From "The Daily Telegraph":
"Liam Byrne, the immigration minister, has been fined £100 for driving while using his mobile phone.
(snip)
A former policeman, Mr Byrne was elected to Parliament in 2004 and also serves as minister for the West Midlands."
|
According to Sky News he was apologetic (as is everyone who gets caught) but said it was "An important call".
That's all right then, as long as he wasn't being a dangerous prat.
--
|
So, is he getting the ticket or not?
|
Well, now read the full news.
He got fined and got points!
So, far I used to think that ministers are chauffeur driven.
|
On Radio 2 a while ago they said he was getting a £100 fine and 3 points.
You can buy a bluetooth headset on ebay for £20, its an easy law to comply with, but you still see people doing it all the time...
|
From what I see there are as many drivers using their mobiles now as there were before the introduction of stiffer penalties.
Clk Sec
|
|
|
|
Good to see the law being enforced for a change. Rich 9-3 is right - bluetooth is cheap enough so there is no excuse.
|
I bought my bluetooth headset from Argos for £12 only!
|
|
I've never understood why people buy a £60K car but don't get a handsfree kit fitted
|
he probably thinks that flouting the law earns respec in da street
|
Sorry Bell Boy but "thinks" and "Government Minister" do not quite go together..
madf
|
Yet another case of politicians' "Don't do as I do, do as I say" - good to see he got his just desserts.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
It makes you wonder how some people managed before the moby was invented. All a moby does for me is give me a feeling of security. Mine justs lives (turned off) in the door pocket in case (never happened yet!) the car breaks down ~ sad or what?
--
L\'escargot.
|
Mine justs lives (turned off) in the door pocket in case (never happened yet!) the car breaks down ~
L\'escargot.
My feelings entirely. I cannot for the life of me understand people's obsession with mobile phone and the necessity to talk incessantly on them day in and day out. Do they realise how absurd they look?
|
|
I've never understood why people buy a £60K car but don't get a handsfree kit fitted
It does seem to me that the more expensive the car the less likely to have a handsfree system - i'm forever seeing top end motors with the drive holding a phone to his/her ear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The local MP; a Home Office Minister; ex-job.... and he still got booked.
That must have been one very, very, ticked-off copper.
What's the betting the conversation started with; "Don't you know who I am..."
|
He appears a sanctimonious twerp.snip
And he was apparently answering a call....
From BBC News: (I like the last bit)
"Byrne has campaigned vigorously on road safety since entering Parliament, tabling a petition in 2005 from constituents calling for tougher penalties for dangerous drivers.
He once told a parliamentary committee that the most dangerous drivers were "serial potential killers" and said he was "shocked" at the leniency of sentences handed down to them.
His website lists safer roads among the eight priorities on his Action Plan for Hodge Hill.
He sat on the parliamentary committee which shaped the 2006 Road Safety Act, which increased fixed penalty fines for driving while using a mobile. "
madf
Edited by Pugugly {P} on 02/11/2007 at 15:23
|
He sat on the parliamentary committee which shaped the 2006 Road Safety Act which increased fixed penalty fines for driving while using a mobile. "
Hoist with his own petard then, so no need to weep. But shrill expressions of schadenfreude can have a dodgy side.
|
Everything seems above board and it will probably act as a warning to others.
I recently read that 126,000 (IIRC) drivers got caught using mobiles in 2005 - seems a lot..
|
I recently read that 126 000 (IIRC) drivers got caught using mobiles in 2005 - seems a lot..
>>>>were they all in the same car then?
|
|
IMHO, I don't think anyone can concentrate on 'important matters of state' at the same time as driving a car - hands-free or not! I couldn't even concentrate on a phone discussion with SWMBO about 'what's for tea?' when I'm driving ;-)
|
|
|
|
>>I recently read that 126,000 (IIRC) drivers got caught using mobiles in 2005 - seems a lot..>>
Tip of the iceberg.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
It always interests me when people complain about legislators making personal mistakes. Without condoning using a mobile phone while driving, are we seriously saying that our politicians should be completely perfect before they have the right to pass legislation? In that case there would be no laws. His conduct is relevant but we're all human and it should help make him a better representative.
|
>wee scotty dog.
The man has a record as anti phones in cars.
He is driving along.
And receives a call.
He has a choice.. stop and answer or continue driving. He keeps on driving.
He says it is an improtant call.. so he keeps on driving.
That is a course of action which is 100% at variance to any sensible person cos if it is important and presumably complex, he would have to concentrate..
We have a Government which passes laws which impinge on civil liberty on the grounds they are needed for public safety.
If they want support and sympathy of that approach (no smoking etc) then they MUST strictly abide by them or it is plain hypocrisy.
If they don't want to keep those rules, fine. Just don't preach.
The man preaches. Nuff said.
madf
|
Sorry madf - seem to have repeated your sentiments - only excuse is that I am a slow typer and my link to HJ site seems v. slow at the moment.
--
Phil
|
|
|
|
"are we seriously saying that our politicians should be completely perfect "
No, but they should set a good example - and there is no excuse for this - are you really suggesting that he knew that this was an extremely important immigration issue call before he picked up the phone?
Anyway, no excuse, if you expect calls like that while driving get a hands free.
--
Phil
|
|
I agree, politicians should set a good example. We all should. I just smile when I see people ranting as if politicians should be perfect. They can't be. Neither can preachers. They make mistakes as well. It does not automatically disqualify them from the job - or we would have none. I tend to wonder if it just makes people feel better about themselves to shout about how bad someone else is. Especially legislators. It's a thankless task and I for one, wouldn't want the spotlight shined on my behaviour 24/7.
|
|
By the way, it's worth repeating "I do not condone the use of mobiles while driving".
|
|
|
the pensions not so bad though wee scotty dog ;-)
|
How did he know it was an important call? He must have answered it first!
Why doesn't he (and everyone elsr driving around with hand-held phones) buy himself a Bluetooth or wired headset?
|
maybe he has like traders i meet 5 phones and this one was his red bat phone that needs answering pronto
|
the pensions not so bad though wee scotty dog ;-)
Don't wind me up. It's long since rankled with me that the HMRC pension limits for MPs are more generous than for us lesser mortals.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
It can't be that thankless! 12 weeks off a year, a full pension after about 20 years service, vast expenses and hundreds of applicants for every constituency long list. Seems like a very desirable job and if you can't stand a bit of public scrutiny don't join them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why it went to Court. I don't get why he was fined £100.
The usual penalty for this is a 3 points and £60 NIP. It usually goes to Court only if the NIP is declined.
Any ideas? Perhaps he declined the NIP to begin with, hoping his status would make it go no further? (Pure guess).
Edited by pendulum on 03/11/2007 at 09:20
|
He wouldn't get an NIP for it. Any number of reasons that it went to summons. For instance.
1. He had points already that may have meant he would have been disqualified on totting up thus precluding a Fixer.
2. He refused a fixer.
3. He was spragged by someone and the Police investigated it and issued a summons.
4. He was caught on camera and the tape handed to Police.
5. Or he felt so guilty that he reported himself to the Police.
|
Any number of reasons that it went to summons. For instance.
5. Or he felt so guilty that he reported himself to the Police.
Cripes. I nearly fell off my stool, laughing.
|
|
I'm glad - it was meant to be funny.
Edited by Pugugly {P} on 03/11/2007 at 11:43
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why it went to Court. I don't get why he was fined £100. The usual penalty for this is a 3 points and £60 NIP. It usually goes to Court only if the NIP is declined.
>>
Quoting from a daily paper
"....pulled over by police while driving a Ford Escort...
When officers asked him how many penalty points he already had on his license he claimed he did not know, meaning that the offence had to go to court in case Mr Byrne faced disqualification under the totting-up rules"
Oh dear! If you believe the above then he is an even bigger xxxx than I first thought.
It was bad enough his comments about it being "an important conversation" and trying to discuss it rather than pull over but it strikes me as he was also trying to be a clever clogs saying that he did not know his points tally.
I suspect most drivers have a good idea how many valid points are on their licence.
|
|
Ahh, that explains why it ended up in court. They couldn't give him a FPN (that's what I meant when I said NIP, PU!) because he failed to tell them basic info about how many points he already had. I read that he had 3 previous points on his licence taking him up to 6 now.
|
Sorry, sounded pedantic. :-)
Various versions of the "truth" in different news reports.
|
|
|
|
Quoting from a daily paper "....pulled over by police while driving a Ford Escort...
A Ford Escort? That's not his car then. Surely MPs can afford at least a Focus or maybe it's a classic Escort ;-)
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
