§ The Marquess of Ailesburyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Why motorists arrested on suspicion of excess alcohol in the blood and wishing to give a sample of urine rather than blood are not entitled to that option. [HL33]
§ Lord Williams of MostynThe great majority of prosecutions for drink drive offences use evidence from the evidential breath alcohol testing instruments in police stations. The Road Traffic Act 1988 (as amended) sets out a few specific situations, including relevant medical reasons or where drug influence is suspected, when a constable may require a sample of blood or urine instead of breath. Section 7(4) of the Act states that it is for the constable to decide whether it should be blood or urine and the choice of the police is normally for blood. This is for a number of reasons, which include hygiene, greater certainty of obtaining an evidential sample and best use of police resources. However, the Act goes on to state that if a medical practitioner is of the opinion that, for medical reasons, a specimen of blood cannot be or should not be taken, then a urine specimen should be used. This legislation has been tested and confirmed in the courts over a long period.