Clause 25

by deleting the words “or a public path warden” in subsections (1) and (2) and substituting in each case the words “or outsourced enforcement officer, or a police officer or public path warden”;

by inserting, immediately after the words “the authorised officer” in subsections (1) and (2), the words “, outsourced enforcement officer, police officer”;

by inserting, immediately after the words “fails to give” in subsection (4), the words “in accordance with subsection (2)”; and

by inserting, immediately after subsection (5), the following subsection:“(6) In any proceedings for an offence under subsection (4), an accused which is a company, a partnership or an unincorporated body is not to be treated as having proved that the accused did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained the information required unless the accused also proves, on a balance of probabilities, that —

it had kept a proper and accurate record containing prescribed particulars of each occasion on which it permits any individual to ride or drive a vehicle —

whether or not the individual is a director, member, partner, officer, employee or agent of the accused or otherwise; and

whether or not the individual is permitted to ride or drive the vehicle in the course of the individual’s employment with the accused or otherwise; but(b)the record shows no individual having been permitted by the accused to ride or drive the vehicle at or about the time of the alleged offence.”.