The Timaru Herald FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1939 New Motoring Offence

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLVI, Issue 21379, 23 June 1939, Page 8

The Timaru Herald FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1939 New Motoring Offence

THERE is certain to be criticism of the proposal endorsed by the New Zealand Road Safety Council that it should be made an offence for any motor car driver to take liquor while driving, or to drive within half an hour of taking liquor. From a statement made by the Minister of Transport it appears that this proposal will be submitted to Parliament during the coming session and it is one about ■which keen debating may be expected. There will be no lack of sympathy with Mr Semple in his efforts to reduce the toll of the road in New Zealand, but those who oppose the creation of this new offence will argue that the proposal is far too arbitrary. The Road Safety Council itself is divided on the question, one member suggesting that the regulation ‘‘would destroy the whole social fabric of the country.” Undoubtedly it would remove one element of conviviality from social intercourse, but it is rather much to say that the social fabric of the country would be endangered. It is by no means impossible for friendships to survive on tea and coffee. However, the dissentient view of Mr W. O’Callaghan, who represents the North Island Motor Union on the Road Safety Council, is sure to find wide approval. He believes that in place of the proposed new regulation severer penalties should be inflicted upon the intoxicated driver. Since road accidents in the Dominion are becoming distressingly frequent a strong case can be made out for a hardening attitude towards the intoxicated, particularly so when many fatal accidents are due to drink.

The Commissioner of Transport has stated that in the past two months eight persons had been killed and 58 injured in accidents in which the driver responsible was either intoxicated or under the influence of liquor. He supports the proposed regulation on the ground that the “borderline cases” are the most dangerous ones. It is just questionable to what extent such a generalisation is valid. It would be a matter upon which medical experts would differ, for there must be a great variation among individuals. Mr Semple and others who support the regulation possess an excellent talking point in the fact that the Dominion’s service car drivers have such an admirable record. These men, says Mr Semple, have learnt to master their cars, keep the rules of the road and keep sober. Possibly it is too much to expect that the private driver should have the same record on the road as men who earn their living as drivers and who travel millions of miles in the year. The question to be decided is how far the taking of drink accounts for the difference between their record and that of private drivers.

There are points in the proposed regulation which can be argued about, but it has to be borne in mind that the sole concern of the Minister of Transport is to reduce the number of New Zealand road tragedies. In this work he is entitled to expect the support of all but the most thoughtless sections of the community. Many will think, however, that the present solution of the problem is to take much sterner action against those who have uudubitably transgressed the existing law.