Memorandum from the Magistrates' Association
(DDD 30)
The Magistrates' Association welcomes the opportunity
to submit written evidence for a short inquiry into drink and
drug driving law, setting out their views on Sir Peter North's
recommendations.
Our views on the particular issues noted are
as follows:
1. Should the permitted blood alcohol limit
be reduced as proposed?
It has long been the policy of the MA that the
limit should be lowered from 80mg to 50mg, based on a resolution
passed at a previous AGM of the Association. We can offer no evidence
to support this, as clearly we do not see in court any drivers
below the current limit. We have been waiting to see data collected
by the new generation of enhanced, memory equipped, electronic
road side screening devices to see what light it sheds on the
question.
2. If so, is the mandatory one year driving
ban appropriate for less severe offenders, at the new (lower)
level?
No, this matter was recently considered at the
National Council of the Magistrates' Association, which concluded
that there should be mandatory disqualification for the new lower
range embraced, but it should be for a shorter period, say six
months. It is a general principle that punishment should be proportionate
to the severity of the offence. We also note that other European
countries that have adopted the lower level have much less severe
penalties.
3. How severe is the problem of drug driving
and what should be done to address it?
We are aware of the widespread use of illegal
drugs through our court experience but since we see only a small
number of prosecutions for drug driving, we therefore suspect
that the current legal regime is not very effective, and there
is a considerable problem which is not being addressed. In those
cases where both drugs and alcohol have been taken, the police
are likely to proceed only on the alcohol issue, as that is readily
measurable.
We support the recommendations made by Sir Peter
North, in particular the introduction of screening devices and
the introduction of an offence of driving with a level of certain
drugs in the body over a prescribed limit.
4. What wider costs and benefits are likely
to result from changes to drink and drug driving law?
The benefits of a lower number of road accidents
are self-evident, and a stricter regime in relation to drug-driving
would hopefully lead to something of a reduction in the use of
drugs. There would be costs implication in introducing screening
and measuring devices to test the level of drugs in a driver's
body. There may be a cost to the alcohol industry and to rural
pubs in lowering the drink-drive limit.
5. What would be the implications of such
changes for enforcement?
In our view the effectiveness of the law depends
very largely on the number of tests carried out. We would welcome
legalising random breath tests and the abolition of the statutory
option of a blood test at a low level of breath. Evidential roadside
breath testing when introduced should mean less time is spent
in the police station, and therefore the possibility of more time
at the roadside looking for further offenders. Random drug testing
could be carried out alongside breath testing.
6. Disqualification
We should like to mention one other matter.
The most effective sanction against drink-driving is disqualification,
but this is effective only if it can be enforced. We are concerned
at the number of people we see who drive while disqualified, and
the prevalence of driving while disqualified as a repeat offence.
We see people with convictions numbering in the 20s, 30s and 40s.
Clearly, the period of custody which can be imposed for what is
currently a summary-only offence is not a sufficient deterrent
for such offenders. We have been pressing the government to make
driving while disqualified an either way offence once again, at
least when it is a serial offence, so that a longer period of
custody could be imposed. The previous administration was not
persuaded that this is necessary, but we urge that this position
should be revisited, or alternatively that the provision already
enacted that increased the maximum sentence available to a magistrates'
court to 12 months should be implemented.
August 2010
| 
