The power of police to test large numbers of drivers at the roadside for alcohol and drugs with no cause to suspect they are impaired, and to prosecute drivers found to be positive, is a vital enforcement tool in the fight against impaired driving. But the reality is that different countries enable this to startlingly different degrees.
The law
Different countries have different laws on drink and drug driving. In the UK, for example, there is no law banning drug driving. Drivers can only be prosecuted if their driving has been proven to be careless or dangerous due to their impairment. While there are laws in many countries banning drink driving, the allowable level of alcohol varies wildly. Sweden, for example, has a legal limit which is four times lower than that in the UK.
Random and compulsory checks
In many countries police have the power to stop drivers at random where they think it is appropriate, with no need to suspect the driver is under the influence (for example, near pubs and clubs late at night). In some countries police have the power to set up road blocks and either select drivers to test, or test all drivers (known in New Zealand as compulsory testing). Random testing is allowed in most EU countries, the only exceptions being the UK and Denmark. [2] Until recently, random breath testing was not allowed in Ireland, but legislation was passed in July 2006 has allowed random breath testing at certain times and in carefully targeted areas where the statistical likelihood of a fatal drink-drive crash is greater. This could be, for example, on weekend nights, enabling police to conduct breath tests at pub and club closing time. Sustained and intensive random breath-testing has been identified as a highly effective means of reducing drink-drive casualties. [12] However, in some otherwise-developed countries this doesn’t happen. In the UK, police do not have the power to stop drivers at random to carry out breath tests. UK officers can only carry out a breath test if: there has been a road traffic offence; there has been a road traffic incident; or the police have reason to suspect the driver has been drinking. In its 1998 consultation paper ‘Combating Drink Driving: Next Steps’, the Government acknowledged that breath tests were the main enforcement weapon against drink-driving. [14] Although the document claimed the Government did not favour unrestricted police powers, it stated that ‘some increase in these powers, properly regulated, seems worth considering’. Yet nothing has changed. [1]
The tools to do the job
While breathalysers have been around for years and are an effective roadside tool for detecting drink driving, tools to detect drug driving at the roadside vary from country to country. While roadside drugalysers have been used for some time in countries including Germany and Australia, for example, in the UK they are not yet approved for use. As far back as 2004, the UK’s Home Office Scientific Development Branch was developing a portable drugs screening device for use at the roadside, which it expected manufacturers to be able to produce by the end of 2006[15], but no testing device is yet available to police. Similar devices are used successfully by other countries, such as Germany and Australia. The Home Office has also investigated the feasibility of developing a handheld roadside screening device that can measure driver impairment, whether from drink, drugs or tiredness, and deliver a quick ‘yes or no’ verdict on whether a person is in a fit state to drive[16]. While training of police officers to carry out FIT tests (which involve police asking drivers to touch their noses and walk in a straight line) can help identify impaired drivers, it is not the best answer for the 21st century.
Volume of enforcement
It’s important to have enough of a police resource to carry out significant numbers of breath tests, in order to act as a real and visible deterrent to drivers who might otherwise risk drink driving. However, different countries invest differently in drink drive enforcement, with the UK, for example, not scoring highly. There has been a decrease in number of breath tests carried out in the UK in recent years, despite rises in drink driving. In 2007 there were 600,000 breath tests compared with 815,500 in 1998, meaning that in 2007 less than 2% of drivers were tested compared with up to half or more in some countries, such as New Zealand (see below). [6] Even drivers and riders involved in road crashes resulting in injury are not always tested in the UK. In 2004, there were tests on just 183,972 of the 362,303 drivers and riders involved in road crashes resulting in injury. [5] In the financial year 2004/5 in New Zealand, there were 2,090,898 breath tests carried out. Yet in the UK in 2004 the police carried out only 578,000. This shows a wild discrepency in testing rates, considering that the population of the UK is 60 million yet the population of New Zealand is just 4 million. [11]
CASE STUDY: New South Wales, Australia
In 1982, New South Wales Police introduced a programme of random testing drivers for alcohol. Highly visible checkpoints were established on main thoroughfares and passing drivers were chosen at random and breath tested. All drivers who were stopped were given a breath test. Approximately one million tests were administered each year, to a driving population of about three million; to achieve this, police were taken off general patrol duties. By the fifth year of the system being in place, more than 50% of drivers in Sydney, the capital of New South Wales, had been tested at least once and more than 80% had seen the system in operation. Extensive publicity was given to the programme from the start and continued for a number of years. The introduction of the random breath testing saw an immediate 22% drop in the total numbers of fatal crashes and a decline of about 36% in alcohol-related fatal crashes, based on the figures from the previous three years. [7]In 2005, 3.4 million breath tests were carried out across the state. [8]
CASE STUDY: Norway
Norwegian police can carry out random roadside breath tests and use roadblocks, either stopping cars at regular intervals, or sometimes blocking a road for 24 hours and stopping every passing car. In 2005, Norwegian police introduced a designated ‘drink-drive’ car for roadside testing. It contains a standard breathalyser, but also a more accurate breath-testing device that records the exact amount the driver is over the limit. The police use this if the driver tests positive on the standard breathalyser. These more accurate tests are normally carried out at the police station, so this method saves time and money. [9]
CASE STUDY: New Zealand
In New Zealand the police carry out compulsory breath testing, rather than random breath testing. This means that the police try to stop every vehicle and test every driver on a particular road, rather than pulling out cars at random. With compulsory breath testing, if a vehicle passes a checkpoint the driver knows they will always be stopped and tested. Compulsory breath testing was introduced in New Zealand in the early 1980s. Each of 12 police districts has a ‘booze bus’ with a dedicated team running it. Metropolitan Auckland (three police districts and several cities with a population of about 1.5million) has five booze buses and more than 40 designated staff. NZ carries out about 1.5 million compulsory tests a year plus about 800,000 tests by officers who are mobile, representing in total about half the country’s population. The country prosecutes about 26,000 drivers a year.
What should countries do?
- Have laws banning drink driving and drug driving, without the need to prove driving was impaired.
- Approve up to date testing devices for drink and drugs that can effectively be used at the roadside.
- Invest resources in traffic policing so drivers expect to get stopped and tested for drink or drugs at some point in any given year, rather than expect not to be stopped, with a target of more than half of the driving population tested in any given year.
- Give police the powers to stop drivers without the need for them to have been involved in an incident, or without having reason to suspect them of drink or drug driving, through random and compulsory testing.
- Ensure drink and drug enforcement is unpredictable in terms of time and place, and deployed across the whole road network, to make it difficult for drivers to avoid randome tests or compulsory checkpoints. [13]
- Ensure that all drivers involved in collisions are tested for alcohol and drugs.
- Produce an annual report on casualties from drink and drug drivers and set appropriate targets and invest appropriate resources based on the findings of this report.
Sources of further information
Combating Drink Driving - Next Steps
DfT
Home Office
PACTS
Road Casualties Great Britain
Road Traffic Act 1988
RTA New South Wales
World Health Organisation
[2] Random Breath Testing Amendment to the Railways and Transport Safety Bill, (PACTS, 2003)
[3] Motoring Offences and Breath Test Statistics: England and Wales 2004, (Home Office, 2006)
[4] Motoring Offences and Breath Test Statistics: England and Wales 2004, (Home Office, 2006)
[5] Breath Tests and Breath Test Failures: by Drivers and Riders involved in Accidents: 1994-2004, Road Casualties Great Britain 2004 (DfT, 2005)
[6] Motoring Offences and Breath Test Statistics: England and Wales 2004, (Home Office, 2006)
[7] Random Breath Testing in New South Wales, published in The Promise of Crime Prevention: Leading Crime Prevention Programmes, (Grabosky, P & James M, 1995)
[8] RTA New South Wales, (www.rta.nsw.gov.au)
[9] Odd Reidar Humlegaard, chief constable, National Mobile Police Service, Norway
[10] Inspector John W Kelly, Manager Operations, Road Policing Support, New Zealand
[11] City Population (www.citypopulation.de)
[12] World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention, (World Health Organization, 2004)
[13] World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention, (World Health Organization, 2004)
[14] Combating Drink Driving - Next Steps, (DfT, 1998)
[15] Hansard (written answers 7 Apr 2005 : Column 1833W)
[16] www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crimpol/police/scidev/aboutpsdb/road_policing.html
