory: fatalities now up 50% year on year.
Alan Wilkinson, Russell, NZ
"If a driver went through two cameras at excessive speed during one journey, they could automatically lose their licence"
And if thats not a detterent to driving at excesive speed,i dont know what is.
It makes perfect sense, as long as they do reduce points for slightly breaking the limit
keith, chester,
There must be more of a crack down on speeding in 30 mph zones. The research you cite in your article makes the case clearly. I am sick of seeing police looking for speeding on motorways and dual carraigeway A roads but not patrolling residential roads where children are at very real risk.
Graham Davidson, Woking, UK
The entire penalty system for speeding, indeed it's role in incidents is disproportionate to the impact of that offence. Again we're given the death toll on the roads: 6% attributal to speed alone. How many children are hit by cars travelling at 85 on the motorway?
Jon, Bristol,
Govt statistics show that speeding is a factor in only 5% of accidents. To reflect risk, penalties should be high - 6 pts - for speeding by a small margin - 5 mph - in residential streets and modest penalty - 2pts - for speeding on dual carriageways and with a higher speed limit on motorways
Clifford, Reading,
Are you aware that vehicles not registered with DVLC do not get the summonse sent from a speed camera and the ticket is scraped. Why dont the government look at tightening the vehicle registration laws so speed cameras become a fair system for all.
Tom, dieppe, france
I agree that those who drive at 50 mph in a 30 mph zone should be punished severely but 90 mph on a motorway should not be treated as a severe crime.
Robert Miller, Harrow, UK
Funny placing this article next to photos of a Ferrari and an Aston Martin, of a Ferrari "a hot new supercar".
R. Adams, Calais, France
Crikey! As being firmly in the anti-speed camera lobby for years I'm surprised that I can actually see some sense in this. It does appear that anyone driving 50 in a 30 is driving dangerously, so they should be punished more.
I'm really surprised at my own reaction to this, cautiously in favour
Gordon, Corralejo, Fuerteventura, Cana, Spain
It is absolutely rediculous how we spend more time worrying about speeding offences and criminalising vast swathes of the UK populace than we do tackling more serious crimes. I'm sure everyone would much rather have policemen patrolling city centres than hiding in bushes on the side of the road.
Kam, Naples, Italy
With most companies looking to downsize, a massive increase in banned drivers would help select those for redundancy. It will also ensure the Government will lose significant tax revenues from those drivers and also extra benefit payments. But Brown has unlimited funds so it doesnt matter.
john, cheshire,