§ 3.5 p.m.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government to state whether arrangements have been made for the police to keep records of the numbers of drivers who are required to submit to breath tests in connection with the new drink and driving laws, of the numbers required to go to a police station for a blood or urine test, and of the numbers of such cases in which it is subsequently discovered that the blood/alcohol level was not in excess of the prescribed limit.]
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD STONHAM)My Lords, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary intends to keep a careful watch upon how Part I of the Road Safety Act 1967 is working in practice; and chief officers of police in England and Wales have agreed to send him, for a time at least, special statistical returns which will include information upon the items specified in the noble Lord's Question.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for his reply to my Question, and ask him whether he is aware that there is great public interest in the method of these tests and the results of them? Could he tell us what have been the results of the tests so far; how many have been made and what the results have been; and, in particular, in answer to the last part of my Question, what number of false results there have been where innocent motorists have been arrested and taken to the police station?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I cannot give the figures for the country as a whole, but a special statistical return has been devised which is also used as a police working sheet during the progress of each case. It is sent in, therefore, when police action is completed, so some cases will not be reported for several weeks. It is too soon to begin to collect the figures for the whole country, but we hope to begin to do so next month. I can, however, give the figures for the first 21 days ended midnight, October 29/30 in the Metropolitan Police District. Roadside breath tests were required on 823 occasions. In 299 cases a result indicating a blood alcohol concentration above the statutory limit was Obtained. In 501 cases the result did not indicate a fixed level offence. In 23 cases the person failed or refused to undertake the test.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, may I thank the noble Lord for those figures and that information, which is very interesting? Would the noble Lord add to the information he has given us the last piece of information I asked for; that is, in how many cases where the motorist failed the breath test was he found, when taken to the station, in fact to have an alcohol level in the blood below the 80-milligramme level?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I am afraid that that information is not available. Nor have I the information in how many of the 501 cases where there was no fixed level offence the motorist was taken to the station because the police officer thought there was a reason under the 1960 Act.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there is a very serious implication about a test which shows a positive reading and which, after the motorist has been arrested and taken to the station, is found to be incorrect because on the blood test the alcohol content is found to be below the 80 mg. level? It means that an innocent man or woman has been arrested, with all the unpleasantness thus entailed, and taken to the police station under police charge. That has a very unpleasant implication indeed. It is that information we want, because we feel that it is necessary to have substantial safeguards here.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the noble Lord is wrong in saying that the motorist is taken to the police station under police charge. He may be taken under police care. He is not charged at that time because the breathalyser test is only an indication. It is only when the motorist subsequently has a blood or urine test and that test shows a content of alcohol above the fixed limit that any charge would lie.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDIs he not arrested by the police?
§ LORD STONHAMHe is not charged: he is asked to go to the police station; and, indeed, he must go to the police station.
§ VISCOUNT BRENTFORDMy Lords, may I ask the Minister, arising out of a previous answer he gave, which I think was to the effect that he had not particulars of the number of people who were taken by the police to the police station after they had successfully passed the breathalyser test, whether he is indicating that there are such people who, having passed the breathalyser test, are nevertheless taken to the police station by the police? If so, I do not think there is any justification for that.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the noble Lord is surprisingly unaware of the 1960 Act, under which a police officer who thought there was something wrong with a person's driving could take him to the police station. The noble Lord may well be aware that people may be unfit to drive, or may be considered so by the police, although they have a blood alcohol content of less than 80 mg. per 100 millilitres of blood. Furthermore, a person may not have been drinking at all but may still be liable to be taken to the station if he was driving, or was thought by the police to be driving, under the influence of drugs or drink.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the whole House and the country will be extremely interested in the figures he has given? According to the figures, over one-third of the people who have been involved in 148 some kind of motoring offence have been proved to have more than 80 mg. of alcohol per 100 ml. in their bloodstream. This indicates that the breathalyser test is proving eminently successful, and anything that can be done with a view to reducing accident rates must be welcomed by all.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that I shall ask him again for the information for which I have asked him to-day?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I shall be pleased to answer it when the information is available. I should inform your Lordships that the statistical return which is now being made—and, as I indicated, is being made for a provisional trial period—may prove to give information which we do not want, may prove that essential information is not obtainable; and in that case we should modify the form. But I assure the noble Lord that I, too, was extremely interested in the answer to the question which he raised. We have been only 21 days on this, and I think it is pretty good to be able to give the figures that I have given.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord.
§ BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGERMy Lords, can my noble friend answer this question, which greatly puzzles me? If a person appears on the breathalyser to show an alcohol content of over 80 mg., he is then arrested and taken to the police station where a blood test is taken; but the result of the blood test is not known for a considerable time. At what point is the charge made; and also, how does he get home?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, so far as the question of a charge being made is concerned, assuming that a blood test has been taken the charge is made when the result of the test is known. As to how a driver gets home, that will depend on two things: his condition and the discretion of the police.