§ 2.50 p.m.
§ EARL COWLEYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they would consider fixing a statutory limit of alcohol for drivers, now that there is scientific evidence linking excessive consumption of alcohol with road accidents.]
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I assume that the noble Earl is referring to the recently published Report of the Road Research Laboratory on fatal road accidents last Christmas. As I explained in a Statement to this House on June 4 in answer to a Question by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, this Report reinforces the main conclusion of the similar inquiry carried out into 510 road accidents at Christmas, 1959, that drink is the main cause of the increased accident rate at Christmas time. Her Majesty's Government take a serious view of this matter, and it was following the earlier Report that the law on drink and driving was considerably strengthened in the 1962 Road Traffic Act. In particular, the Act clarified the definition of the offence by providing that a person is unfit to drive
if his ability to do so properly is for the time being impaired",and required the courts to have regard to chemical evidence of the concentration of alcohol in the blood.The new provisions of the Act have been in force only a short time, and we are convinced that they should be given every chance to work. We also realise that alteration of the law is not enough. It is, unfortunately, clear that far too many people are ignorant or heedless of the dangers of driving after drinking, and we propose to launch a campaign later this year to inform the public of the facts and to make it plain to everyone that it is dangerous to drive after drinking even small amounts of alcohol.
§ EARL COWLEYMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that a recent survey, which is not published in this country at the moment, showed that 0.06 per cent. of alcohol in the blood, as against none, makes an accident twice as likely; that 0.1 per cent. makes an accident six to seven times as likely; and 1.05 per cent. makes one 25 times as likely? Moreover, it showed that there is a toll of nineteen human beings every 24 hours, and at the end of 1963 there were 356,000 accidents on the roads, and anything that can be done to prevent this sort of massacre in Britain should be done.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I was aware of the information given at the beginning of my noble friend's supplementary because he told me about it just before we came into the Chamber. If I was not aware before, I should be now. It was with just such considerations in mind that I framed the original reply to the Question—to bring out that modest amounts of alcohol could be dangerous, as well as large amounts. But I hope my noble friend will not believe that effective action against alcohol will cure the whole accident problem, because it will not. 511 Alcohol is only one of the factors to be taken into consideration.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he can inform the House if his Ministry are making progress with those researches into the mechanical methods, such as breathalysers, which many of your Lordships think will have to be the ultimate solution to the problem of arriving at the alcoholic content of the blood before definite drunkenness or inability to drive is established?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I am not sure that that ought not really to be a separate Question, but I will at least say that progress is being made.
§ LORD MORRISON OF LAMBETHMy Lords, if out of courtesy a noble Lord gives the Parliamentary Secretary advance notice of a supplementary question he is going to ask, is it courteous on the part of the Minister to give the noble Lord Lord away?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I would hasten to try to absolve myself of discourtesy to any noble Lord in this House. I found myself at a disadvantage because, although I was aware of the information because my noble friend had told me, he then went on to say that it had not been published in this country, so I was not quite sure where I stood.
§ BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGERMy Lords, does the noble Lord not agree that there have been a great number of campaigns about the dangers of even small quantities of alcohol on just the lines he was indicating, and that the continued increase in road accidents at Christmas, and the evidence that these are caused by alcohol, is a testimony to the complete failure of these campaigns?
Does he not agree that it is now time we followed the example of those countries which have set a maximum level of alcohol in the blood with which it is permissible to drive?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, to begin with, even if what the noble Baroness has said be true, I would not regard that as an effective reason for not having another campaign in the circumstances. It is perfectly clear that ignorance plays a great part in this problem, and even if such measures as the noble Baroness has 512 suggested were adopted the ignorance would continue.
§ LORD ELTONMy Lords, does the Minister realise that if he had been dining at a large dinner party in Norway, as I was a fortnight ago, he would have found that every single guest was driven away by a chauffeur or took a taxi, or abstained completely from alcohol, the reason being that they are well aware in that civilised country that at any moment a driver is liable to be stopped by the police and given a breathalyser test? If the instrument shows a faint blue tinge the driver will be taken to a police station and given a blood test. If this shows an alcohol content above the maximum permitted level then, without any question without any alternative and with absolute certainty, he goes to "jug" for 28 days cheek by jowl with criminals. Does the noble Lord realise that that is why drink is an infinitely less serious cause of road deaths in Norway than in England?
§ LORD CHESHAMYes, my Lords, I think I may say that I am fully aware of everything the noble Lord has said about Norway and, indeed, Sweden. I am also aware of what your Lordships expressed as your views of such matters during the passage of the Road Traffic Act, 1962.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord why he thinks that the drink addict is different from the tobacco addict who does not respond to gentle treatment?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, unless the noble Lady is establishing a tenuous connection with tobacco as a drug, I do not think it falls within the ambit of the offence we are discussing.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, the noble Lord has not followed. We have tried the methods he suggests he is going to use with the drinkers with the man who smokes too much, because we tried to remind him that he might get cancer of the lung. He does not respond. Listening to the noble Lord, I was wondering what methods he was going to adopt now for the man who drinks too much when he drives, in order to get him to respond.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I think the essential difference must be that driving dangerously is already an offence and 513 while desperately dangerous and undesirable I do not think having cancer of the lung is an actual offence.
§ LORD TAYLORMy Lords, how high a death rate over the holiday season will the Government require before they introduce the legislation needed to stop this slaughter?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, frankly I do not think much of that question.