Often things in life do not work out as planned. For example, when the Government introduced the IRP scheme with the wide publicity that this was harsher punishment for alleged over-.05 drivers, we noticed an uptick in calls from people who had failed to stop at the scene of a collision. This is the manifestation of a perverse incentive. Thankfully most cases involved clipping, bumping or knocking the mirrors off of parked cars. Some people did not know what they hit.
It seems likely that people were discouraged from stopping at the scene because of the fear of the new harsh punishment. ICBC may have suffered greater exposure from hit and run accidents. In many cases there would have been little or no punishment had the drivers stopped. But hindsight is 20-20. In any event, an increase in hit and run accidents was not what the Government had intended.
Similarly, 24-hour driving prohibitions had unintended consequences.
If you have had anything to drink and you see red and blue lights ahead, the natural reaction should be to begin sweating profusely. You may be well under the legal limit, you may be on the fence or you may be barely capable of knowing that you are driving. In any event, the fear of a divine deity should take hold. If you manage to slip through without having to provide breath samples at a police station, you should consider yourself warned: the next time your number will be up.
When 24-hour prohibitions were introduced, the idea was that the police could take people off the road even though they might not be a threat. It was all okay because it was not really punishment. So the downside was not so bad — 24 hours without driving was the only consequence. If the police were wrong, there was not much to complain about because it was not a real inconvenience. The problem was the perverse incentive.
The word got out that if you drink and drive in British Columbia all you faced was a 24-hour suspension. And it was not simply people who received a 24-hour prohibition who thought this way. People would come to us expressing amazement that they were charged when their nephew only got a 24-hour prohibition.
The police, prosecutors, defence lawyers and the Government knew about the problem. It was obvious because people were racking up 24-hour prohibitions, and then when arrested they would beg the investigating officer to let them go with a 24-hour.
So the wrong lesson was imparted to those who might consider drinking and then getting behind the wheel. And the result was that it seemed to encourage people to drink and drive.
That this feedback loop existed was known in many jurisdictions and to deal with it, in some US states, they compelled people to attend a class and suffer a lecture about how close they came to criminal prosecution. In BC the Government did not think that far ahead.
So the problem of drinking and driving in British Columbia is to some extent the result of poorly considered legislation. The Government legislated a reason to drink and drive. They created a perverse incentive encouraging people to take the risk.
Our elected officials get their jobs because they win the contest in their riding. It does not mean that they are knowledgeable or qualified to govern us. And it seems rare that they have the foresight to understand the implications of their policy decisions or legislation that they promote.