Dear Editor,
Inaccurate information is circulating regarding the new impaired driving legislation (Bill C-46). This has resulted in a misleading impression of this critically important traffic safety legislation. As the member of parliament for Cloverdale-Langley City, I wish to clarify some key points in the legislation and reassure our citizens that their safety is top of mind.
Impaired driving is the leading criminal cause of death and injury in Canada. Canada has long had one of the poorest impaired driving records among comparable countries. The U.S. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention reported that Canada had the highest percentage of alcohol involvement in crash deaths among 20 high-income countries in 2013 even though it has one of the lowest rates of alcohol consumption. Canadians drink considerably less than residents of many other countries and yet are much more likely to die in an alcohol-related crash. I am proud that our government introduced the most significant reforms to this part of the Criminal Code in more than 40 years.
Key changes to the impaired driving laws include mandatory roadside screening; new and higher minimum fines and maximum penalties; changes to some legal defences that are commonly used to evade criminal conviction despite having a blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) well above the Criminal Code limit; and clarifying what the Crown must disclose to the defence.
Mandatory screening is a proven traffic safety measure. It has been implemented in more than 40 countries and where it has been put in place, it has saved lives. For instance, in Ireland, the introduction of mandatory screening is credited with reducing the number of people killed on their roads by 23 per cent in the first year and 40 per cent over the first four years following its enactment in 2006. Police are now able to demand a breath sample from any driver that has been lawfully stopped. A lawful stop could be made because a driver ran a stop sign or a red light, or committed another traffic offence.
Police have long had the power, during the course of an impaired driving investigation, to come to the residence of a suspected impaired driver and demand that he or she accompany them to the police station and submit to evidentiary breath testing. However, the police can only make this demand if they have reasonable grounds to believe an individual committed an impaired driving offence within the last three hours, they inform the individual of his or her rights to consult with a lawyer and give him or her an opportunity to do so, and that the testing is conducted by a qualified technician designated by the federal attorney general on an approved instrument.
Bill C-46 makes it an offence (subject to a major exception) to have a BAC of 0.08 per cent or more within two hours of having driven (the two-hour rule). However, the bill specifically states that no offence is committed if the alcohol was consumed after driving; the individual had no reason to expect that he or she would be required to submit to a breath or blood test; and the individual’s evidentiary BAC is consistent with being below 0.08 per cent when driving. This two-hour rule was enacted to address two questionable defences (bolus and intervening drinking) that impaired drivers commonly used to evade criminal conviction despite having a BAC well above the Criminal Code.
We have lost too many lives due to impaired driving including many tragic cases in our own community. Reforms were desperately needed and that is what our government delivered. These reforms will lead to more efficient trials and will reduce the burden on our courts, while respecting our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Police now have more tools to enforce these new laws.
An accurate summary of Bill C-46 and the rationale for the specific provisions is readily available on the federal government website: https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/LegislativeSummaries/421C46E Constituents can also contact my office for more information (604-575-6595).
John Aldag, Member of Parliament, Cloverdale-Langley City
