Editorial

Christmas and the New Year is a time for festivities, celebration and revelry – and substance abuse. Alcohol is consumed in astounding quantities at this time and drivers who abuse jeopardise themselves, their passengers and other people on the road.

Alcohol slows down reflexes and precipitates brash decisions, a deadly combination at the steering wheel, a fact recognised a century ago with the introduction of the first legislation related to driving under the influence of alcohol in New York in 1910. Every single injury or death caused by drink-driving is 100 per cent preventable. Unfortunately, in spite of some progress, alcohol-impaired driving remains a serious national problem, tragically affecting many victims annually.

Unfortunately, as the law stands, the police can only request a breathalyser test when they “reasonably suspect” a motorist is driving under the influence of alcohol. Even then, the driver can object, leaving the police with just a single option: arrest. While the rule of law rightly demands an individual is innocent until proven guilty, it is difficult for law-abiding citizens to understand how such tests can be called a personal liberty infringement. If one drinks, one should and must not drive because although one may feel one can abuse one’s body with alcohol, the rest of society fail to see why such a person should drive and endanger all.

Sedqa have quite correctly called for a change in the law, allowing police to carry out random breathalyser tests as a way of clamping down on drink-driving, a perfect deterrent that would nicely complement portable speed cameras. The agency would also like to see a lowering of the blood alcohol threshold, along with the rest of the EU, such that drivers would only be able to drink the equivalent of one small beer, a glass of wine or shot of spirit once an hour. Moreover, it is lobbying to raise the minimum drinking age to 18, mostly for health reasons because the effect of alcohol on the developing body of an adolescent is even worse than that on an adult. Sedqa’s overriding concern is that there are about 15,000 Maltese people with serious alcohol problems.

The government can only say it is “looking into this”. That is likely to mean it will be too late for Christmastime.

Other measures should also be taken in a holistic (to use an expression favoured by politicians) manner. Better roads and more effective traffic management are a must. Hefty fines and long periods of driving licence suspension, even imprisonment in serious cases for those caught drink-driving, would definitely help. And the police need to be given more leeway to enforce the law.

Several studies show that selective breath testing at checkpoints works, as does lowering the permissible blood alcohol limit and raising the minimum legal drinking age. Ignition interlock programmes are also effective for offenders as these prevent cars from starting up if the car’s sensors detect the driver is drunk.

Statistically, drink-drivers tend to be male, aged 25-35 years and have a history of drink-driving convictions and, possibly, a history of drug abuse. The risk of death for drivers in single-vehicle crashes involving a high blood alcohol content is estimated at 385 times that of a zero-blood alcohol driver. Such studies are supported by driving simulators that allow research into drink-driving without the hazard of a drunk person actually driving a real vehicle.

Drink-driving causes fatalities and must not be allowed, under any circumstances.