Targeting The Hard Core

Sydney Morning Herald

Tuesday December 17, 2002

No traffic code reform has done as much as random breath testing in cutting the NSW road toll by 60 per cent. Its success is measured in changed social attitude and statistical analysis. According to a survey last year, 80 per cent of Australians regard drink drivers as irresponsible, criminal or potential murderers, up from 65 per cent when RBT trials began 20 years ago today. The Roads and Traffic Authority says RBT has so changed behaviour that 4367 lives have been saved by its introduction. In 1981, drink driving was NSW's biggest road killer, accounting for 40 per cent of that year's 1291 road toll. Last year, drink driving was the main cause of 99 road deaths in a total toll of 524, less than half the 1981 rate.

And, yet, the drink driving assault has not worked for all. A hard core of drink drivers continues to recklessly endanger the safety of others with a self-righteous contempt for prevailing attitudes. Such is the pattern with most criminal law. Most citizens comply, out of respect for social norms or fear of punishment. Neither consideration weighs on the hard-core criminal, whether robbing or bashing or drink driving. Between 1995 and 1997, 40 per cent of convicted drink drivers were repeat offenders. This matched the pattern of another study, covering 1984 to 1995, while other findings suggest that one in three drink drivers on their third offence was unlicensed to drive at the time. Some have disqualifications extending beyond 20 years.

To these recidivists, the usual punishments are meaningless. They simply ignore orders not to drive. They seek to justify repeated drink driving by insisting their superior driving skills put them above the rules, or they fantasise about being able to consume excessive alcohol without their judgement being impaired. They blame everyone but themselves. But each time they escape the law, their self-righteousness is reinforced. How, then, can their behaviour be satisfactorily modified?

High on the list should be the application here of a Victorian law which demands that the cars of repeat offenders be fitted with ignition interlock systems, preventing intoxicated drivers from starting the engine. This is far from foolproof. The challenge, however, is to take the next step against drink driving by targeting repeat offenders. That requires weapons which work.

Telephone interception capabilities didn't stop organised crime but they certainly inconvenienced it and, occasionally, exposed it. In the same way, random breath testing could not stamp out drink driving, although its success exceeded expectations. Again, a device that locks off an intoxicated driver's engine will not be a cure-all but it makes a repeat offender's conduct that much more of a hassle. It's been talked about for more than 20 years but only now has NSW introduced the device on a voluntary basis. Recidivist behaviour, however, suggests appeals to co-operation fall on deaf ears. Against these offenders, action must get a lot tougher.