Conclusions and recommendations
1. We
recommend that individual police forces should be consulted to
assess the respective cost-benefit implications of more effectively
enforcing the current drink drive limit against any proposed reduction.
(Paragraph 36)
2. In the long term,
the Government should aim for an "effectively zero"
limit of 20mg/100ml but we acknowledge that this is too great
a step at this stage. (Paragraph 38)
3. We believe that
any reduction in the legal drink drive limit should only occur
after an extensive Government education campaign, run in conjunction
with the pub, restaurant and hospitality industries, about drink
strengths and their effect on the body. In doing so, the Government
should look to learn from experiences in other countries which
have successfully implemented a reduction in the drink drive limit
to either 50mg/100ml or 20mg/100ml. (Paragraph 39)
4. The success of
Great Britain's drink driving policy has been largely attributable
to the deterrent effect of the current 12-month mandatory disqualification
penalty and we believe that it should remain even after a reduction
in the legal BAC limit. (Paragraph 41)
5. Effective police
enforcement is equally as important to deter drink driving as
the level of the legal blood alcohol limit. Enforcement of drink
drive law in Great Britain must be much more visible, frequent,
sustained and well-publicised. (Paragraph 50)
6. The Government
should amend the Road Traffic Act 1988 to give police an additional
power to enable preliminary breath tests to be required and administered
in the course of a designated drink drive enforcement operation.
(Paragraph 54)
7. Drug driving is
as important an issue as drink driving, given the risks involved
to other road users, the relative lack of public awareness and
the current lack of adequate police enforcement. The Government
should aim to improve the detection of drug driving so that it
is as important a road safety priority as combating drink driving.
We recommend that the Government develop a five-year strategy
for tackling drug driving. (Paragraph 69)
8. Improving public
awareness about the likelihood of being caught by the police is
essential in order to deter people from driving under the influence
of drugs. A high-profile drug driving advertising and information
campaign should be central to a five-year strategy. This should
highlight the consequences of being caught and convicted for this
crime. The campaign should also inform the public about the significant
safety risks that a driver impaired on drugs poses to themself
and others. (Paragraph 70)
9. It is unfortunate
that a drug screening device has not been type-approved seven
years after police were granted the legal power to use them. However,
we welcome the Government's commitment to install drug screening
devices in every police station by 2012. We will monitor progress
to ensure the Government meets its target so that no further time
is lost. (Paragraph 84)
10. Drug screening
devices for use at the police station should only be an interim
measure. The Government's aim for the medium-term should be to
develop and type-approve a drug screening device for use at the
roadside, drawing on experience in other parts of the world in
developing such devices. (Paragraph 85)
11. On balance we
favour the adoption of a "zero-tolerance" offence for
illegal drugs which are known to impair driving, which are widely
misused, including among drivers, and which represent a substantial
part of the drug driving problem. As with alcohol, "zero-tolerance"
would not necessarily mean the detection of drugs in the bloodstream.
An appropriate quantity would need to be detected in order to
rule out, for example, passive inhalation. (Paragraph 98)
12. If a new offence
is created, the Government should retain the current impairment
offence to cover other drugs that impair driving ability, such
as medicines and 'legal highs'. (Paragraph 99)
| 
