Car-Insurance-UK-Supermarket.co.uk
compare online quotes the easy way
|
||||
|
||||
The public support a drop in the drink-driving limit29 June 2011by Janice May In the recent AA survey of 150,000 motorists, the support of the majority of people for a drop in the drink-driving limit was confirmed. 57% said that the current 80mg/100ml blood drink drive limit should be reduced while the vast majority (90%) agreed that passengers had a responsibility to stop the driver if they think he or she is over the drink drive limit. These figures suggest, as previous surveys on this issue have done, that attitudes among voters towards drink-driving are less liberal than those of their political repesentatives that have continued to resist a drop in the drink-driving limit. A recent RAC survey found that drink-driving was one of the biggest concerns of motorists with, in their survey, less than a fifth in support of maintaining the current drink-driving limit, with the largest proportion favouring a drop to a zero blood alcohol level for driving. It is not just the public that have argued against maintaining the current drink-driving limit, of course. Expert opinion, as laid out in the North Report and elsewhere, makes a compelling case for dropping the drink driving limit, a move that would undoubtedly save lives. While a drop to a blood alcohol level of 50mg/100ml in line with many other EU countries would be the most likely change if a new blood alcohol level were to be introduced in the future, those that advocate for a zero blood alcohol level are supported by research evidence that has shown that even at legal levels of alcohol intoxication, that there is a six-fold increase in accident risk. From the Government's perspective, the issue of the optimal blood alcohol limit for driving is complex. While they could not argue that dropping it would have no impact on road traffic accidents and deaths, they are also obliged to consider the potential impact on rural economies if people, in their droves, stopped driving to pubs that are not easily accessed by any other means. There would also be an impact on tax returns and on the profits of the powerful drinks industry in which numerous MPs have a personal financial interest. Many country pubs, already challenged by the economic downturn, as well as other businesses in their vicinity would be likely to be hit hard, with, quite possibly, many going out of business. The Government's line has been to talk up better policing of drink-driving (while cutting the numbers and availability of traffic police) as well as removing the loophole that many exploited to demand a blood test if only slightly over the limit on a breath test which, owing to the delay until it is taken, results in their blood level dropping under the legal limit; so allowing them to lawfully dodge a driving conviction. Is the Government's position reasonable? Well, taking a conservative approach (doing nothing), when the arguements for and against lowering the alcohol limit are complex is arguably a responsible approach as long as political dogma does not get in the way and prevent common sense prevailing. The question does need to be asked, however, as to whether the often dysfunctional relationship this country has with alcohol needs to be addressed more aggressively by our political masters. Attitudes need to change if we are to reduce the negative social and health consequences of alcohol misuse, including prevalent binge drinking among young people. Furthermore, given the compelling evidence that serious injuries and road deaths could be averted by reducing the drink-driving limit could be considered reason enough to drop the drink-driving limit desptie any economic adverse consequences. Drink-driving convicitons are costly for drivers too, of course, with the cost continuing over many years (typically for seven years) via increased car insurance premiums. This is an issue on which politicians could have taken the lead. Dropping the drink-driving limit is a move that would have been popular with voters as shown by the above-quoted surveys. That they did not seize the opportunity to do so is regretable, not least because there will be numerous avoidable road deaths as a result. We urge the Government to reconsider. |
||||
|
