Drinking and Driving

HC Deb 21 December 1984 vol 70 cc710-20 11.19 am

Mr. Keith Best (Ynys Mon)

First, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish you and all my parliamentary colleagues a very happy Christmas. This debate on drinking and driving very much concerns the festive season. Christmas is a joyous time for everyone, but drinking and driving is a sombre topic. Every year some 1,200 people die as a result of road traffic accidents in which drink is a contributory factor. In 1983, 109 pedestrians were killed and 1,077 injured by vehicles driven by people who failed the breath test. It may be of interest to note, too, that one third of car drivers and motor cyclists who are killed have more than the prescribed limit of alcohol in their blood. On Friday and Saturday nights, between 10 pm and 4 am, the proportion rises to a dramatic two thirds.

There must be a responsible reaction to the problem. Many people in the licensed trade are as concerned as I am, but the public at large is desperately short of facts and information. We must make a concentrated effort to inform people of the effects of alcohol, the penalties for drunk driving, the relationship of various drinks to blood alcohol levels, and so on. Some members of the licensed trade have been extremely helpful. The Wine and Spirit Association recently produced a 15-minute videotape entitled "Alcohol Abuse — What Must Be Done". A copy has been placed in the Library. It acknowledges that it does not give answers but merely poses the questions, but it is an ideal introduction for discussion purposes, especially among young people in youth clubs and so on.

The Brewers Society has produced three road safety films to make young people aware of the dangers of drinking and driving and on 18 December it launched a nationwide campaign under the title, Don't gamble with your licence and much material has been produced in connection with that. I am glad to see that my hon. Friend the Minister of State is to answer the debate. As we have come to expect each year, the Department of Transport has launched its own campaign. That, too, is greatly to be welcomed.

It is important to deal with some of the myths about drinking. For example, spirits are not invariably more dangerous than beer or wine. A product called "double gin and tonic" in 175 ml bottles can be drunk straight from the bottle but the strength of 11.4 per cent. is no greater than table wine. Spirits diluted in that way may be considerably less strong than some sherries. When mixed with tonic and the like, spirits are not nearly as strong as many people think. The key to any valid campaign to ensure a reduction in the tragic waste of human life through drinking and driving must be the principle of moderation. The aureum mediocritatem or golden mean of the Roman poet Horace is indeed a good guide to us all in this as in every aspect of life.

Alcohol in moderation can be beneficial. People who drink in moderation—under 20 units per week for men and 13 units per week for women—are likely to live longer and suffer fewer heart attacks than teetotallers. I am sorry to hear that teetotallers have been singled out as likely to suffer more, but that is substantiated by medical evidence. That, too, is part of the dilemma. Although in many cases alcohol can be beneficial, if taken to excess it can, like most other things, be positively harmful and dramatically dangerous not just to those who consume it but, more importantly, to innocent bystanders caught up in the tragic results of drinking and driving. I should explain at this point that one unit of alcohol is roughly equivalent to a single whisky, one glass of wine or half a pint of ordinary beer or cider.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister on the Government campaign, which has been described as the "Stay Low" campaign. Although there has been much controversey about the campaign and the title has unfortunately been misleading, there is a beneficial aspect in that the campaign has been far more widely debated than it otherwise might have been. I hope that my hon. Friend will make it clear again today that to be fully safe people must not drink at all when they drive. In fairness to my hon. Friend the Minister of State, I will read the press release in its entirety, as that is indeed the message that comes across. It reads as follows: Don't drink any alcohol at all if you are going to drive. That's the only way to be sure you won't be affected by drink and liable to be convicted of a drink-drive offence. And it's the best safeguard you can give yourself that you won't be involved in an accident. Although the 'breathalyser' law puts a limit of 35 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres on drivers' breath, you can still be prosecuted below that limit if a policeman thinks your driving ability is impaired by alcohol. So the only way to be certain is not to drink. That's what the Department of Transport means by its advice to drivers this Christmas to stay low—very low. Taking the press release as a whole, that is clearly the message.

People must also be made aware of the cumulative effect of alcohol. An advocate who has represented many defendents charged with drinking and driving offences has pointed out that many people do not realise that a drink at lunchtime, for example, materially affects the degree of driving impairment if the person concerned has another drink before going home, because the earlier drink may not have been fully dissipated by that time. Equally, a person who goes out on a massive drinking spree in the evening and then sleeps for six hours or more—my hon. Friend the Minister of State and I have to manage on much less to carry out our parliamentary duties—he may think that he has "slept off" the effects, whereas in fact when he gets into his car the next morning he may still be substantially over the limit and therefore driving unlawfully.

I shall not go into the subject of the somewhat controversial intoximeter designed to measure the level of alcohol, the limit being 80 mg per 100 litres of blood or 35 mcg per 100 millilitres on the breath. We know that some free pardons have already been issued to people wrongfully convicted on evidence involving the Lion intoximeter. Nevertheless, even at a level of 50 millilitres per 100 litres of blood, driving is impaired although the level of alcohol is below the legal limit. A person with that amount of alcohol in his blood is already three times more likely to have an accident than if he had taken no alcohol at all. We must do more to warn and inform.

The Government commissioned a study of alcohol policy, and the report was ready in 1979, but it has never been published in Britain. It was published in Sweden. It recommended that the Government should make a policy statement on alcohol, but that has not been done. There is a great need for information about alcohol and its effects. In 1981, Government expenditure on health education advertising about alcohol was less than 5 per cent. of what the alcohol industry spent on advertising, which was about £100 million. The Government receive in revenue, directly and through VAT, about £6,000 million a year from the sale of alcohol. It is not too much to ask them to spend more than £5 million on health education.

Yet people still do not know the consequences. In 1982, the British Crime Survey contacted more than 3,000 drivers who provided information on drinking and driving since the beginning of 1981. The alarming statistic—one of many that I could quote but with which I shall not detain the House—is that about 40 per cent. of males aged between 16 and 30 who were over the limit and, therefore, driving unlawfully believed that they would pass a breathalyser test after drinking five units of alcohol.

One way of dealing with the problem that is within the power of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State is to include something in the highway code about the effects of alcohol and the consequences of disobeying the law. That has the attraction of simplicity in getting across the message, and it means that one can be satisfied that at least once in a driver's life he will have had brought to his attention the consequences of disobeying the law and the effects of alcohol, because everyone must pass an examination on the highway code as part of the driving test.

Alcohol is eliminated from the body at a rate approximately equivalent to half a pint of beer or a single measure of spirits each hour. Of course, that is not uniform. A lighter person has less water in his body than does a heavier person and will reach a higher blood-alcohol level for a given consumption. The elimination of alcohol cannot be quickened. Coffee — popularly believed to be an antidote—may keep one awake, but it does not reduce the alcohol level. Therefore, it was with great anxiety that I saw about four weeks ago the launch of a product called "Alcaway". Its advertisement describes it as the answer for all those occasions when a person has consumed more alcohol than he or she had intended. Under the heading How much will it affect my alcohol level? the advertisement states: It depends. Perhaps 25 per cent. — or a 32 per cent. reduction. It could be as high as 45 per cent. On average about 30 per cent. That is grossly iresponsible advertising. In view of what I have said about the inability to reduce the blood alcohol level, the advertisement could be extremely misleading.

Is there any validity in those claims? That was considered by Mr. John Teller, the director of Avon Council on Alcoholism in Bristol. He noted that it had been claimed recently in the press that blood alcohol levels can fall by as much as 77 per cent. in 30 minutes. He contacted Mr. Peter Bate of the company Five Swallows in Stansted, Essex, which is marketing that product in Britain. Mr. Bate sent to Mr. Teller the research upon which the claims were based. He sent him five documents, two of which were copies of published research carried out in South Africa in 1983—Alcaway is produced in South Africa — and in Australia in 1982. The two studies involved only 19 white males. Mr. Bate also sent two typewritten sheets describing the effects of Alcaway on blood alcohol levels. That study involved only 12 subjects. There were no controls. In that document we find the magic figure of a 77 per cent. reduction, although not in 30 minutes.

What worries Mr. Teller and what worries me is, first, that no tests were carried out on women. Secondly, increasing the rate at which alcohol is broken down by the body can cause poorer judgment, such as in driving. Thirdly, fructose, on which Alcaway is based—it is an apple-flavoured drink — can cause painful side effects. Fourthly, Mr. Bate does not know of any side effects. Fifthly, Mr. Bate expects to sell 400,000 cans of Alcaway before Christmas, and about 4 million cans next year. Finally, it is naive in the extreme to assume that people will not use Alcaway — the name leaves little to the imagination — in the belief that it will then be safe to drive after drinking. No guidance, advice or warnings have been issued to retailers or customers. The company hopes to market the drink next year in the United States of America under the brand name "Arrive Alive".

In fairness to Mr. Bate, I should say that he is reported as having said that, in his judgment, people should not drink and drive. But it is naive to believe that people will not be misled by the product.

As a result of my anxiety, I put down several questions about this—one to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Transport and another to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Services. I asked whether there was a policy about marketing products designed to reduce blood alcohol levels, and I received this reply from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State: If a product were marketed explicitly for the purpose of interfering with the normal operation of a physiological function, it would probably require a licence under the Medicines Act. If any such product appeared on the market consideration would be given to enforcing the requirements of the Act."—[Official Report, 19 November 1984; Vol. 68, c. 71.] I am glad to know that the Department is now considering the product carefully to see whether it should come under the Medicines Act.

My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State replied in this way: The rate at which alcohol is absorbed into the blood stream is affected by a variety of factors. While some products can slow down this process, I am not aware of any evidence which suggests that the elimination of alcohol from the body can be significantly speeded up. My general policy is to warn drivers of the risks involved in driving after drinking under any circumstances."—[Official Report, 19 November 1984; Vol. 68, c. 46.] There seems to be no doubt in the mind of my hon. Friend and her Department that no substance can artificially reduce blood alcohol levels. I hope that that message will go from the House to the general public, and also a message about the side effects that could be caused by a fructose-based drink.

I have written to the Advertising Standards Authority about this matter. I said in my letter: Although fructose does, in some instances, accelerate liver function the consequences of this can themselves induce drowsiness and inability to concentrate and in view of this the claims made for the product appear to be unsubstantiated. The statement 'research has proved beyond doubt' is derived from two small studies in South Africa when less than 20 people were tested. No structured or creditable scientific experiments can be discovered.

Not only the group of which I have the privilege to be chairman — the all-party parliamentary alcohol policy and services group—but the drinks industry expresses considerable reservations about the way in which the product is being marketed. The implication that it might be safe to drive after using Alcaway is especially disturbing. It is simply not true. As the final paragraph of the advertisement says, Only you will know how well it works. No one will know that until he or she breathes into an intoximeter, and by then it may be too late.

The reply that I received from the Advertising Standards Authority on 20 November of this year was that this is being pursued as a matter or urgency.

I believe that the trade is concern about the marketing of this drug. In the Morning Advertiser of 21 November, under "Viewpoint", it was noted that concern was being expressed about the claims made for it. From the time that the breathalyser was introduced products have been launched at intervals making claims that they are antidotes to alcohol. The attitude of the trade has been made clear from the start. It will have nothing to do with such products. The trade has adopted the same attitude towards the various do-it-yourself breathalyser kits that have been marketed. Their comment is that they can only repeat the advice that has been given to licensees in the past and that they are reasonably sure that brewers take the same attitude—that is, to leave well alone.

There is the additional danger that immediate allegations will be made that licensees are only out to get customers to drink as much as possible without thought for the social consequences. By putting such products on the market for sale they would be putting themselves in danger of fierce criticism from several directions.

While accepting my congratulations on the campaign which the Government have launched, I hope that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will realise that this is not the end of the story. There is much more that the Government can do and which I expect the Government to do in the form of information and helping to explain to people the problems of drinking and driving and its effects. I have made one or two suggestions which I hope the Under-Secretary will look at carefully. Ultimately we need to change attitudes. We need to ensure that there is moral condemnation of the concept of drinking and driving. This matter is as much in the hands of the public as it is in the hands of the Government. However, the Government can take a lead on information and education. I shall be satisfied if the result of the debate is that more people are alive and uninjured after the festive season than might otherwise have been the case. If so, this will have been a worthwhile debate.

11.42 am

Mr. Norman Miscampbell (Blackpool, North)

I am well aware that my hon. Friend the Minister of State who is to reply to the debate wishes to do so fully. In those circumstances, my speech will be shorter than I had intended it to be. At the moment we are in the midst of the normal Christmas campaign. On this occasion it is a controversial campaign, although I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Best) that the very controversy may have drawn people's attention to the campaign. We should always remember that driving with an excess of alcohol in the blood is a continuing problem. It does not happen only at Christmas, although people may be well aware of the risks that they run and may be more careful at Christmas.

We have been given today the figures relating to accidents throughout the year. As many as two thirds of those who are involved in fatal accidents have too much alcohol in their blood. The level of alcohol in their blood is above the permitted limit. This year Derbyshire does not intend to have a special drive over the Christmas period. Last year, however, 935 people were stopped in Derbyshire and tested and were found to be negative. They were driving within the limit; only 53 positive results were found.

Once the figures are as far apart as that, one is getting virtually to random testing. I am not against random stopping and testing, but I believe that the time has come when we must make up our minds about where we stand on random testing. Car checks occur regularly on a random basis. Breathalysers are often used at the same time. The use of radar is random; it is not known that a radar check is round the corner. When a motorist is stopped, the breathalyser may be used. In this country, therefore, there is random testing and we must make up our minds about whether random tests should continue and stealthily increase. My view is that it would be better to acknowledge that random testing is taking place and that we should allow the police to stop anybody whenever they wish and test them if they wish. It is a continuing problem on our roads. It may lead to political difficulties. In the past we have made promises that this would not happen. However, every time anybody who has had a drink takes a car on to the road it becomes a lottery. Therefore, the Government would be well advised to take their courage in their hands and say that they will allow the police to stop anybody whenever they wish.

11.45 am

Mr. Michael Colvin (Romsey and Waterside)

I should like to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Best) and my hon. Friend the Minister of State for agreeing to my brief participation in the debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend upon the timeliness of the debate and I endorse all that he has said. In the interests of saving time I shall not reiterate any of his remarks, apart from stressing that anything that can be done to reduce the carnage on our roads, in particular at Christmas, is to be welcomed.

I declare a double interest in taking part in the debate. First, I am the parliamentary adviser to the National Union of Licensed Victuallers. Secondly, I am one of the only two licence holders in this place. The purpose of my intervention is to acknowledge what the licensed trade, both the licensees and the brewers, are doing to promote responsibility among pubgoers regarding drinking and driving. This week has seen the launch of a national campaign entitled "Don't gamble with your licence". I see that my hon. Friend the Minister of State is holding a copy of a poster which, she will notice, is drink and drip-proof. I have in my hand a drip-mat. It is an example of 15 million such mats that are being distributed throughout the country. The number of posters that are to be sent out is 100,000.

I welcome also the involvement in the campaign of some of the police authorities. Sussex is one. I am sure that there are others. Both the police and the licensed trade have a joint interest in promoting safety on our roads at Christmas.

May I also draw the attention of the House to two other measures that are being undertaken by the trade. First, the trade is stepping up its promotion of low content alcohol and non-alcoholic drinks. I accept what my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn has said about dubious products that make extreme claims about their safety in relation to alcohol content and ability to counter alcohol. This does nothing but bring the trade into disrepute. Advertising claims for such products must be backed by clinical evidence, or those who are involved in the manufacturing and marketing of such products are taking part in an activity that borders on the criminal.

Secondly, may I draw the attention of the Minister of State to the fact that public transport is being organised over the festive season by brewers and local licensed victuallers associations? One example is the Phoenix brewery in Brighton. This is very welcome. It may be continued throughout the year. It is unfortunate that in some areas public scheduled bus services stop running at 10.30 pm. At Christmas and the new year, with so many pub extensions, this presents considerable difficulties for those who want to get home without having to drive their own cars.

I should be grateful if the Minister could acknowledge what the licensed trade is doing. Will she also look into the problems presented by the proliferation of off-licence outlets for alcohol? We have seen a growth in the number of supermarkets that now sell alcoholic drinks, often with completely inadequate supervision of the age of those who purchase drinks. I am horrified to hear—I have yet to find the concrete evidence—that some garages are now selling alcoholic drinks in their off-licences. As we prohibit the sale of alcohol on motorways, some guidance must be given to magistrates to ensure that on no account should off-licences be granted to garages.

Let me conclude by quoting a statement made by Mr. Danny Trevelyan, the president of the NULV, when launching the "Don't gamble with your licence" campaign this week. He said: Celebrating Christmas and New Year in a pub is a tradition in itself but drivers who exceed the limit are risking their licences, their livelihoods and sometimes their lives and the lives of other people. Licensees will welcome this opportunity to warn drivers to think before they drink before they drive. I am sure that the House will join me in applauding that statement and the campaign that it introduced.

11.51 am

The Minister of State, Department of Transport (Mrs. Lynda Chalker)

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Best) on having this most timely debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside (Mr. Colvin) and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Blackpool, North (Mr. Miscampbell) who have participated. They do the House, and indeed the country through the media, a service in continuing to remind us of the potential fatality that any driver who is foolish enough to drink and drive or get on a motorcycle may cause, not just for himself and his passengers, but for anybody else who may be on the road or even on the pathway beside the road.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môon is right to say that we need more education on the dangers of drinking and driving. In due course my Department is planning to give even wider information than has already been given out in the facts leaflet on drinking and driving from the road research laboratory because it needs to be much more widely available and influential.

Like my hon. Friend, I am worried by much of what he described this morning and I shall be taking up what he said with my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Health. The new 1981 legislation, which became effective in 1983, gave us procedures for dealing with high risk drink-driving offenders, but the problem of what alcohol does to one's perceptions needs to be taken forward in a rather different way in future.

My Department is reviewing the highway code, as it does from time to time and I shall see what entry in that might be useful in persuading people to do the sensible thing. Unfortunately, although the highway code is full of sensible advice, once people have taken their first driving test it is usually only those who go on to advanced training who look at it again. The fact that there are three copies of the highway code in my flat is something to do with the fact that I am always telling people what is in it. If only people would go back to it after they had passed their tests, a little more common sense might be produced on our roads.

My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Blackpool, North was right to remind us that drinking and driving is not just a problem at Christmas but a fatal combination at any time. Of course, we see a higher consumption of alcohol around this time of year, but the incidence of drinking and driving is not appreciably higher at Christmas than at other times of the year. I hope that it is the publicity, and indeed the debate that we have had about this year's campaign—just as we had a rather smaller debate about last year's campaign—which makes people aware just how stupid it is to drink and drive.

When Christmas and the new year are over, with, we hope, fewer fatalities, injuries and accidents than in previous years, we still cannot let the matter drop until 12 months hence. The threat posed by a drinking driver at any time of the day, night or year must be taken account of in our policies. However, successive Governments, including this one, have taken the view that a particular lead should be given at Christmas to bring home the appalling risks. There are two reasons for that. Inevitably, there is anxiety that if no action were taken people might begin to forget the alarming numbers of people who drink more than is probably wise for them over the festive season. Secondly, a continuous programme of major publicity throughout the year would not be as effective.

The present campaign documents, such as the facts on drinking and driving published by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory, and also the reminders which my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside gave us in the campaign that the brewing industry has launched this year, all help to make sure that we see more responsible attitudes and behaviour now and throughout the year.

For 10 years a substantial proportion of my Department's publicity budget has been dedicated to Christmas advertising to prevent drinking and driving. I am grateful too, for the parallel efforts made by some local authorities and many police forces. I echo the welcome that my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside gave to those organisations and companies which are helping to provide a safe get-you-home service with somebody else doing the driving, whether it be local car hire firms or the new year's eve free travel on London Regional Transport which is being provided by one brewery this year.

It is impossible to gauge the effects of campaigns; that my hon. Friends know that was clear from the way that they approached this debate. We must try to see whether our campaigns are getting through to the people on whom we have to make a positive impact. Surveys suggest that advertising has played a part in increasing general public awareness about drinking and driving. It is more encouraging that over the period that we have had such campaigns alcohol consumption and the volume of motorway traffic has been rising, but the incidence of drinking and driving appear to have at least remained fairly steady, and may even have dropped slightly.

We know, because of the problems that we face on road safety—so depressingly familiar and rather intractable some of the time — that there is a great need for a stimulus of fresh and innovative thinking if we are to have any chance of getting to grips with the problem successfully. We must present our message in a forceful and arresting way. The last thing that would be right would be for the campaign against drinking and driving to become just part of the traditional background to the festive season.

It is not enough just to go through the motions of condemning drinking and driving and to leave it at that. As my hon. Friend the member for Ynys Môn said, we must be ready to search for new approaches which persuade people to think afresh about what drinking and driving involves, to be conscious that they should never put the two together and to alter their behaviour accordingly.

The campaign strategy has been debatable, but as my hon. Friend said, we have had much more media coverage, and I hope that that in itself will this year save lives that would not otherwise have been saved. We are aiming this year's campaign particularly at young people who are at the beginning of their driving careers and — I do not want to call it a drinking career — but at least their experience of alcohol.

Young people face particular risks. They are inexperienced as drivers, even if they think that they are great on the road. They have not the experience of alcohol that older people have. They may not readily appreciate how easily alcohol can impair performance at the wheel or on a bike. The attitudes of young people are still at a formative stage. Therefore, there is a good chance that responsible habits developed at that stage will stay with them in later life. With that same aim in view, more attention is now being given to drinking and driving as an issue in traffic education in our schools.

We all know that the young are not an easy audience to reach. We carry out research in preparing all our campaigns. Research demonstrates that the response of young people to a message depends very much on its presentation to them. Every piece of evidence indicates that to adopt a heavy-handed, authoritarian approach produces an immediate switch-off. If we wish to communicate effectively, we must ensure that we do not switch people off. We must be conscious about the kind of message and the tone of voice to which young people will respond. That is why the whole thrust of the campaign this year has been to bring home the truly awful human consequences that can follow from drinking and driving. Commercials and posters put that message over in no uncertain terms.

I cannot accept for a moment—and I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn takes the same view—the criticism that the campaign lacks punch. One needs only to take a good look at posters such as "Too Much Punch For Judy," "Christmas For Carol" or "Stephen on the Terrace" to see that the criticism is untrue. As I stand at the Dispatch Box today, I go cold when I remember what is involved for a family who perhaps lose someone or have a disastrously injured person among them for the rest of their lives—perhaps an innocent victim of someone else's thoughtless drinking and then driving.

There can be no doubt about the message at the heart of the campaign. It is, "Don't drink and drive". That is what we have always said. I have said it this year on every occasion when I have been given the opportunity, and I shall go on saying it. The campaign gives no comfort to anyone who is tempted to run a stupid risk — or to gamble, as the Brewers Society advertisement says, with drinking and driving.

Why, then, does the message this year stop short of the explicit statement that people must drink absolutely nothing when they are driving? I will give the House two reasons. First, the law does not involve a complete prohibition on alcohol for drivers. The law says that they must not he over the limit, nor must their driving be impaired, whether they are under or over the limit. It is important that what we say in our campaign is consistent with what the law says. Indeed, there has been criticism in the past that our advertising appeared to extend the law by administrative edict.

Secondly, the stark injunction never to drink and drive is just the sort of message that turns off the target audience of younger people to whom I referred. They dismiss it, and then they do not listen and take further note of the message. So the campaigns are designed to produce a response. If we do not get a response, whether it be for a target group or for others, we know that we have to do something different.

People must not be misled by concentrating only on the caption "Stay Low". The campaign as a whole must be looked at. The overwhelming majority of the people in the 16 to 19 age group-in the pre-campaign research thought that the symbol, the slogan and the message meant either "Don't drink" or "Don't drink and drive". That proves that the message has gone through to them.

I hope that the current campaign, which is one of the most powerful we have ever had—and the debate about it will ensure that over this festive season—and, with luck, beyond—the message goes home. My own contact with young people shows that the campaign is having an effect. I understand that Stevie Wonder has produced a record called, "Don't Drive Drunk". That should reach many young people. In all those ways, the message for which my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn asked is being brought home.

My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Blackpool, North went a little further than my other two hon. Friends. He told the House how certain police forces have conducted their campaign in trying to ensure greater safety on the roads at Christmas time. Those campaigns involve the breathalyser. I remind him that there was a new Transport Act in 1981, and that some of the measures were brought into force only in 1983. This is only the second Christmas period when the new penalties have applied —a maximum fine of £2,000, up to six months in goal, and the minimum of a year's suspension of a driving licence.

While we must watch exactly what each police force is doing, we must also watch exactly what the public are doing. We must know whether they are taking the message. I think it is right to wait for at least two years before asking whether there should be any change in the way that we operate the law. We are nearly at the end of those two years.

We do not have random testing in Britain but if anything appears to be wrong with a vehicle on the road it is liable to be stopped. Any police officer who smelled alcohol on a driver's breath would be failing in his duty if he did not then ask the driver to take a breathalyser test.

The debate is valuable for us all. My hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside mentioned not only the get-you-home services but the fact that some garages seem to have off licences for the sale of alcohol. If such a development is taking place, I view it with considerable alarm. I know that the Home Office will also want to look at it. I think that many of us are concerned that alcohol is becoming available through various new outlets.

With regard to Alcoway and any other potential so-called alcohol remover that might be marketed, I do not know in detail about the product that my hon. Friend the Member for Ynys Môn mentioned. I am glad that he has referred the advertising of the product to the Advertising Standards Committee. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services and I shall need to look with some care at any products, marketed in whatever way, which could perhaps mislead the public into thinking that they could get protection by using them.

I shall continue to look for new ways of improving education and awareness still further, and of winning the battle against unnecessary damage to life and limb, let alone to vehicles. There is only one safe way to drive on the roads, not just at Christmas time or the new year but throughout the year. My message to people is, "If you are going to drink at Christmas, by all means have a good time, but do not then get on your motor bike or into your car. Go home safely by public transport, or by letting someone drive who does not take alcohol. If you cannot get to your destination by either of those means, use your own feet." There is a good song: These boots were made for walking". I remind people that their feet were also made for walking. If people have been celebrating at Christmas—which I hope everyone will enjoy—I beg them to have a care for others on the roads and not only for their own families. I ask people to make sure that they do not drink and drive.