Zero limit is ‘over the top’

THE controversial “zero limit” for alcohol consumption by drivers as proposed by the Department of Transport has been criticised by various sectors who feel it won’t improve the drunk-driving problem on South African roads.

The proposed amendment made by the department in January will mean the current blood-alcohol level of 0.05g per 100ml of blood will be lowered to zero for all motorists.

The Cape Chamber of Commerce and Industry wrote to the department to call for stricter enforcement of road rules rather than enforce such a rigid regulation.

Chamber president Janine Myburgh said that unless there was a dramatic improvement in enforcement, the further reduction of alcohol limits would make no difference at all: “When the zero limit makes a criminal of a man who has one Windhoek Light (a halfstrength beer) with his lunch then we are inviting disrespect for the law.”

Myburgh said limits for South African drivers are already low and in line with those of countries that have already achieved significant reductions in road fatality rates. She said the real problem could be seen in the enforcement statistics for the Western Cape, where only 17 percent of the fines issued by the province to drivers were actually paid.

“At present 83 percent of drivers in the Western Cape (and probably more in some other provinces) know they can duck and dive and avoid any responsibility for bad and irresponsible driving.

“The system of fining drivers is broken. It does not work and because it does not work, it is not a deterrent. Unless enforcement is improved, a further reduction in alcohol limits would be a waste of time and resources,” said Myburgh.

MEC of Transport and Public Works Donald Grant said that while he supported the need for continual review of legislation, there were strong reservations about the current proposal as there was no scientific evidence to show that if the existing acceptable levels of alcohol consumption were reduced, there would be a decline in the number of car crashes.

“There is no proof that drivers who have consumed alcohol, but within the currently prescribed levels, are more dangerous on the road than those who have not consumed alcohol. Insufficient law enforcement, an extremely low prosecution pace, and the length of time it takes to process blood samples are some of the key reasons for the continued disregard of the law,” he said.

“Reducing the blood alcohol limit to a zero rating will have severe unintended consequences on an already overstrained and ineffective justice system, with backlogs at forensic laboratories and courts set to escalate.

“Excessive alcohol consumption is undoubtedly a leading factor in the carnage we see on our roads daily, and to address this issue effectively there must be appropriate laws, the requisite levels of enforcement, speedy prosecutions, and tough convictions handed down by our courts.

“All this would result in a concerted effort to stigmatise the crime and deter would-be offenders from participating in antisocial behaviour like drinking and driving, and drinking and walking,” he said.

Grant said we should benchmark our interventions with international best practice, and adopt lessons from countries that lead in road safety, namely Australia, Germany, the US and the UK.

“This is the only way we can achieve the real behavioural change that is necessary to dramatically curb the scourge of the carnage on our roads. Before any amendments are to be considered, a proper study should be undertaken to highlight and address all concerns and challenges,” he said.

The spokesman for the National Department of Transport, Tiyani Rikhotso, said: “Alcohol abuse is one of the biggest causes of road crashes and fatalities, so I find it strange that any sector would oppose a total ban on drinking and driving.”