Reducing the Drink Driving Limit in Scotland Analysis of Consultation Responses

Executive Summary

Background

1. Following the recent transfer of the power to set the level of the drink drive limit from Westminster to the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government published the consultation paper 'Reducing the Drink Driving Limit in Scotland'. The consultation sought views on the Government's proposals to reduce the drink drive limit in Scotland. The consultation ran from the 6 September 2012 until 29 November 2012. Although the Scottish Government has not been given associated powers relating to drink driving, such as being able to change the penalties for drink driving and introduce the ability for the police to breath test anytime, anywhere, the consultation invited suggestions on other measures that may be considered to tackle drink driving.

2. A total of 138 consultation responses were received; 82 from individuals and 56 from organisations.

3. The consultation posed five questions (one of which had two parts) relating to the proposal to reduce the existing blood / alcohol limit of 80mg / 100ml to 50 mg / 100ml and consequential equivalent reductions in the breath and urine limit.

Overview of responses

4. The following paragraphs highlight the main themes that emerged in relation to each of the questions in the consultation document.

Reducing the drink driving limit

5. Most respondents said that drink drive limits should be reduced in Scotland; 102 (74%) said yes, 33 (24%) said no and three did not reply to this question. Almost all of those who said no were individuals.

Scottish Government proposal

6. The Scottish Government is proposing:

• A reduction in the blood limit from 80mg of alcohol in every 100 ml of blood to 50 mg of alcohol in every 100 ml of blood.
• An (equivalent) reduction in the breath limit from 35 mcg of alcohol in 100 ml of breath to 22 mcg of alcohol in every 100 ml of breath.
• An (equivalent) reduction in the urine limit from 107 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of urine to 67 mg of alcohol in every 100 ml of urine.

7. The 102 respondents who supported a reduction in the drink drive limits were asked whether they agree with the Scottish Government proposal to reduce the drink driving limits.

8. There was also widespread agreement with this proposal, with 89 respondents (87%) saying 'yes' and 11 (11%) disagreeing, two did not reply to this question. Again, most disagreement came from individuals.

Consequences

9. Respondents were asked whether they had any evidence for the main consequences of the proposals. The main theme to emerge related to likely benefits such as fewer road accidents, fewer casualties or the reduced risk of road accidents.

10. There were also comments from a small number of respondents that the proposals would lead to increased public awareness on the impact of alcohol on society, that the proposals would provide a central message to drivers not to drink and drive, or that the proposals would help to deter drink driving.

11. A main concern identified by respondents related to a potential loss of business for local pubs, restaurants and hotels or a loss of tourism business to Scotland.

12. Some respondents voiced concern over a lack of available data and called for more data to be collected or made available in relation to drink driving accidents.

Financial impact

13. Few respondents provided evidence relating to any financial impact of the Scottish Government proposals and some of these found it difficult to provide figures in relation to the financial impact. However, these respondents pointed to a number of benefits such as a reduction in costs to the NHS, emergency services and health and social care services. Additionally, there were a small number of comments that there would be benefits to employers through fewer workplace accidents and less absenteeism.

14. One main comment was that while there would be some initial costs in implementing these proposals, these would be outweighed by the longer term savings. A few respondents pointed to a number of areas where additional costs would be generated and these included the need to re-calibrate roadside and evidential breathalysers, an advertising campaign, increased costs in enforcement, increased prosecutions and an increase in workloads for the police and court services.

15. There was again concern over the potential loss of business to the licensed trade and to tourism, with rural areas in particular seen as vulnerable.

16. There was also some concern over a lack of quantifiable evidence with which to assess savings.

Ancillary matters

17. The consultation document explained that drivers who have a breath sample reading over the current limit of 35 mcg and below 50 mcg of alcohol per 100 ml of breath, have a legal right to ask for the breath sample to be substituted with a sample of either blood or urine.

18. Very few respondents commented on ancillary matters; the main theme to emerge was agreement that the statutory option and ratios should be retained as set out in the consultation document.

Other measures

19. A wide range of other measures that should be considered in order to tackle drink driving was suggested by respondents¹.

20. There was some support for a zero limit; other respondents wanted to see a 20mg limit. There were comments on the need for different limits; especially for young, new or commercial drivers.

21. The need for clear information; delivered through publicity or education, was noted. This would apply especially to morning after effects and how to equate units to drink measures.

22. Respondents were in favour of additional powers for Scotland, particularly with regard to random breath testing.

23. There were calls for better, more consistent enforcement; and especially for more visible policing.

24. Respondents commented on the need for stricter penalties; vehicle forfeiture in particular.

25. There were also comments on the need for education to raise awareness of the limits and the effects of alcohol, with an emphasis on education for young or new drivers.

26. Respondents wanted to see publicity campaigns to promote the new limit and to promote the 'don't drink and drive' message.

27. There was a degree of concern over persistent offenders and the need to target this group.

28. Respondents commented on the need to look at preventative measures, especially alco-locks² and individual breathalysers.

Summary

29. The proposals put forward were widely supported and a number of respondents felt that the Scottish Parliament should be given further powers; especially in relation to random breath testing.

30. The need for publicity and education was noted in many responses.

31. Respondents wanted to see consistent enforcement and penalties and there were also comments on the need for preventative measures such as alco-locks.

32. There were calls for better data collection and availability in relation to drink driving, including accidents, test levels and costs.

33. There was a degree of concern from a small number of respondents over any impact on businesses and especially any impact in rural areas.

34. The findings from this consultation will help to inform policy and support discussion on what else can be done to tackle drink driving in Scotland.