HL Deb 06 December 2004 vol 667 cc657-60

2.50 p.m.

Lord Luke

My Lords, my noble friend Lord Dixon-Smith is unable to be present today to ask his Question. On his behalf, and at his request, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in his name on the Order Paper:

How many individuals have been prosecuted and convicted following roadside drug tests since the introduction of such tests.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal)

My Lords, Section 4 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 makes it an offence to drive or attempt to drive while unfit through drink or drugs. Historically, statistics have not differentiated according to the cause of impairment. New sub-classifications, introduced on 1 January 2004, will make such a differentiation possible, so identifying the number of offences involving drugs. The 2004 figures are expected to be available in autumn 2005.

Lord Luke

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer, but is not the only way to catch motorists driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol effective road-traffic policing? Does she agree with me that the 11 per cent fall in the number of road traffic police officers since 1996 and their apparent replacement by speed cameras means that perpetrators are less likely to be apprehended?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, unfortunately, I cannot agree with the noble Lord. Of course we have taken advantage of new technology to make accurate detection easier. That has been possible using the technology, which has appeared to enhance our ability to bring offenders to justice.

Lord Berkeley

My Lords, the breathalyser is the accepted means of checking whether people are over the limit for drink offences. What is the equivalent for drugs, and which types of drugs can it detect? Is it as accurate as the breathalyser has now become?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, there is a clear difference between the test for drink and the drug test. Noble Lords will know that in drink testing one must be over a prescribed limit. It is a different offence from that with which we are currently dealing. The test for drugs can identify only whether the drug is present in the body. It does not identify the level at which the drug is to be found. That can be done only by more specific analysis. The nature of the individual's driving must then be observed to understand whether the drug has made that person unfit to drive.

Lord Dholakia

My Lords, is there adequate provision to monitor roadside drug testing to ensure that it does not adversely affect one particular racial group, as is the case with stop-and-search legislation?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, roadside testing will be done in a proper manner. I understand the point made by the noble Lord. However, there will usually be some indication of impaired driving, which would cause the person to be stopped, at which stage there would be an examination. I take on board the sensitivity that the noble Lord has expressed. I assure him that we will be assiduous in ensuring that there is parity of treatment of all who are so stopped.

Lord Tebbit

My Lords, does not the Minister agree that her answer to her noble friend suggests that, in detecting and prosecuting those driving under the influence of drugs, we are back where we were in relation to alcohol offences before the introduction of the breathalyser, and that that means that very few people will be convicted of driving while unfit through drugs?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, I do not accept that that is our position. The noble Lord should know that we are developing more sophisticated testing. The Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 introduced to the Road Traffic Act 1988 improved powers to test at the roadside for both drink and drugs. Those powers allow the police to require motorists to undertake at the roadside preliminary impairment tests and preliminary drug tests. The preliminary impairment tests require a trained officer to observe a suspect in the performance of specified tests and to make such other observations about that person's physical state. Legislation requires a code of practice which will specify exactly how tests must be undertaken. The combination of those two and the fact that we are developing very sophisticated tests that can be used at the roadside means that we are a long way from where we were and far down the road of proper intervention.

Earl Attlee

My Lords, can the Minister explain why the road traffic fatality rate has remained more or less static over the past five years?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, we cannot say why the rate has remained static; perhaps we should rejoice that it has not gone up. Noble Lords will know that, until fairly recently, the numbers were going up and up. I hope that we will be able to celebrate the fact that we can contain them and, it is to be hoped, drive them downwards.

The Countess of Mar

My Lords, is any distinction made between people who have taken illicit drugs and those who have taken prescription drugs, where they have been warned that they may be drowsy and therefore should not drive cars or operate machinery?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, there is no distinction between illicit drugs and those obtained lawfully. The real test is the effect on driving. If the consumption of drugs so impairs an individual's driving as to make it unsafe, it is a trespass against the law.

Lord Brougham and Vaux

My Lords, the Minister said that there were measures other than police on the motorways to detect drivers under the influence of drugs or alcohol. If there are no police on the motorways, what measures are there?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal

My Lords, there are still police officers on the motorways. Noble Lords will know that traffic is monitored, sometimes very closely, through cameras. It is possible through that monitoring to send necessary police officers to a particular spot. On a number of occasions offenders are stopped by police officers after they have been observed on camera and requisite police officers have been moved into place to intervene. Those measures have greatly helped our ability to detain road offenders. I respectfully suggest to the noble Lord that they should not be seen as a disadvantage; they are an acute advantage.