A new study published in the Lancet indicates the lowering of Scotland's drink-drive limit in 2014 to 50mg has not resulted in a reduction of Road Traffic Accidents (RTAs), though it suggests this may be due to a lack of supporting enforcement and campaigns.
Jim Lewsey, Professor of Medical Statistics, at the University’s Institute of Health and Wellbeing, said the findings were "surprising" given previous international evidence, which "generally supports a reduction of RTAs following the same lowering of a blood alcohol concentration limit", and that:
"In our view, the most plausible explanation for our findings is that the change in legislation was not backed up with additional police enforcement, nor sustained media campaigning. It is also perhaps an indication of the safety of Scotland’s roads more generally, following continual improvements in recent years, and the fact that drink-driving is increasingly socially unacceptable. Drink-driving remains highly dangerous and against the law. It is important to stress that these findings should not be interpreted to imply that any level of drink-driving is safe."
A Twitter thread by Niamh Fitzgerald summarising the findings also highlights that a limitation of the study was that it was unable to use alcohol-related RTAs as a specific outcome - rather than RTAs overall - as driver Blood Alcohol Content (BACs) are often unavailable or inaccurate. However a parallel study [pdf] will examine enforcement efforts and campaign spend in an effort to help address such questions.
Drink-drive policy and politics
The findings and their interpretation are likely to have significant policy implications given the regular attention to drink-driving. As an IAS report points out, there remains widespread public support in Scotland for further action, with over half of the public even reportedly supporting a zero alcohol legal legal limit. PHE's evidence review had also stated that 'enforced legislative measures to prevent drink-driving are effective and cost-effective', with the latest study perhaps adding emphasis to the importance of enforcement and supporting measures to raise awareness of lowered limts.
Meanwhile England, Wales and Malta remain the only countries in Europe still to have an 80mg per 100 ml of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit, despite regular calls for it to be reduced. In 2011 the coalition Government rejected the recommendation from an independent review to lower it, and a Government official stated in June that there are "no current plans to lower the drink drive limit and considers rigorous enforcement and serious penalties for drink drivers to be effective deterrents." However recent figures suggest alcohol-related road accidents and causalities have been rising after many decades of progress.
Such findings may be seen as a reminder of the complex environment of alcohol policy and interventions. Whilst many groups argue for firmer legislation in the run up to a new strategy, particularly concerning pricing and availability, it may be seen as increasingly important to stress there are no silver bullets. Population level policy changes will therefore still be seen as important levers, albeit they must still be enacted as part of wider multi-component strategies, as set out in Scotland's recent national strategy. Calls to bring England's legal limit in line with most of Europe are likely to continue, albeit that accompanying enforcement and awareness raising are now also likely to be heavily emphasised.
Comments