(11 years, 10 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, absolutely not. The difficulty with that idea is that it would enable drivers to drink more while believing that they were below the limit. Our policy is that there is no safe level of alcohol in the blood when driving. Therefore, we do not support the compulsory carrying of breathalysers by drivers.
My Lords, when the Minister gave the figures for the number of fatalities involving drink, did all of those incidents involve blood alcohol levels above the current limit? My recollection is that one problem with the issue was that no statistics were kept for accidents involving drinkers who were below the 80 milligram limit but above the 50 milligram limit. Is that information now available?
My Lords, it may well be available but I am not aware of it. However, my point is that there is no safe blood alcohol level when one is driving a vehicle.
(13 years, 10 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I strongly oppose the question that the House do now adjourn. We need to determine this matter now.
It is perfectly in order for the noble Earl to oppose the question after I have put it to the House, so perhaps I may do that. The question, as I understand it, is that further consideration of Motion A be now adjourned.
My Lords, I strongly oppose the question that we adjourn this debate. We have had a good and tough debate. I understand the sensitivities and it has been difficult but we need to determine this matter.