National Road Safety Plan A+

The Candor Trust congratulates National upon a package that is smart, and will make a significant difference. Staff are pleased at the Nats refusal to be bullied into a lower drink limit by Labour's 7 million marketing campaign, as 0.05 is the weakest time wasting remedy available.

It is a nonebidence based cut off with demonstrated inherent risks of increasing tolls for twenty somethings (Victoria), for complex reasons when it is introduced without complementary random drug testing.

New Zealand already has a lower CRIMINAL legal limit than most countries giving 0.05 drivers instant fines, where criminal limit thresholds are in fact 20% higher than our current best practice one of 0.08.

Research has demonstrated that most if not all drink drivers caught are repeating ones (most not yet sprung). Mr Joyce’s commitment to an ignition interlock program brings New Zealand into this century at long last; it is an initiative proven to save 3 x as many lives as a limit drop ever could.

The tougher penalties for killer impaired drivers are effective deterrents with a generalised effect elsewhere, and raise the seriousness of the offence in the public mind. Weak penalties and excessive "normalising" publicity have made influenced driving a popular local past time.

Candor is especially delighted with the introduction of a zero limit for repeat offenders, but would prefer to see this extended to any persons caught at twice the limit or with multiple drugs aboard.

This package is nobbled by omission of one major requirement to reduce drink driving related trauma - random drug testing. As with alcohol you should not need to wait for a crash to happen before you charge someone. Most drink drivers are now poly-druggers, which puts the typical drunks crash risk on a skyscraper trajectory.

Cabinet’s agreement to study the role of sub limit alcohol in crashes with a view to introducing 0.05 is both misguided (given no evidence of issues) and a commitment to junk science. Nothing would be established by counting low level drink crashers unless a non crashing population is also tested for its average levels, and all subjects also have drug tests.

Nothing will be able to be concluded unless the control and comparison sample is pure of other risk drugs. A methodology that fails to account for this will end up misreporting drug triggered crashes as drink related, when drink will have had nought to do with it.

The blend selected suggests the Government is not as keen to establish a crop of first and repeat fine payers as was the prior one, and the changes should make drink driving quotas much harder for Police to meet. We suggest that MoT reduce them to take the pressure off.

ENDS

© Scoop Media