A new EU regulation says that all new cars must have integrated breathalysers and speed-limiters by 2022. Existing models sold after 2024 must also have this updated safety technology. The British Government has confirmed the standards will apply in the United Kingdom, despite Brexit.
The landmark ruling, which the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) say may cut traffic collisions by 30% and save 25,000 lives across Europe over the next 15 years, received provisional approval in March but the European officials passed it early last week.
Tried and tested
In-car breathalysers are common in Australia and the United States, where they’re known more often as ‘alcohol interlock devices’, or ‘alcolocks’. Fitted onto the dashboard, the breathalyser needs a clean breath sample before the car’s engine will start. If the driver doesn’t pass the test, they must wait a certain amount of time before they can re-test. In-built chips can let the police know when a driver fails a test or if someone has tampered with the machine.
Some systems need the motorist to give repeat readings at random intervals, preventing drunk-drivers from getting a sober person to start the engine and/or drinking once the vehicle has started.
In a deliberate move, the EU won’t yet discuss the practicalities of how the breathalysers will work but, after doing my research into a common ignition interlock used in the US, I imagine it’ll work with a camera to check that the driver is the person taking the test whereby the camera takes an automatic snapshot of the motorist whenever they give their required sample.
Aside from breathalysers, the recent approval includes several new mandatory safety features including ‘Intelligent Speed Assistance’ (ISA) software, which stops drivers from going above speed limits, slowing speeding vehicles, and another feature that detects when you’re falling asleep, drifting over lanes, or losing concentration.
The speed-limiter software uses GPS data and speed limits from local traffic cameras, displaying the limits on your car’s dashboard.
If you go above the limit, the system reduces your car’s speed and, although you can override the system by pressing harder on the accelerator, if you continue to speed your car will sound an alert, like a seatbelt alarm.
The ETSC has suggested motorists should be able to deactivate ISA software. While speed-limiting equipment seems like something from ‘1984’, it could also help reduce road casualties, so shouldn’t we take advantage of all technological safety developments?
Drive like your life depends on it
People met the ruling, that the European Parliament says will save ‘thousands of lives’ and help motorists avoid speeding tickets, with a mixed response.
The road safety charity Brake describes the new regulation as the ‘biggest leap forward for road safety this century’ and Joshua Harris, Director of Campaigns at Brake, said:
‘Drink-driving and speeding are a scourge on our roads and the cause of devastating crashes every day.
Mr Harris added it was ‘fantastic to hear that alcohol interlock compatibility and speed-limiting technology will soon be mandatory.’
Despite our government agreeing to mirror EU road safety rules, it’s up to them to decide on how we use in-car breathalysers.
Neil Greig, Director of Policy and Research at IAM RoadSmart, says it’s unlikely the vast majority of the law-abiding public will ever use them to start their car, which may mean the only people who must use breathalysers to start their engines are motorists convicted of drink-driving, returning to the road after a driving ban.
Edmund King, President of the AA, said that ISA can help motorists from always checking their speedometers because even when people are religious about sticking to the speed limit, they still face the threat of ‘smartphone zombies and other unwary road users stepping out in front of them or drunk or distracted drivers crashing into them.’
King said, while technology plays a part, motorists shouldn’t only rely on computers and cameras to drive their cars for them and, until vehicles come with complete self-driving capabilities, people must keep their eyes on the road and their hands on the wheel.
He said: ‘Features such as lane-keep assistance, autonomous emergency braking, and driver-drowsiness warning systems have the potential to have a very positive effect on the number of accidents.’
The AA says something must exist to stop drink-drivers from buying or driving vehicles without fitted breathalysers.
Save your breath
Whichever of the new safety features we discuss, let’s not forget, we the consumer pay the extra to cover the cost of the advanced technology and its maintenance.
Regarding the breathalysers, many unanswered questions remain such as, how the machines cope with false readings from people using cough medicine or mouthwash, and whether drivers need to produce a 0% alcohol reading.
Will the machine register the readings of motorists with poor lung health? Will the regulation extend to motorcyclists, cyclists? Could the technology fail, leaving people stranded, unable to start their vehicles? Will we soon see an in-car system to test for drugs?
Will the safety features help police fight other crimes by reducing their traffic offences workload or will the government reduce officer numbers still further?
Brits might agree with making those convicted of drink-driving use an in-car breathalyser, but for every driver? Should we now presume guilt in all motorists?
There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a drink in moderation, but we’re the ones responsible for our actions, so, if you intend to drink, make sure you don’t drive over the legal alcohol limit. Arrange a designated driver or use a taxi or a ride-share service (like Uber).
If you space out your drinks or alternate between alcoholic and soft drinks, you give your liver a better chance of breaking down the alcohol in your system, preventing high blood alcohol levels.
So, will in-car breathalysers turn our ‘nation of drinkers’ into one of pedestrians? At least it would reduce harmful emissions…
What’s your view on mandatory breathalysers and speed limiters? Are they a good thing? Share your opinions in the comments.
Please can you share the original article from the EU on this, to prove that it’s not just Brexit propaganda?
Not particularly effective propaganda if it’s going to apply even if we leave, is it?
Well… that or Brexit isn’t what it was cracked-up to be!
Brexit certainly won’t be, seeing as it was sold in a pack of lies! The U.K. has voted in favour of something like 98% of all EU laws, so the claim that they have been foisted upon us is false. And don’t forget that the U.K. helps to shape the, through the various committees.
Caroline, if I could upvote this more than once I would. It’s really great to see someone else who understands how the EU functions.
I think that will be past tense, as the UK helped to shape EU regs in the past. So now it seems we have agreed to abide by things we no longer shape, or can influence in any meaningful way. A great deal, as Boris “depiffle” Johnson keeps insisting. I am still wondering, as I have spent the last thirty years or so exporting machines built in the UK to every continent on the planet, under the aegis of EU “rules”, why we suddenly need new trade deals to “allow us to trade with the world”. None of this seems to make any sense.
I must have missed something. Is this article about Brexit?
I’ve not voted any EU laws in…the government do that for us, even if we didn’t vote for them!!
We were lied to when we joined the then Common Market and scaremongers like you are still peddling untruths. We voted OUT so that means OUT.
That’s because it is something the U.K. voted in favour of!!
If you like things we are in favour of.. look at the referendum result and see that a majority of voters were in favour of leaving.
Or do you only like things the UK is in favour of when you agree with it?
Most people who voted to leave did it on the basis of a pack of lies.
Correct. Unfortunately, some people chose to ignore that and carry on with their mantra.
Both sides told a pack of lies, the politicians all just wanted to further their own agendas and thought the public were dumb enough to believe whatever they said. As no-one has left the EU before, it’s not possible to truly know the effects.
We were led into the EU like lambs to the slaughter on the biggest lie ever.
we didn’t join the EU, it was the Common Market and a much different entity
At last someone who does actually know how we were transitioned from EEC trade to EU federalist politics. Too many ignorant EU sycophants on here.
Most people who voted to join also did it on the basis of a pack of lies too! Do you remember the 70s?
Yes, I don’t remember any lies for joining, only that it would be good for the economy. AND IT WAS.
Years later, Edward Heath was asked if he’d lied about the effects on UK sovereignty of joining the EEC. He replied that of course he’d lied, because the British people would not have accepted the truth. So it seems that your memory is at fault.
Come on listen to Boris we wont be in the EU, after 31st January
A disaster waiting to happen. Boris will lend lots, boost the economy then bust the economy will over heat. It has happened all before.
Yeah, by Labour remember
Yes! But which year?
Nope, I knew exactly what I was voting for.
The uk did not vote for it , I for one was not asked , some high payed di** in an office agreed to it
No one in the UK or even over the whole of mainstream Western Europe voted for an EU. The UK voted for a common market on trading way back. as did its near European countries. The EU evovled with not one Country voting or giving its permission. If you think the UK is the only Country wanting out of being controlled by unelected Officials. Then skip the local UK News and see what is happening in other close European Countries. There have been riots in some of them over Policies imposed upon them by the EU. The UK is not the only Country questioning the EU. Just our collective Politicians have no balls to stand agaisnt these unelected EU officials that are imposing their will on us and our news medai has decided to stop reporting dissent in other Western Eurpoean Countries that object. How is this
different than “Dictaortship”? If no one has voted for them or agreed to their imposed polices. Anyone read 1984? WE are heading there!
Not concentrating must be the biggest cause of accidents, how can we solve that?
That will be their next argument for self-driving cars as they gradually proceed towards removing all freedom of choice from the driver.
A happy day. Once all the humans have been removed, the computers will be able to transport us at high speed without risk as the amoeba who currently clog up our roads will not have control of their own passage. We will be able to make use of our time in vehicles, enjoying the view, conversation, picnic or sleep without concern over the behaviour of the other vehicles in the network. One speed for all – “fast enough” – with no ridiculous debate over a finite limitation isolated entirety from the specifics of an actual physical piece of road. I can’t wait. Seeing as it is no longer permissible to drive for pleasure; I say bring it on.
Not concentrating and generally poor driving skills.
But if ISL takes away some of the need for multi-tasking more attention can be paid to the road rather than the speedo needle
https://www.seeingmachines.com/
Why the downvote? Paul asked how we can solve drivers not concentrating. Seeing Machines are doing that. Not only for Car drivers, lorries, trains, trams, planes also. I was just answering the question.
Don’t drive. … . .easy.
I am utterly resistant to all these so-called “driver assist” technologies to combat irresponsibility and incompetence in drivers, because each one reduces the concentration required of a driver to drive properly. I would far rather take a person’s driving licence away from them than have all this tech. If a person cannot drive to a reasonably safe standard at all times under all circumstances, they shouldn’t be driving. Simples. I agree completely with the alcolock idea, though, for those previously convicted of drink-driving, provided that the technology can distinguish alcoholic drinks from medicines and oral care products, etc.
Peter can’t you afford a modern vehicle are you jealous or do you need a man with a red flag to walk in front of you tech moves on weather you like if or not and you can’t stop it so expect if
What has the weather got to do with the discussion?
Fair comment. No pun intended .
There was no need to be rude, tech may move on whether we like it or not but that doesn’t mean we have to grab it by both hands. I hate to say this but social media has proved that tech is ruling a lot of peoples lives, they can’t live without it and to be honest that is a sad indictment of people today. Tech should be an aid and should not be forced on anyone…..The only thing I do agree with is the breathalyser.
Pat it is not about being rude it’s about people complaining about other people using modern vehicles this technology will keep coming while motor manufacturers can out play other vehicles makers for profit we will have to except it or ride in old cars because it’s on the vehicle it doesn’t mean you have to use it if it doesn’t suit. I myself have been a HGV driver and I have got an ADI LICENCE also I’ve been driving since 1963 but I still let people get on with their own choice without suggesting it’s distracting them and if my spelling mistake gives some people another wow factor let’s hope it make their day for them
All the best to you Pat
So, Frank 2, in your opinion drivers being properly trained and concentrating on driving the vehicle is unnecessary as technology can take up the slack? I’ll use the technology if I think it’s an improvement, but I’m quite capable of driving without it. The overall drop in driving standards since I passed my test in the 1970’s is obvious, and few take driving using hand held devices as a serious distraction. Far too many use the car systems as a crutch to cover their inattention.
I don’t think the technology is there yet for autonomous cars to be safe either.
Excellent post.
Weather or whether obviously you don’t like tech yourself, what happened to spell check before you post.
so leave him alone. He is entitled to his opinions and views., stop being an on line bully be more respectful.
JSM I’m not as posh as you it must be great to be perfect but there is one article in this forum that would BE WORTH you reading I think it’s your criteria it comes under the title
THE MIND BOGGLES
look it up
I think you meant whether, I feel we are entitled to have our own opinion jealousy has nothing to do with it. I agree some drivers can’t even use an indicator, just one little flick of the finger, maybe we will get some tech to deal with that,
Frank 2 you’re a complete moron. I also don’t like so called driver assist technology. If you can’t drive a car without assistance you shouldn’t be driving. And it’s not because I can’t afford it you thicko. I like to make my own decisions in life I don’t need a machine telling me what to do.
We already have self drive cars they are called TRAINS !!!
If only they went where we want to go and it was possible to use them in rural areas without a car to get to them
Bang on fedupwithtwats. I have a 1999 Audi 80 convertible with cassette deck and a proper non computerised engine. No electronic mod cons and I love it as I have to actually drive the car! Completely agree with you on the “I like to make my own decisions in life I don’t need a machine telling me what to do.” I am in total agreement, if you can’t drive the car without assistance, you shouldn’t be driving.
https://www.britishcouncil.org/english/learn-online
Me too, speed does not cause accidents. BAD driving does.
Speed causes fines and points, expect the government to oppose speed limiters.
Bring back manual advance and retard on engine ignition systems, age get rid of those pesky automatic locks which take away the pleasure of individually locking each door with a real mechanical key.
And while you are at it disable the TV remote, who wants this newfangled technology.
I turned off the lane assist in a hire car recently as it was somewhat disconcerting having the steering wheel move when you don’t want it to. And imagine not being able to accelerate away from a dangerous situation because the car won’t let you like passing a lorry on a short and narrow stretch of road.
Agreed. It’s a nightmare in the making. We already have long convoys of vehicles driving far too close to each other at speeds well below the National Speed Limit. People will stop overtaking completely and the roads will get even slower. While I’m on the subject, why can’t technology be used to stop tailgaters? They are very dangerous drivers and I’ve never heard of a single case of somebody being prosecuted for it.
Yes. I have to keep switching City Safety off in my Volvo (seems t keep turning itself on again) as it regularly tries to plant my nose in the steering wheel when I turn into a parking space with a hedge at the end. I recently had a Hyundai hire care with speed limit detector – it frequently got it wrong especially with temporary speed limits due to roadworks so I have little faith in the tech (and I work for a tech company).
Just wait till you are older. If someone can drive safely WITH the assists why not.
Would you want everyone to be able to double declutch. I remember a friend had to learn to do that, technology has improved.
I thought this forum was for humans. Have you met any Peter? If you do, be careful, they make mistakes don’t you know! If they drive to a ‘reasonably safe’ standard, does that mean they can’t cause an accident and / or kill someone?
good idea
I find it crazy that people have downvoted this. How can ensuring people drive within the regulations; within speed limits and not under the influence not be a “good idea”. Bring on the drug use test too I say.
Speed limiters are downright dangerous
I see a problem for clergymen taking communion services in several rural parishes on a Sunday morning
Non alcoholic wine! Simples!
Keith, most “wine” used in church services is really a fruit cordial, often blackcurrant. I know this because I used to order the stock for several churches. Clearly I cannot speak for all religions though.
Coming back to the real subject of this thread, I remember when the breath test for alcohol was used to prevent a driver starting the car by stopping the ignition working, this was in Australia. Problem at first was that the cars fitted with the device needed the ignition on to run the test! Drivers got round it by hot wiring the car to start it. Just shows systems can be beaten if a determined drink driver wants to drive.
Your point about wine is a good one though, made me laugh on a gloomy day. Thank you.
Great point. It is possible to completely reprogram a car’s ECUs (Engine Control Unit) at the moment and there is absolutely no easy way to find out if this has been done. It is probably most commonly used to produce more power and torque in turbocharged engines, I can imagine that overriding a breathalyser would be a doddle. like press one button 3 times, then another twice and another four times and you’re unlocked.
Ray, do you mean:
I see a problem in several rural parishes on a Sunday morning; clergymen taking communion services and then driving under the influence.
Speed limiting might have an effect on the numbers of gas-guzzling, high polluting, high powered cars/SUVs on our roads. Pointless paying all that money for something that’ll never go over 70 mph.
Stop trying to force your lack of driving excitement and enthusiasm onto everybody else. Life should be about personal choice, not just personal choice that you happen to agree with.
Kennington, do you mean personal choice to get drunk and/or race around ignoring speed limits, hoping you don’t kill somebody, or that everybody else will get out of your way? Seems more like arrogant ignorance to me.
Kennington: you do have personal choice, but what you seem to be confusing it with is selfish choice. Doing things that endanger others shouldn’t be accepted by others. Both speeding (which you seem to condone because ‘hey, it’s fun!’) and driving under the influence endanger others. Personal choice comes into play when you realise you can still do those things at track days, on private land etc. Public roads are not your private playground.
Driving at a safe speed and driving at the speed limit are not the same thing. Frequently the safe speed is below the legal limit but equally it is often above the limit. Many limits were brought in by politicians with little to no evidence to back them up e.g. few rural roads in Surrey now has a limit above 40MPH despite Surrey police advising against it. Whatever happened to common sense? Do we all have to be penalised for the few who don’t have it?
Typical attitude of the mememe person!
If you’d done your research PROPERLY, you’d have found out that the EU regulation stops at requiring the INTERFACE for an “alcolock” to be fitted to new cars. It says NOTHING about the alcolock itself – which is why you can’t find any details about what the limits will be or how it’s going to work). The decision as to whether or not to require alcolocks to be FITTED, will rest with each Member State.
As for the Intelligent Speed Adaptation, it’s not likely to be GPS-based as GPS-based systems can’t cope with temporary speed limits like in motorway roadworks. Instead, they’re likely to rely on traffic sign recognition cameras in the windscreen. And no, they won’t prevent you from exceeding the speed limit, the driver will still be able to switch the system off.
I must disagree with that last part of your comment. My Sat Nav is connected to the internet through my phone and so collects all types of traffic information including temporary divisions and speed limits. It also allows me to check that within Average Speed limits I can keep within that limit. If this can happen now then I don’t see how in 3 years time this can be added to all cars
It’s only new cars, not all cars!
The problem is that your phone is dependent on the information being put there by a third party. If it’s like my phone, the information will be constantly changing too. There’s another reason why the Commission doesn’t like the idea of GPS – it makes them dependent on the goodwill of the Americans! Once the EU’s own Galileo GPS system is up and running, I think they’ll be much more enthusiastic about it! The thing with traffic sign recognition, is that the information is coming straight from whichever national authority puts the traffic signs there. That’s good from a liability point of view.
Use WAZE. 100% real time traffic information through your phone.
Except….. you are not allowed to interact with your phone whilst driving, and several employers are now banning all device interaction both hand held and hands free now. My employer already made receiving and making hands free calls a sackable offence to reduce their insurance costs, even passengers are not allowed to use devices that make use of the car’s speakers.
Shame we won’t be allowed to use Galileo (despite having paid a large chunk for its development) post-Brexit 😉
The challenge is that the tech doesn’t work perfectly (think road signs hidden by tree growth etc) and GPS gets confused by 30MPH roads running alongside 70MPH dual carriageways, crossing bridges etc.)
Until government cuts mean overgrown hedges cover the 30mph signs or kids turn signs around to face the other way or some workman installs the sign behind a lamppost so the camera doesn’t detect it or a non standard to road sign is installed. All real failings I see every day all over the country.
Not everyone has their phone connected to their sat nav as mobile data costs are still too high. Of course if Labour get in everything will be free!
I think you’ll find that only applies to broadband, not mobile data.
My mobile lives in the boot when I driving…. then there isnt any temptation to answer calls or read texts.
If I hear it ringing I can pull over when safe and deal with it then.
You must have a severe lack of self control.
Phone Sat Navs do not use data, that is a fallacy. I’ve been to countries, like Canada where I can’t use my mobile data without paying through the nose for it, and I’ve used my Sat Nav app Navmii on my iPhone and it’s not cost me a penny.
George Strachan, your phone based sat nav may well work with data turned off, but you cannot get live, real-time updates without a data signal. Given that temporary speed limits can be put in place at pretty much any time, your sat nav can only be as good as its last update. Not good enough if you’re requiring that data to control your car.
Yes you can with the WAZE APP
No. How do you think it gets the updates without a data connection? The GPS signal works but anything else e.g. updates to maps, traffic data has to come from somewhere!
It is not necessary to have a phone active in a car. Driving a vehicle needs full time attention – a ton or so of steel hurtling along the road is potentially a killer – no distractions.
If Labour get in then we will be taxed out of cars in no time. Car tax will rise dramatically and their tax on fuel companies will make filling the tank a mortgage job.
Using GPS will only work if the temporary speed limit has been passed to Google etc. They keep playing with the limit on the M1 works, but never pass the info on.
well I wont be buying a new car from 2022 just used I think the speed limter is danerus
Sometime when you have a problem out driving you can get out of that problem by accelerating, not braking.. Example, last week some numpty attempted an overtake that he would never complete before hitting oncoming traffic. The numpty applied the brakes, the oncoming applied the brakes… I accelerated leaving a gap behind my car that the braking numpty could pull into and avoid the collision.. You limit my acceleration, I go to the scene of the accident.
There must always be an override to any speed limiter to cater for the situation you describe.
It is mentioned in the above article.
“you can override the system by pressing harder on the accelerator”.
Trickcyclist, speed and acceleration are not the same thing. Almost (and I use that word generously) all cars can decelerate (brake) faster than the accelerate.
So will the alcoholic drivers switch to an older car without a detection device fitted? And what about the over paid gas guzzle brigade and their super speedy sports cars will they like this? I’m sure there will be some exemptions for these adrenaline junkies!
You just sound very bitter. Sad 🙁
Easy peasy if you can drop 80 grand plus on a car you can drop 15 grand a year in insurance to cover being a bell….
I foresee long queues in the service departments of BM/Merc/Audi dealers, full of owners complaining about lack of performance….
This is why we MUST LEAVE THE EU it is not a common market for trade it has become a dictatorship they say YOU MUST CLEAN YOUR BEACHES UP YOU MUST WEAR YOUR SEAT BELTS YOU MUST HAVE SPEED LIMITERS AND CARRY BREATH TESTING DEVICE IN YOUR CAR let them shove their dictatorship rules where the sun don’t shine and be ruled by our own country because if not it will only get worse
What rubbish! Until the EU stepped in we had the filthiest beaches in Europe. Raw sewage was being pumped out only a few yards out from family beaches. Now we have some of the cleanest. If you want your family to swim in raw sewage then you go right ahead.
Seat belts and drink driving came in long before we joined the EU, in fact the EU is years behind some countries. Norway for instance is zero alcohol as is Switzerland. The breath testing device is a French law brought in to prevent the annual carnage on the French Autoroutes.
So you go ahead, get in your car after 10 pints, forget your seatbelt and hammer down the high street at 60mph but don’t moan to us when you end up doing a 2 year stretch and losing your licence.
Gordon – you’re wrong. Compulsory seat belt wearing did not come in ‘long before we joined the EU’. It was made compulsory for front seats in 1979 (six years after we joined the EU), and for rear seats in 1986 to have seat belts fitted (13 years after we joined the EU) and 1991 to wear them (18 years after we joined the EU).
considering the EU didn’t exist until 1993, I don’t see how we joined it 20 years earlier
UK joined the common market/EU 1st Jan 1973!
Not the same thing, Andrew. EEC (Common Market) 1973, EU 1993. Mytheroo is right, and Alan wrong.
Front seat belt wearing became compulsory in the UK in 1983.
Don’t talk stupid! Different names for the same thing. It was sold originally as a “common market” because the realized that there would be a lot of resistance if people knew of the true, long term plans of the EU, (a federal state of Europe.)
That is why various treaties have been foisted on us bit by bit. Read some EU history for gods sake.
But it wasn’t called the EU when wearing of seat belts became compulsory for driver and front seat passenger in 1983 was it? I don’t know where Alan got 1979 from, because I was on a course at RAF Kinloss when it became law, January 1983. Fitting of them on new cars became compulsory in 1972, a year before we entered the EEC. Compulsory breath testing became law while I was still at school in the sixties, several years before we joined the EEC. I’m a leaver too Bob 1 but I don’t like seeing false information.
Actually you’re wrong, the wearing of front seat belts was made compulsory in 1983, in 1989, it was made compulsory for children under 14 to wear rear seat belts & in 1991 for all rear seat passengers.
Gordon, Quote.. “What rubbish! Until the EU stepped in we had the filthiest beaches in Europe. Raw sewage was being pumped out only a few yards out from family beaches. Now we have some of the cleanest. If you want your family to swim in raw sewage then you go right ahead.”
So you know for a fact that if we were not a member of the EU our beaches would still be as bad, it’s you that’s talking rubbish.
…and you know for a fact that they won’t be?
Actually the law requiring your own alcohol detection kits was repealed when the new president was elected in France.
Gordon if you can’t think for your self then it will please you for someone to think for you and hold your hand
Gordon, things are “ahead” only when their direction of travel is the right direction…..
Anything the EU say we must do the British government abide by it, they are unable to think for themselves.
What we should have is a breakdown of how many accidents are caused by. Drugs. Drinking. Speed, and lack of experience.
Reasonable idea but the EU D/D limit is the same as Scotland’s, so is England and Wales to fall in line and lower their limit, which is strange because our accident is rate is lower than most of the European countries who have some ridiculous rules of the road. also France you have to carry a breathalyser in the car and if you use it you are driving illegally but there is no penalty for not having one.
No, it isn’t at all reasonable. As adults, people should be TRUSTED with the choice NOT to drink and drive or speed dangerously. They shouldn’t have oppressive technology forced upon them. The vast majority of responsible people are forever having their daily lives made incrementally that little bit worse for the sake of an irresponsible minority.
Its a reasonable idea if it saves your kids or wife from getting killed before their time don’t you think Kennington. The French have lowered their nation speed limit of single carriageway roads to 50 mph (80 k’s) from 60mph just to save 400 lives, but my main point is the EU’s limit of alcohol consumption is nearly a 1/3 less than ours so odds on ours will be reduced which in its self should reduce accidents.
Let’s just ban cars then, part of the pleasure of driving is the personal control you have, if you remove this pleasure and all cars become characterless self driving boxes you may as well.
Part of the pleasure of driving cars is you have a reliable, comfortable and clean form of transport that goes where you want and when you want…. I have this morning taken my neighbour as he knocked on for help, to hospital to see his sick baby.. I could of course leave him standing at the bus stop, in the rain, taking nearly an hour to get to the hospital or, I could drive him there in 15 minutes… Go figure!
Geoff, we actually have the safest roads in Europe.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/new-report-says-uk-roads-are-still-safest-europe
The UK very severely punishes drink drivers. Some countries, including the UK, can send you to prison if you’re over the limit and first offence. In practice, it’s very different. When I lived in Belgium, one of my colleagues was banned for drink driving for one month and he could choose in the next six months when the ban would be. People just choose it when they’re on their holidays. In the UK, minimum 12 months, it’s a very big difference.
In fairness put the motorway speed limit to 80mph.
Then put speed limiters on vehicles I would agree.
80 in the dry, 60 in the wet.
Yet another step towards 1984 under the guise of “safety” and “protection”. Why doesn’t the government just create a society where none of us ever have to (or are even allowed to) leave our padded living cells? They could remove all risk from our lives, ensuring our “protection” and “safety”! Who needs personal accountability, responsibility and freedom of choice anyway, they’re all just unnecessary sources of risk!
Anyone supporting this is extremely short-sighted and has an infantile need to delegate personal responsibility to a higher authority, even if that comes at the expense of freedom. Should people drink and drive or speed dangerously? Of course not! But that isn’t the point here. The point here is that people should be TRUSTED with the choice NOT to drink and drive or speed dangerously. The vast majority of people will never do it, and yet we’re told that, for our own good, we must be all have such control measures forced upon us for the sake of a small minority. Once again, the lives of the responsible many must be made incrementally that little bit worse, their freedoms slowly but surely eroded, because of the irresponsible few.
I’m not a tea totaler but my own principal is not to drink and drive apart from the real danger I detest giving the police the pleasure of taking my cash and having a laugh about it when I have clocked police in their own private cars speeding (I have got a speed calculater in my car) who would take any notice if you reported it ??
I agree
All this technology but still cannot stop unlicenced, banned or uninsured drivers.
How do you fit a brethaliser to a bicycle?
It has been proposed that vehicles be fitted with remote kill switches. So a stolen car that is being used will be remotely switched off, but only after it has already come to a stop for whatever reason. It’s just a proposal, and not mine. I think you’re right though, we could do this to uninsured, untaxed and untested vehicles and our insurance rates will come down, as will accidents.
Anything that help to keep loony’s off the road.
Drink driving is too often flouted and needs to be hammered home.
More than the limit? Impound
and crush the vehicle.
You will never keep loony’s off the roads. Technology good or bad will never stop them, maybe unmarked police cars will.
LOL
Great – so the next casualty statistic that goes up is drunk pedestrians causing accidents (already a recognised correlation) along with people stranded at the side of the road waiting to be hit by careless drivers. Just more examples of forcing everyone to behave in common with the lowest common denominator – until you fix the underlying problem (ignorance springs to mind) then it will only get more and more draconian, more liberties removed in the name of solving a problem. Anyone that wants to get around the enforcement will anyway because none of these proposed systems are foolproof
Yet more evidence (as if any more were needed) of the ‘Big Brother’ nature of the EU (and its UK slave) and its ever more draconian imposition of control over the masses! Our personal freedoms continue to be eroded by the ‘Establishment’ dictatorship – frightening!
The UK has already said that it will adopt the same regulations. “Taking back control”…they said…
They’ve always had control and they are continuing to show that control by choosing to adopt regulations.
To take back control you have to be able to think for yourself, our governments are incapable of such a task.
Geoff, are you irrationally afraid of all types for governing bodies, like your manager at work and your local council, or just the one the Daily Mail tells you to be afraid of?
yet MORE technology making new cars more complicated and expensive for no real need. the government are just allowing the cars to be more expensive so they can hit more cars with the ‘luxury car’ tax, forgetting those that live in rural areas are on much lower incomes, have no option BUT to have a car, so they will then buy older, nore polluting cars as a result. hardly what the government needs at this point in time.
with all the electronics already in cars there should be a host of ways to add all this just by a software tweak to more or less eliminate added costs, but of course the manufacturers wont pass this on to the buyer.
i genuinely wish all novice drivers had to spend 5 years in the sorts of cars those of us over 40 had to learn in and own. absolutely ZERO power/performance, poorer handling, no ABS/Traction control/power steering/airbags/electric everything and most of all no PHONE connectivity, so they couldnt sit with their in car screen updating instabook or facegram or whatever, as they drive. the few mobiles around when they got affordable were just that. PHONES.
get the idiots in cars like that and let Darwinism sort things out!
Zero drink limit
And speed cameras should do it
Oh what about under influence of drugs !!!!
If your caught you pay the price
What about freedom of choice
Where will GPS linked speed limiters leave us with Local Council temporary speed limit alterations,
OR camera sign recognition systems cope with signs obscured by overgrown bushes/tree branches, picking up speed limits for side roads (happens twice on a regular drive between two local villages)
or the real sweeties, recognizing speed limit signs on the back of HGVs or the 10t sign on the bridge which always tells me that the speed limit is now 110!!
Modern tech needs to be more accurate in the real world, not just on (non)smart motorways.
Yes, there will be bugs in the system. My last car with traffic sign recognition was pretty good, but if it missed a sign (as you say, because of overgrown branches) it would put up a warning until it “saw” the next sign. Like all new technologies it will need to be perfected.
The human brain and eyes have built in traffic sign recognition. Does your car recognise the presence of street lights? Those in the know know that street lights actually matter, if you don’t know what I’m talking about, go read the Highway Code.
So we are still and will be having EU rules foisted upon us ,wether we like them or not.!
Yup! So much for all that “taking back control” rubbish the Brexiteers were feeding us!
If we were not in the EU and our MPs foisted these changes on us then we could at the next election “Make them pay” by using our votes.. Not an option we have as EU members… See the difference???
TC you make a good point but you’d have to be rather short sighted to ‘make them pay’ solely on introducing a couple of vehicle safety features that you didn’t happen to like. That type of thinking encourages populist parties like the single policy toting Brexit Party.
Not quite. We’re adopting the regulations by choice which, if you take the time to think about it, makes sense as our representatives will have voted for them as an EU member state. Maybe you should take those political blinkers off.
I trust that these ‘safety’ devices will be fitted to police cars and ambulances as well to prevent the deaths that they cause.
Emma they may be fitted but definitely not used
Some ambulances are fitted with speed limiters already. They are engaged whenever they are not driving under blue lights.
If you get stopped by the police and get asked to do a breath test, can you refuse if your car is fitted with a breath test? If your car reminds you about speeding, what about track days? Or rally stages? Will police cars also be fitted with both these devices. Will the price of secondhand cars increase? What’s next, you can’t modify your car?
There aren’t any speed limit signs on race tracks, so the car won’t pick them up.
Breathsliser , great idea
Speed limiter will cause massive congestion, imagine trying to pass a convoy of lorries travelling at 68 mph . It will take an age to pass at the limit of 70 mph .
Is that safe ?
It would if it actually limited your speed – but it won’t. It just warns you.
If the lorries are over 7.5 tonnes then they are speeding. Their limit is 60mph, including motorways. Learn your limits!!
I’m under no illusions that the minority brings up some idiotic law and the do gooders follow like sheep to have it in their heads and say( I did that) when they get it past pricks
I agree with the breathalyzer but not the speed limited there are many people driving below the speed limit causing problems now could aggravate the problem
I am 100% against anything mandatory being placed in private cars. A driver has to have full control in his or her vehicles. Who is going to pay for the supply of replacing mouth tips of the device If you have to use it everytime to start. Get caught drink driving the fine should be so, that you never do it again. There are so many idiots on our roads who take drugs, speed and lose control. What’s needed is more unmarked police cars. I would think most drivers see idiots on our roads on a daily basis. Don’t persecute everyone for the sake of a few.
Brakes are mandatory in private cars. Would you be willing to make an exception for them?
What I have really found out about petrol price forum is being a avid reader of this it finds out what all the different authors have in their mind weather be intelligent or dum but they all have one thing in common that ( their comments are correct and the best no matter what) it’s better than readers digest
This one’s pretty inaccurate! It talks about mandatory alcolocks but in fact, the new regulations are only demanding the INTERFACE to allow one to be fitted!
What happens if the vehicle is stalled? Does the breathalyser routine have to be repeated? Quite embarrassing!
Zero tolerance on drink driving seems like the only way forward to me. If you do, you lose your licence – never to be returned as you can’t be trusted. As for speeding, why make cars that be driven at 100+ mph, when most countries have much lower speed limits on their roads, for safety reasons? Reduce the capability of the car, rather than expecting individuals to obey the rules. For some people it’s enjoyable to drive fast, too fast for busy roads, so maybe they need to book time on a racing circuit to get it out of their system!!
I can recommend your local Go Karting circuit… excellent fun and safe. If you have an outdoor circuit near you then they are likely to have twin engined karts that can reach around 70mph… In the North West I would recommend the Three Sisters circuit in Wigan.
TC +1 public roads are not private playgrounds
Simple answer, change the law to NO ALCOHOL if driving!
Many countries have strict l alcohol aws ZERO TOLERANCE!
Surely common sense laws must be introduced banning all alcohol before driving!
They need to ban all alcohol in food then. No more Tiramisu or Christmas Pudding for you ma laddo!
The article talks of 0% alcohol – great idea but the body produces its own alcohol so somebody needs to sort out what is possible or we will get an EU repeat blunder of Diesel car engine is good.
In parts of london on under passes the paralell side road is 30mph and under pass 40/50. If the satnav cant differentiate & brakes are applied there could be plenty of accidents to which the EU would say – nothing to do with us mate & refuse compensation. They are a set of idiots creating laws that cannot be complied with & people get fined for not compling with then
The concept is interesting and its good that technology is being researched to combat irresponsible people who drink and drive. However, its the usual story of everyone else being penalised financially for others unbelievable stupidity. I agree with Peter’s comments – take their licences away and even better give custodial sentences to drink drivers.
Would like to see similar technology being used to prevent uninsured drivers. For example having technology in your vehicle to add a code issued by insurers on purchase so that if there is no insurance the car won’t start. This would stop irresponsible people driving without insurance. You would only do it once before you drive so no distractions.
Drink driving – crush the car. Drug driving – crush the car. Phone driving – crush the phone.
Crush the phone AND the car! Slightly maim the drivers too.
I’m sure that conscientious drivers would agree with you, I do too.
I drive A RAV 4 which is supposed to pick up Speed limit signs. It sometimes get this wrong or doesn’t pick it up at all. I’ve seen 100 mph signs and if there is vegetation in front of the speed signs, it misses it.
I think the driver should be able to override all technology offered because it’s the driver that pays the fine if the wrong decision is taken.
Speed limiters can normally be overridden by pressing hard on the speeder in realisation that there are situations where speeding can *increase* safety.
I use the speed limiter in my Lexus most of the time and it’s usually very helpful. But it can sometimes pick up an inappropriate speed limit (for example a 30mph sign on a side road as you go round a roundabout on a dual carriageway) so it definitely needs to come with an override capacity. Of course sometimes it picks up the speed limit roundels on the back of foreign lorries and lets me know that it’s fine to do 120mph………..!
No sign of this in Australia. Rent cars there every year and no breathalyser. My daughter and her husband have top of the range cars and nothing on those. Rubbish!
Speed limiters will have a twofold effect of reducing pollution due less fuel will
be used with reduced speeds and obviously less accidents with lesser speeds
which summaries in the fact who will need a Porche, Bmw , Ferrari if one cannot
utilise their power !!!!! Will they be excluded !!!!!!,
Their is going to be no point in owning fast expensive cars anymore as you will
be reduced to being one of the. crowd all going down the road at the same speed!!!,
The school runs will be safer as one will not be able to pick the kids in the car if
one has had a tipple as the car may not start .
.Bring it on .
The incar breathalyser /drug. tester should have been brought in years ago
and could have saved many lives,accidents and cut the NHS expenditure
down.!!!!!!!!
Pretty much every single NEW car sold today can exceed every speed limit there is., and some cost less than £7000!
Do you think the the Government should just ban all cars except one that you approve of?
Whilst not quite in the “EU bans bent bananas” category, this story is slightly inaccurate in crucial details. The EU is only mandating the fitting of the wiring for an integrated breathalyser and not a breathalyser.
The speed limiter seems a good idea but many cars already have them anyway – maybe not as “clever” as the ones envisaged – but my reading of what’s been approved by the European council is that the device can be over-ridden.
We won’t be in the EU then!!
Yet another burden to harm the already falling sales of new cars. I do not condone exceeding speed limits, but taking away the drivers ability to accelerate to avoid a potential collision as well as brake is downright dangerous. The driver should be in full control at all times. By all means make audible alarms compulsory (In the extreme perhaps they don’t stop until the limit is complied with?!) but never take the control away from the driver.
Maybe some tech to deal with the 50mph middle lane warriors might be a better focus of effort?
Speed limiters can normally be overridden by pressing hard on the speeder in realisation that there are situations where speeding can *increase* safety.
Just curious, since when has an accelerator been called a “speeder”? It sounds ridiculous to me. I’ll hazard a guess, a video game from the US?
My cheap Garmin SatNav is more than ten years old and it can be set to beep when you exceed the speed limit, it’s not new technology. The Government has no commitment whatsoever to deal with lane hogs. the police don’t seem to care either. They don’t caare about tailgaters either, the list goes on and on.
Presume the electronics companies are already working on devices to defeat these items
Nanny state on stilts!!
I am sick and tired of this ongoing surveillance that technology is producing and, its a liberty on our freedom, its big brother as one more example of our freedoms slipping away. where is all this going to end. stop treating motorists as criminals
Big brother has arrived.
The GPS maps in cars will need a massive improvement. My KIA Cee’d has its maps updated as soon as the new version comes out. The Speed indication is wrong about 15% – 20% of the time. The previous version could not even distinguish between the old and new A1 roads in Yorkshire.
To be fair Tony, it sounds like your KIA has a totally s*** SatNav. My 10+ years old standalone Garmin is still much better than that now. Not all incar SatNavs are equal, some are far better than others. I occasionally drive a 2018 Ford Cmax as part of my job and it regularly tries to take me in circular routes, never getting anywhere, a Seat Arona is perfect on the same roads.
Exceeding the national speed limit may be in the system but the myriad of other limit zones will surely not be. The huge income from speeding fines and ‘awareness courses’, the sole reason some of these limit zones exist, is not something that the treasury and police forces will abandon easily.
That’s the best reason I can see for not buying a new car.
Im opening a business outside pubs and clubs blowing the the breathalyser for you…. Think that might be illegal?
Fucking ridiculous