Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
97 Offences relating to safety zones
(1) Where a vessel enters or remains in a safety zone in contravention of section 96(1), the vessel’s owner and her master are each guilty of an offence.
(2) Where—
(a) a vessel enters or remains in a safety zone with a permission granted for the purposes of section 96, and
(b) there is a contravention of a condition of that permission in relation to the vessel or individuals on the vessel,
the vessel’s owner and her master are each guilty of an offence.
(3) A person who carries on an activity wholly or partly in a safety zone in contravention of section 96(2) is guilty of an offence.
(4) Where—
(a) a person carries on an activity wholly or partly in a safety zone with a permission granted for the purposes of section 96, and
(b) there is a contravention of a condition of that permission in relation to the carrying on of that activity,
that person is guilty of an offence.
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine, or to both.
(6) In proceedings against a person as the owner of a vessel for an offence under subsection (1) or (2), it is a defence for him to show that the existence of the safety zone—
(a) was not known to the master of the vessel in question at the time of the offence; and
(b) would not have become known to the master had he made reasonable inquiries before that time.
(7) In any other proceedings against a person for an offence under this section, it is a defence for that person to show that the existence of the safety zone—
(a) was not known to him at the time of the offence; and
(b) would not have become known to him had he made reasonable inquiries before that time.
(8) It is also a defence in proceedings against a person for an offence under this section for that person to show that he took all reasonable steps to prevent the contravention in question.
Your change, as a redline
97 Offences relating to safety zones
(1) Where a vessel enters or remains in a safety zone in contravention of section 96(1), the vessel’s owner and her master are each guilty of an offence.
(2) Where—
(a) a vessel enters or remains in a safety zone with a permission granted for the purposes of section 96, and
(b) there is a contravention of a condition of that permission in relation to the vessel or individuals on the vessel,
the vessel’s owner and her master are each guilty of an offence.
(3) A person who carries on an activity wholly or partly in a safety zone in contravention of section 96(2) is guilty of an offence.
(4) Where—
(a) a person carries on an activity wholly or partly in a safety zone with a permission granted for the purposes of section 96, and
(b) there is a contravention of a condition of that permission in relation to the carrying on of that activity,
that person is guilty of an offence.
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine, or to both.
(6) In proceedings against a person as the owner of a vessel for an offence under subsection (1) or (2), it is a defence for him to show that the existence of the safety zone—
(a) was not known to the master of the vessel in question at the time of the offence; and
(b) would not have become known to the master had he made reasonable inquiries before that time.
(7) In any other proceedings against a person for an offence under this section, it is a defence for that person to show that the existence of the safety zone—
(a) was not known to him at the time of the offence; and
(b) would not have become known to him had he made reasonable inquiries before that time.
(8) It is also a defence in proceedings against a person for an offence under this section for that person to show that he took all reasonable steps to prevent the contravention in question.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.