Drink And Driving Change This Week

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31974, 29 April 1969, Page 1

Drink And Driving Change This Week

On I hursday the new regulations on drink and driving will come into force. Traffic officers will have the power to stop drivers they have cause to suspect are intoxicated and require them to take breath tests.

If a driver refuses to take the breath test he can be required to accompany the officer to a police station and if he refuses that he will commit an offence.

if the initial breath-test j shows a reading of more than 80 milligrams of alcohol per; 100 millilitres of blood, the driver will be required to' take a second test at the! police station 20 minutes: later. If the second test shows a reading of more than 80, if the driver refuses to take the test, or if there is no tester available, a blood test must be taken. Refusal to have a blood test will render the driver liable to the same penalty as if he had taken the test and failed. By Thursday, all Ministry of Transport traffic officers would have been issued with breath-analysers, the district! officer of the Ministry (Mr D. L. Hogan) said yesterday. All officers had been instructed in the use of the devices and the application of the new regulations. •GOOD CAUSE” In order to stop a driver and require him to take a breath-test, an officer had to have good cause to suspect he was intoxicated —for instance, because his car was weaving across the Mr Hogan said. If, when the blood sample was analysed, it was shown to have more than 100 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres, then the driver would be charged accordingly.

The penalty was automatic disqualification for six months, and either up to a I month in prison or a fine of I up to $2OO, Mr Hogan said. The existing offence of driving under the influence of j drink or drugs, which carried i a penalty of three years dis-! qualification, up to three months imprisonment or a fine of up to S2OO, would re-i

■ main in existence. Mr Hogan said. A driver who was a bad case could still be charged with the more serious offence. Health Problems Mr Hogan said there was no provision in the regulations for persons to refuse to take a blood test on conscientious grounds, but there was provision for persons with health problems. The sample had to be taken by a registered medical prac titioner. and it was a defence against a charge of refusing to give a blood sample if the Court was satisfied on the evidence of a registered medical practitioner that taking a blood sample would have been prejudicial to the health of the person concerned. The act also stipulated that no person who was in hospital or receiving treatment in a doctor's surgery could be required to take a breath or blood test unless the doctor in charge permitted it. The Christchurch City Council traffic superintendent (Mr J. F. Thomas) said yesterday that breath-analysers would be available to all Christchurch City Council traffic officers, and would be carried in the patrol vehicles of senior officers. All officers had been instructed in the use of the testers. There would be no random testing of drivers in any circumstances, he said. The manual for police and traffic officers dealing with the new regulations says that unless a driver draws attention to himself by his driving .or conduct, he should not be approached for the specific ! purpose of seeing if he is a candidate for the breathanalyser. If the officer is in any doubt when reading the

' tester, the motorist must be given the benefit of the doubt. The new offences which exist from Thursday are dm - ing with more than 100 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood, refusing to accompany an officer to the police station or place where a blood test may be carried out (it could be a doctor's surgery or a hospital), failing to remain at the police sta(tion. and refusing to give a blood sample.