Random breath tests in shake-up of drink-drive law

Motorists could face random breath tests at roadside checkpoints as part of the biggest shake-up of drink-drive laws in 40 years, it emerged today.

The move would be a big departure from current laws which only allow police to order a test if a driver is perceived to be driving erratically, been involved in an accident or committed an offence.

The checkpoints would operate for up to 24 hours, wherever there was a reasonable belief that drink or drugimpaired driving may take place

Ministers have previously rejected random testing but it is now understood they have changed their minds after the latest Christmas drink-drive campaign.

Figures showed that while the number of tests carried out in England and Wales rose by six per cent, the number of motorists who failed fell from 9,700 in 2006 to 7,800.

The Department for Transport believes the results show that increasing the number of tests acts as a deterrent to drink-driving. Ministers are also concerned that a new generation of drivers has no recollection of the hard-hitting advertising campaigns of the Eighties and Nineties. Robert Gifford, the director of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee for Transport Safety, which drew up the checkpoint proposals, said: "This will send a message to road users that ministers are taking the issue of drinkdriving seriously."

Under the plans, the decision to set up a checkpoint could only be made by an officer of inspector rank or above.

It could then be left in place for a further 24 hours on the orders of a superintendent.

A spokesman for road safety campaign group Brakewelcomed the plan, but called for further action.

He said: "Random testing of drivers is long overdue. These proposals are a step in the right direction but to have greater impact all levels of police officer should have the power to test anyone, at any time.

"Only if the Government combines random testing with increased yearround enforcement and a lower drinkdrive limit will we see a drastic reduction in the devastating numbers of people killed and injured in drink and drug-driving offences." There were 540 drink-driving related deaths last year, the same number as in 1997.

However, the proposals were criticised by John Spellar, a former Labour transport minister. "Yet again they are straining the tolerance of the British public, when they should be focusing on the minority who are grossly over the limit and causing mayhem," he said.

"This system has been working well for many years and has left us with one of the best safety records in Europe. There is a serious danger this will erode the confidence of the public in the police and will create ill will."

The plans are expected to be unveiled in the next few weeks although no decision has been made on whether to reduce the drink-drive limit from 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood to 50 milligrams.

This would bring Britain into line with other European countries and mean that drivers could be over the limit after one pint of beer. British drink-drive offenders are automatically given a one-year ban if convicted over the 80mg limit. In France, which has a 50mg limit, offenders at the lower end of the scale receive endorsements or fines.