Stay sober or else
People convicted of an alcohol-related crime in London may be required to stay sober or run the risk of being sent to prison. The idea has been put forward by Kit Malthouse, the Deputy Mayor of London, based on a scheme already in operation in South Dakota in the USA, the 24/7 Sobriety programme devised as a more effective method of dealing with repeat drink drive offenders.
Mr Malthouse has proposed a trial of the scheme, under which those convicted of alcohol-related crimes serious enough to warrant a prison sentence are tested for alcohol twice a day at their own expense, and if they test positive they go before the court which may then impose the deferred sentence.
Strangely, Mr Malthouse did not appear to make any reference to Drink Banning Orders which are already in operation in the UK, and which have a similar purpose. (See Box below)
| Drink Banning Orders
A drink banning order is a specific order from a civil court imposed on an individual who has behaved in a disorderly manner or who has committed a criminal offence while under the infl uence of alcohol. They were introduced by the Labour Government in 2009. A DBO may impose any prohibition on a person that the court considers necessary to protect others from alcohol-related crime, or disorderly conduct committed while they were under the influence of alcohol. The prohibitions must include whatever the court thinks is necessary with regard to that person entering premises that sell alcohol. This could include exclusion from:
DBOs can last from two months to two years. Offenders who breach a DBO are liable to a fine of up to £2,500. The police (including British Transport Police) and local authorities in England and Wales can apply to the courts for a DBO to be made. DBOs can also be granted on conviction for an alcohol-related offence in specified local justice areas. The Violent Crime Reduction Act also enables courts to offer an approved course to those subject to a DBO, as a means to address their behaviour. This is on a voluntary basis. These courses focus on educating people about the serious social and health implications of heavy alcohol consumption. Successful completion of the course may lead to a reduction in the length of the order. Currently, 50 local justice areas in England and Wales are authorised to impose DBOs, including a number of London Boroughs. |
Speaking to BBC Radio, Mr Malthouse said:
‘(Alcohol related crime) is costing us a huge amount of money in terms of police time and NHS time, so we put our thinking caps on and scoured the world for a scheme that might help us.’
‘The way it works is somebody who is convicted, rather than go to prison, they go on this scheme where they get tested twice a day...so they can maintain employment.’
‘If they are found to have consumed alcohol, they go before a judge or magistrate, who decides what punishment they should have’, he added.
Mr Malthouse said the American version of the scheme had a 99 per cent compliance rate. He also said it was self-fi nancing, because the people taking part paid a dollar per alcohol test, and it was a ‘cheaper and more cost-effective’ alternative to prison.
He said: ‘We would like to try it here. We do think drink is a great driver of crime in this city.’
Unfortunately, Mr Malthouse failed to convince Don Shenker, Chief Executive of Alcohol Concern, who immediately opposed the idea. He said: ‘The real issue we need to actually address is why people are drinking the way they are. We already have schemes called alcohol offence referral schemes where the police, once they have picked somebody up for a crime, refer them on to an alcohol service where that person receives some advice, support and even counselling if needed.
‘I don’t think you can stop it until you cure it. I think (Mr Malthouse’s) approach is to try and coerce people into sobriety and my approach, I think is a much better approach, where you coerce people into support and treatment because these people have a problem with alcohol and that problem will not disappear once they leave prison.’
However, the South Dakota scheme is reported to be working very successfully. The stated aims of the 24/7 Sobriety Project are:
- to reduce recidivism
- to improve public safety
- to serve as an alternative to incarceration that reduces the number of people in local jails and state prisons
- to allow offenders to remain in the community with their family and friends to permit offenders
- to maintain employment
- to save tax dollars because most monitoring costs are paid by the offenders and because offenders are being diverted from jail and prison where appropriate
An evaluation of the impact of the scheme found that it was working impressively, particularly given the fact that almost half of the participants have been convicted three or more times for drink driving offences. As of January 2010, almost 13,000 offenders participated in twice-daily alcohol breath testing. They took over 2.4 million tests, passing 99.6% of them. Over 66% of the offenders were totally compliant during the entire term of their participation. In addition, the large majority of participants who were surveyed about the program indicated that the program helped them stop using substances, improved their family functioning and helped them maintain or improve their employment. The evaluation also found that while early skeptics of the 24/7 Sobriety model predicted that close monitoring with a strict no use standard would fill the jails with offenders, in fact, the results of the program have been exactly the opposite. The program actually reduced incarceration leading to reductions in jail populations and jail costs.