Hansard

Members will be aware that the Scottish Government has long argued that a lower drink-drive limit will save lives and help to make Scotland’s roads safer. Some members in the chamber have also long campaigned on that important issue. In particular, I pay tribute to Dave Thompson. He has been a tireless campaigner for a lower drink-drive limit and first raised the matter in Parliament way back in October 2007.

Earlier this month, we saw the 50th anniversary of the first anti drink-drive television adverts in the United Kingdom. The existing drink-drive limit was introduced in 1967. Social attitudes towards drink driving were very different when the limit was first introduced. It is fair to say that, back then—hard as it may be to believe now—many people really did not think that it was irresponsible or dangerous to get behind the wheel of a car after drinking. Since then, attitudes towards drink drivers have, understandably, hardened considerably.

A survey of UK drivers that was published earlier this month found that 91 per cent of people agreed that drink driving was unacceptable, and 92 per cent said that they would feel ashamed if they were caught drinking and driving. In comparison, in 1979, more than half of male drivers and nearly two thirds of young male drivers admitted drink driving on a weekly basis.

However, the sad truth is that there remains a persistent minority who, despite repeated warnings, put their lives and the lives of others at risk by getting behind the wheel after drinking alcohol. In 2012-13, 4,730 people were convicted of drink and drug-driving offences in Scotland’s courts. That may be a dramatic fall when it is compared with the 8,145 people who were convicted of those offences in 2003-04, but too many people are still choosing to ignore the warnings and drink and drive.

The consequences of drink driving can be tragic. Drink driving costs lives. That is why it is right that we take action to reduce the risk on our roads.

Last month, the report “Reported Road Casualties Scotland 2013” was published. It revealed that an estimated 580 casualties and around 10 fatalities were due to drink-drive accidents in Scotland in 2012. The figure for fatalities is a fall on the 2011 figure, but the average for the past four years remains at 20 fatalities. Casualties that resulted from drink-drive accidents have fallen by more than 50 per cent since 2002, from 1,270 to 580. In 2013, 2.4 per cent of drivers who were involved in injury accidents and were asked for a breath test registered a positive reading or refused to take the test.

Although we welcome the reduction in the number of casualties, the figures still show that, over the past four years, an estimated one in 10 deaths on Scotland’s roads—20 deaths a year—involved a driver with a blood alcohol reading that is above the current limit. Another 560 people suffer injury, and 100 of them are seriously injured.

Some have said that our efforts should concentrate on strictly enforcing the existing drink-driving limit and that there is no need to reduce it. Let me be clear: that ignores the scientific evidence that the risks of driving under the influence of alcohol start to increase well below the current legal limit. Indeed, a wealth of research indicates that impairment begins with any departure from zero blood alcohol concentration.

With a blood alcohol level of between 50mg and 80mg, drivers’ vision is affected, slowing reactions to red lights and tail lights. They are more likely to drive too fast and to misjudge distances when approaching bends. Motorcyclists will find it difficult to drive in a straight line.

British Medical Association evidence shows that the relative risk of being involved in a road traffic crash for drivers with a reading of 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood is 10 times higher than for drivers with a zero blood alcohol reading. The relative crash risk for drivers with a reading of 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood was more than twice the level for drivers with a zero blood alcohol reading.

The independent review of drink and drug-driving law conducted in 2010 by Sir Peter North concluded that reducing the drink-drive limit from 80mg to 50mg will save lives.

The current drink-drive limit has had its day. If we look at the drink-driving limits across Europe, we can see that only the United Kingdom and Malta have a legal blood alcohol limit of 80mg per 100ml of blood. Reducing the limit to a lower level of 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, to bring Scotland into line with most other European countries, is the right approach and will make Scotland’s roads safer.

I first raised the drink-drive limit with the UK Government back in 2008. It is a real shame that it has taken until now to reach the point at which we are able to reduce the drink-drive limit to make Scotland’s roads safer.

The Scotland Act 2012 devolved the power to set the drink-drive limit. We welcomed the fact that we have the power to make Scotland’s roads safer through having a lower limit. However, we consider that that limited transfer of power was a missed opportunity. We wanted a package of powers that would allow the police to carry out the breath testing of drivers anytime, anywhere. We also called for powers to allow us to consider differential limits—for example, for young and novice drivers—and the ability to change the penalties for drink driving. However, those powers were not granted by the UK Government.

It is right that this Parliament should have the powers to set appropriate and proportionate penalties for drink driving. I welcome Margaret Mitchell’s amendment, which seeks the Parliament’s views on drink-driving penalties. I presume that that means that she supports the call for such powers to be granted to this Parliament.

We are clear that the automatic 12-month driving ban is appropriate at the current limit and will remain appropriate at the lower limit. There is strong evidence that drivers with a blood alcohol reading of between 50mg and 80mg are significantly impaired, and an automatic ban is appropriate to deter people from drinking and driving.

We will continue to argue for greater powers to tackle drink driving. The Scottish Government’s submission to the Smith commission makes the case that giving this Parliament full responsibility for the law on road traffic offences will help to tackle drink driving, make Scotland’s roads safer and address the anomalies in the boundaries between reserved and devolved areas.

We want the lower drink-drive limit to result in less drink driving, not more convicted drink drivers. To ensure that drivers are aware that the lower limit is coming into effect, the Scottish Government yesterday launched a public information campaign that is aimed at informing all adults of driving age in Scotland. The campaign comprises advertising on television, video on demand and radio; partnership and stakeholder engagement; field marketing; website updates; social media; and public relations. It includes material relating to the effects of alcohol the morning after a night out.

Let me be clear. Whatever the limit may be, it should not be forgotten that any level of alcohol impairs driving and that our central message remains “Don’t drink and drive.”

I am happy to accept the amendments from Labour and the Tories, on the basis that they do not seek to reduce the current period of disqualification as a result of the reduction to 50mg and would welcome the opportunity to consider what further powers might be available and what further action could be taken if we had control over penalties.

I move,

That the Parliament supports the reduction of the drink drive limit, which will help to save lives and make Scotland’s roads safer, bringing Scotland into line with most other European countries, and encourages drivers not to consume any alcohol at all before driving.