Probe reveals boozed up learner drivers weren't banned from the road
By Tom Pettifor 26/08/2010
Learner drivers sent home from tests because examiners thought they were drunk or on drugs were not banned from the road.
The 29 men and 11 women, aged between 17 and 61, failed their tests at centres across England and Wales over the past three years.
But a Mirror investigation has uncovered none of the 40 drivers were reported to the police.
And due to Driving Standards Agency guidelines they were not even told why their tests had to be abandoned.
Steve Gough, a trustee of the Campaign Against Drink Driving, said: "This has really shocked me. It's disgusting - talk about double standards. This is the authority responsible for driving standards on our roads and they should be leading by example."
But a DSA spokesman said: "If a driving examiner ever suspects that a candidate is unfit to drive they will cancel the test and advise the candidate not to drive.
"However, examiners do not have the power to formally test whether a candidate is impaired and so it would not be appropriate for them to impose penalties.
The figures, which include 15 drivers under 21, were released following a Freedom of Information request by the Daily Mirror.
In March, George Howarth, 53, was banned from driving for 16 months after he crashed his instructor's car while one-and-a-half times the limit.
He blamed it on drinking the night before even though the accident, in Gorton, Manchester, was at 4.30pm.
Friday, 27 August 2010
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
Transport minister rejects move to halve drink-drive limit
Ministers are set to reject an official report calling for the drink drive limit to be halved, the Evening Standard has learned.
Transport Secretary Philip Hammond is expected to rule that it would be too damaging to rural pubs despite evidence that tougher laws would save hundreds of lives.
An insider said: “The minister is very sceptical indeed about this idea. He is far from convinced that it would be a good thing.”
A formal review of the drink-drive laws by academic and legal expert Sir Peter North reported in June with 51 recommendations, including one suggesting the alcohol limit be cut from 80mg per 100ml of blood to 50mg.
That would effectively create a “one pint or you're banned” rule, with the same mandatory 12-month driving ban as now and put Britain closer in line with many other European countries.
Mr Hammond, a Conservative and motoring enthusiast, greeted Sir Peter's report as “a serious piece of work” but delayed a decision so that he could commission research into the likely impact on beleaguered country pubs.
The drinks industry argues that cutting the limit would put people off driving to rural pubs and restaurants yet would do nothing to change the behaviour of the minority of drunks who already flout the law.
Alcohol-related road deaths in Britain stand at 17 per cent of all road fatalities. Sir Peter's report suggested up to 300 deaths could be avoided each year if the law was changed,
Britain's 80mg limit is much higher than other European countries including Germany, France, Holland, Spain and Italy where 50mg is the maximum.
However, accident statistics are not always better in those countries. In France the proportion of fatalities where alcohol is a factor is 27.3 per cent. Sweden has a limit of only 20mg but the figure is still 16.1 per cent. In Hungary, where there is a zero limit, 8.7 per cent of road deaths are alcohol-related.
Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said: “We have broadly favoured a reduction in the drink-drive limit to bring us into line with most of Europe.
“Drink-driving campaigns have been successful but education alone has not been completely successful in eradicating what many see as anti-social behaviour. Research suggests 65 lives a year would be saved by a change, though it is unlikely such a policy would encourage hardened offenders — those already way above the current limit — to alter their habits."
Transport Secretary Philip Hammond is expected to rule that it would be too damaging to rural pubs despite evidence that tougher laws would save hundreds of lives.
An insider said: “The minister is very sceptical indeed about this idea. He is far from convinced that it would be a good thing.”
A formal review of the drink-drive laws by academic and legal expert Sir Peter North reported in June with 51 recommendations, including one suggesting the alcohol limit be cut from 80mg per 100ml of blood to 50mg.
That would effectively create a “one pint or you're banned” rule, with the same mandatory 12-month driving ban as now and put Britain closer in line with many other European countries.
Mr Hammond, a Conservative and motoring enthusiast, greeted Sir Peter's report as “a serious piece of work” but delayed a decision so that he could commission research into the likely impact on beleaguered country pubs.
The drinks industry argues that cutting the limit would put people off driving to rural pubs and restaurants yet would do nothing to change the behaviour of the minority of drunks who already flout the law.
Alcohol-related road deaths in Britain stand at 17 per cent of all road fatalities. Sir Peter's report suggested up to 300 deaths could be avoided each year if the law was changed,
Britain's 80mg limit is much higher than other European countries including Germany, France, Holland, Spain and Italy where 50mg is the maximum.
However, accident statistics are not always better in those countries. In France the proportion of fatalities where alcohol is a factor is 27.3 per cent. Sweden has a limit of only 20mg but the figure is still 16.1 per cent. In Hungary, where there is a zero limit, 8.7 per cent of road deaths are alcohol-related.
Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said: “We have broadly favoured a reduction in the drink-drive limit to bring us into line with most of Europe.
“Drink-driving campaigns have been successful but education alone has not been completely successful in eradicating what many see as anti-social behaviour. Research suggests 65 lives a year would be saved by a change, though it is unlikely such a policy would encourage hardened offenders — those already way above the current limit — to alter their habits."
Wednesday, 4 August 2010
Jail problem drinkers for 24 hours, says senior Tory
A senior Tory has urged the government to jail problem drinkers for 24 hours if they fail to pass a compulsory twice-daily sobriety test.
The coalition is due to publish a white paper on rehabilitation for drink and drugs in the autumn.
Kit Malthouse, the influential Conservative deputy mayor for London policing, is proposing that the government follow the example of a successful 24-hour scheme in South Dakota.
"In the UK a similar scheme would be relatively easy to establish given our police structure. With a plethora of custody suites and prisons swift and certain incarceration could be achieved," Malthouse said today.
Oliver Letwin, the government's chief policy maker, has been talking of a need for a quantum leap in drug and drink treatment in the UK since he was shadow home secretary in 2002.
Ministers are convinced that Labour's expensive drug treatment testing orders do not work. They have also rescinded Labour plans to link welfare benefits to staying clean from drugs, and called for an end to the so-called 24-hour drink culture in the UK.
Malthouse added: "Given that the new government want to cut policing and prison costs and at the same time tackle alcohol-related crime, insisting on self-financing compulsory sobriety from offenders may be the only path to a vomit- and blood-free high street on a Sunday morning."
The scheme, operational across most of South Dakota since 2005 and now spreading to other states, requires anyone convicted of drink-driving or domestic violence to be put in a police cell for 24 hours if they fail a breathalyser test. Courts and lawyers are not involved.
All those put in the scheme are required to attend a police station or testing centre twice a day, and if they do not they are arrested. They are also required to pay for the costs, typically $5 a day.
The scheme was started in a part of South Dakota with two Indian reservations which suffered from unemployment and high alcoholism.
It has since been extended across South Dakota so that since 2005 nearly 15,690 people have been placed in the programme and been tested 3.12m times. The pass rate is 99.3%. The jail population has also fallen.
The results are regarded as impressive since almost half of the participants had been convicted three or more times for driving under the influence.
In rural communities offenders are also tagged with a leg bracelet which checks alcohol levels every half an hour and relays the information to police.
These bracelets are battery operated devices worn on the leg. Every half hour, they collect and analyse wearers' sweat gland emissions for the presence of alcohol.
The accumulated information is remotely transferred to a modem attached to a landline telephone; the modem and bracelet communicate whenever they are within 40 feet of each other.
The structure of the programme is being adapted to include drug abusers.
All content from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/02/jail-problem-drinkersJail
All content written at the above link and not by us.
The coalition is due to publish a white paper on rehabilitation for drink and drugs in the autumn.
Kit Malthouse, the influential Conservative deputy mayor for London policing, is proposing that the government follow the example of a successful 24-hour scheme in South Dakota.
"In the UK a similar scheme would be relatively easy to establish given our police structure. With a plethora of custody suites and prisons swift and certain incarceration could be achieved," Malthouse said today.
Oliver Letwin, the government's chief policy maker, has been talking of a need for a quantum leap in drug and drink treatment in the UK since he was shadow home secretary in 2002.
Ministers are convinced that Labour's expensive drug treatment testing orders do not work. They have also rescinded Labour plans to link welfare benefits to staying clean from drugs, and called for an end to the so-called 24-hour drink culture in the UK.
Malthouse added: "Given that the new government want to cut policing and prison costs and at the same time tackle alcohol-related crime, insisting on self-financing compulsory sobriety from offenders may be the only path to a vomit- and blood-free high street on a Sunday morning."
The scheme, operational across most of South Dakota since 2005 and now spreading to other states, requires anyone convicted of drink-driving or domestic violence to be put in a police cell for 24 hours if they fail a breathalyser test. Courts and lawyers are not involved.
All those put in the scheme are required to attend a police station or testing centre twice a day, and if they do not they are arrested. They are also required to pay for the costs, typically $5 a day.
The scheme was started in a part of South Dakota with two Indian reservations which suffered from unemployment and high alcoholism.
It has since been extended across South Dakota so that since 2005 nearly 15,690 people have been placed in the programme and been tested 3.12m times. The pass rate is 99.3%. The jail population has also fallen.
The results are regarded as impressive since almost half of the participants had been convicted three or more times for driving under the influence.
In rural communities offenders are also tagged with a leg bracelet which checks alcohol levels every half an hour and relays the information to police.
These bracelets are battery operated devices worn on the leg. Every half hour, they collect and analyse wearers' sweat gland emissions for the presence of alcohol.
The accumulated information is remotely transferred to a modem attached to a landline telephone; the modem and bracelet communicate whenever they are within 40 feet of each other.
The structure of the programme is being adapted to include drug abusers.
All content from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/02/jail-problem-drinkersJail
All content written at the above link and not by us.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
