§ Mr. Peter Bruinvelsasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is yet in a position to announce a decision on the continuation of the blood test option for drivers subjected to a Lion Intoximeter 3000 breathalyser test; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Hurd[pursuant to the reply of 3 November, c. 225]: Experience since the publication of the Home Office forensic science service report on the monitoring of the 541W evidential breath test machines confirms that the machines do not place subjects unjustly in jeopardy, and that they should continue to be the principal means of establishing the level of alcohol for the purposes of deciding on prosecution in drink drive cases.
The necessary improvements to the performance of the Lion Intoximeter's acetone detector identified by the report have been carried out, and the recommendation for a blood or urine test to be available in cases where the difference between the two breath samples is wide will be implemented by continuing to allow the option on a non-statutory basis in these cases.
The average take-up rate for the general non-statutory blood or urine option was 16 per cent. in 1985, with monthly figures of 14 per cent. and 15 per cent. in the second half of the year. The experience of those exercising the option will have been that the blood test result confirms the evidential breath test, when any necessary allowance is made for the passage of time between the two types of test. Accordingly, I expect confidence in the machines to continue to grow but I have decided to allow the option to continue for a further period to allow this confidence to be further consolidated. The option will be reviewed again in two years' time.