Campaign anger as Ministers refuse to cut drink-drive limit

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said improving the way the current limit was enforced would have a bigger impact on the problem than reducing the amount motorists are allowed to drink.

The decision was made despite Whitehall-commissioned research by former Oxford University vice-chancellor Sir Peter North, who called for the limit to be reduced from 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood to 50mg.

Sir Peter suggested a lower limit would save 168 lives in its first year and as many as 303 lives annually after it had been in place for six years.

But the Government will instead focus on tightening current testing methods and introducing a new specific offence to punish motorists who drive on drugs.

Mr Hammond said the number of drink-driving deaths had fallen by more than 75 per cent since 1979 but tougher action was needed against motorists who “flagrantly ignore” the limit.

“Drink-driving and drug-driving are serious offences and we are determined to ensure they are detected and punished effectively,” he said.

“It is just as dangerous to drive impaired by drugs as alcohol so we need to send a clear message that drug-drivers are as likely to be caught as drink-drivers and that drug-driving is as socially unacceptable as drink-driving has become.”

Drivers only marginally above the drink-drive limit will lose the right to request a blood test, closing a loophole that allows motorists to sober up while waiting for a medic to examine them.

Random breath testing will not be allowed but traffic officers will be given portable alcohol testing devices to free up police time.

Police will also be given roadside drug testing kits as soon as possible. Six such devices are currently being tested by the Home Office.

Critics said the Government had missed an opportunity to lower the drink-drive limit at a time when most motorists were in favour of the move.

Robert Gifford, executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said: “While we welcome the operational improvements contained in this Government statement, the failure to lower the limit continues to put our citizens at risk. How many more have to die before the Government really makes road safety a priority?”

Road safety charity Brake, which claims drink-driving is responsible for one in six road deaths, said it was “bitterly disappointing” the limit would not be lowered.

Its campaigns director Julie Townsend said, “Quite simply we need a zero tolerance approach to drink-driving – including a lower limit and far more breath testing – if we are to stamp out this deadly menace once and for all.”

RAC motoring strategist Adrian Tink said: “Nearly 90 per cent of drivers told us last year that they backed a reduction in the limit.

“Targeting those who are excessively over the limit will always be welcomed – but will these changes mean more police on the roads?

“Because that is undoubtedly the best way to improve enforcement of those who flagrantly flout the drink-drive laws.”

AA president Edmund King said: “Although an opportunity to cut the limit has been missed, drink-drivers need to understand that new procedures will make them more likely to be caught.

“Meanwhile, the introduction of ‘drugalysers’ and simpler procedures will send out a strong message that drug-drivers are more likely to be targeted and caught.”