Roadside testing for drugged drivers hailed

Nathan Crombie | 21st November 2008

Drug driving puts hidden killers on the road that only the law has hope of stopping, says Wairarapa AA chairman Handley Thomson.

Mr Thomson was speaking yesterday about a bill to give police the power to do roadside tests such as demanding a driver to touch their nose, walk a straight line, turn around, or stand on one leg and to order blood tests for drivers who appear to be under the influence of illegal drugs though they might have passed a breath alcohol test.

Leo Mortimer, Ministry of Transport land safety legislation manager, said a transport select committee heard submissions on the bill before the election and the draft law is now expected to go back before the House.

Mr Thomson said the Wairarapa AA committee discussed the issue of drug driving this week and recommending their support of roadside testing and research projects to their national office to find more about "something that is certainly happening that is an absolute danger on the roads".

"Drug driving is all suspicion and no real evidence. Research needs to be conducted to quantify the problem and we as a council support legislation that allows roadside testing that could perhaps dovetail with on-the-spot breathalysers."

Mr Thomson said he has heard of a "lick test" machine used in Australia to identify drivers under the influence of cannabis but the establishment of roadside drug driver testing in New Zealand has been dogged with problems, including time constraints on officers and costs involved.

"The impediments to rolling out roadside testing for drugs need to be resolved and further research efforts made. Something must be done."

An informal survey of pedestrians in Masterton found almost unanimous support for wider police powers to identify drug drivers despite concerns over rights of privacy.

Adrienne Brittany, of Masterton, said testing is a necessity but "privacy issues and citizens' rights should be carefully considered" under any proposed legislation.

Levin driver Jim Russell was the only pedestrian approached yesterday who said police powers are already great enough and "they already overstep the mark sometimes", although he does not condone drug driving "at all".

Masterton man Daniel Bishop agreed with roadside testing and described as "idiots" any motorists that drive under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Robyn and Roger Gordon-Wiles, of Masterton, each agreed police powers should be widened to net drug drivers as it may potentially save lives and "the innocents inevitably become the victims in the end".

Family First NZ has welcomed the proposed widening of police powers to test and arrest drug drivers.

"Based on international experience, the extent of the drug-driving problem is far greater than has been acknowledged," Family First NZ national director Bob McCoskrie, who made a submission to the transport select committee, said.

"The research in New Zealand shows that from 2004 to 2006, driver alcohol and drugs were a factor in almost a third of fatal crashes both legal and illegal drugs almost 20 per cent of serious injury crashes and over 10 per cent of minor injury crashes."

Otago University research has found younger drivers are far more likely to drive drugged than drunk over a five-year period, and are consequently twice as likely to have crashed under the influence of drugs than alcohol.

Mr McCoskrie said since 2003 in Victoria, drug testing has helped reduce their road toll in two years from 450 to 346, Scandinavian countries drug test and have low road tolls, in Malaysia in 2006 drug testing of motorcyclists dropped the daily toll from 17 to 11 deaths, and a two-year campaign in Britain led to a halving, to none, of dead young male drivers being on drugs.