RoSPA Drinking and Driving Policy Paper 2007

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents Drinking and Driving Policy Paper Updated May 2007 Evidential Roadside Breath Testing Currently drivers who fail a roadside breath test have to be taken to a police station for a second test; roadside breath test results are not admissible evidence in court. However, powers to enable the police to use evidential roadside breath tests were included in the Serious Organised Crime and Policing Act 2005, which means they will no longer have to take a person who fails a breath test to a police station for a second test, but can use the roadside test as evidence in court. This means that Police Officers can spend more time on patrol and test more suspected drink drivers with the same level of resources. Penalties for Drink Drive Offenders There are stringent penalties for drink drive offenders. The maximum term of imprisonment for ‘Causing Death by Careless Driving Whilst Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs’ was increased from 10 years to 14 years by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The government intends to extend the penalties, and in particular to require repeat drink drivers to re-take the driving test (after their period of disqualification) before they can drive again. They also intend to expand the use of rehabilitation schemes for offenders because those who attend such schemes are between 2 – 3 times less likely to re-offend than those who do not attend. 14 Sentencing policy for convicted road traffic offenders makes an important contribution to improving road safety and to achieving the casualty reduction targets set in the Road Safety Strategy. Sentencing policy should complement and support other road safety measures, such as education and training to produce better, safer drivers who are less likely to offend, and high profile enforcement, so drivers know there is a strong chance of getting caught if they behave dangerously. From a road safety point of view, the most important aim of sentencing should be to change the attitudes and behaviour of the individuals being sentenced and also of the wider driving public. Sentencing policy can help to: • change the attitudes, skills and behaviour of convicted offenders • remove convicted offenders from the road for their period of disqualification or imprisonment • influence the behaviour of other drivers and riders who hear/read about the sentences imposed for particular offences. It is essential that wider use is made of sanctions designed to change offenders’ behaviour, such as re-training, rehabilitation courses, and re-testing. Greater consideration should be given to their compulsory, rather than discretionary, use. Consistency in Sentencing Policy Consistency in the use of sentences is also important. Although, each case must be judged on its individual circumstances, it seems likely that greater consistency in sentences for similar offences would enhance their deterrent effect, and help to address the public disquiet that is often expressed when offenders receive (seemingly) inappropriately light sentences. 13
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents Drinking and Driving Policy Paper Updated May 2007 Rehabilitation Schemes The Road Traffic Act 1991 allowed Courts to reduce the disqualification period of offenders if they completed a Rehabilitation Course. A driver, who has been convicted of a drink-drive offence and disqualified for at least one year, can be offered the opportunity to attend a course. Those who successfully complete the course are eligible for a reduction of up to 25% in their period of disqualification. Generally, courses are targeted at first-time offenders. The courses are run by organisations such as Probation Services, Road Safety Departments, hospitals, charities and private companies, and seek to promote sensible drinking by educating drivers in the need to separate drinking and driving They generally run for 8-10 weeks and include: • Information about alcohol and its effects on the body • The effect of alcohol on performance, particularly driving ability and behaviour • Analysis of drink/driving offences • Alternatives to drinking and driving • Sources of advice. Evaluations of the effect of attending a drink drive rehabilitation courses on the likelihood of re-offending show that drivers who attend a course are less likely to reoffend. After 6 years, 18% of convicted drink drivers who did not attend a course had re-offended compared with only 7.6% of those who had attended a course. Offenders are most likely to avoid re-offending while they are still disqualified, but even once the dis-qualification period has ended and they can legally drive again, course attenders are still less likely to re-offend. 15 Schemes in Other Countries In Europe, young drivers are not generally over-represented in alcohol related accidents except on weekend nights. In the USA young people are over-represented in driving accidents involving alcohol. In some states it is illegal to drink in licensed premises under the age of 21 and about 35 states restrict drivers aged 21 and under to 40mg/100ml or lower. Young drivers (16-24) make up 14% of the US driving population but were involved in 28% of all alcohol-related driving accidents. Australia Evaluation of drink/driver rehabilitation schemes in other countries, most notably in the USA and Australia, have found that recidivism is reduced in those who have attended courses when compared with offenders who have not. A study 16 in Australia examined both licence sanctions and rehabilitation programmes and concluded: • Programmes can have a 7-9% reduction in recidivism in addition to the benefits shown by licence sanctions • Programmes can reduce alcohol-related crashes and drink driving recidivism, but unlike licence sanctions, do not reduce non alcohol-related crashes. But, their benefits appeared to be longer lasting than those shown by licence suspensions. • Drink/driver programmes can impact on knowledge and attitudes toward drink driving, lifestyle characteristics and psychosocial functioning • Multi-model programmes, which included counselling, education, probation, licence suspension or a combination of these, are more likely to result in a positive outcome than single interventions. 14
Page 1 and 2: DRINKING AND DRIVING POLICY PAPER U
Page 3 and 4: The Royal Society for the Preventio
Page 13: The Royal Society for the Preventio

RoSPA Drinking and Driving Policy Paper 2007

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?