Justice Committee on June 14th, 2007

[Cpl Evan Graham]

I can't answer that.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Ms. Dalpé-Scott.

[Marthe Dalpé-Scott]

I just wanted to add, Mr. Thompson, that you're preaching to the converted right now—

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I realize that, but—

[Marthe Dalpé-Scott]

—and I am not the person who can bring that about. We just belong to a scientific organization, either as a peace officer or as a scientist, to support the Department of Justice of Canada in their endeavours. So you really are preaching to the converted.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Well, I realize that, but you are human beings and you have thoughts, and I think your thoughts are every bit as important as anybody else's on this panel.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you very much, Mr. Thompson, for your philosophical questions. I think they're important too in the big scheme of things.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

On a point of order, that's not philosophical; that's common sense.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Yes, well, it's still philosophical.

Madam Jennings.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I'd just like a clarification.

In response to Mr. Ménard's question about the reliability or accuracy of the standardized road sobriety test, you said that in cases where the officer suspected impairment from alcohol and conducted the road sobriety test, subsequent examination showed in 72% of those cases that the driver was in fact impaired by alcohol consumption.

[Cpl Evan Graham]

That's based on one test: the walk and turn. When you combine the tests, the percentages go up. So with the entire test battery, if they show clues in all three, the probability is up at about the 84% mark.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

What is the accuracy or reliability when the officer suspects impairment due to drug consumption?

[Cpl Evan Graham]

With the total drug evaluation—

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

No, I want each one. The officer suspects an impairment, uses his legal authority to ask the driver to step out of the car and to undergo the roadside sobriety test. What is the accuracy in that case?

[Cpl Evan Graham]

There have been no studies to correlate the sobriety test roadside to an overall percentage of people who are actually failing the drug evaluation afterwards, because we don't have a presumptive level, as we do for alcohol. We have to go through the whole evaluation, at which point we're 98.6% accurate with the drug evaluation in Canada. So I guess you'd basically look at 1.4% as those who have been brought in and passed.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Okay. I'm not a scientist. If an officer stops 200 people for a variety of reasons, in 100 of them he suspects impairment; and in 50 of those 100 he suspects alcohol or alcohol and drug impairment, and in the other 50 he suspects drug impairment. He then asks those 100 drivers to undergo the roadside sobriety test.

What you explained to Mr. Ménard was that in the 50 in which he suspected alcohol alone or alcohol and drug impairment, the roadside sobriety test confirmed an impairment in 72% of the cases, meaning that at that level—just at that level—the officer was right in 72% of the cases. He then goes on to do the breathalyzer, etc., and the percentages, from what you have said, go up.

In the case of suspicion of drug impairment, with 50 drivers, the officer conducts the roadside sobriety test. Do you have any studies about what percentage the officer then goes on to require be further tested, through the DRE? Is it 25 out of the 50? Is it 45 out of the 50? Is it 10? Has any study been done on that?

[Cpl Evan Graham]

There have been no studies. Based on anecdotal evidence and my own evidence from dealing with drivers, I would suggest you're talking about 85% to 90% of the people who do sobriety tests, whether it's for alcohol or drugs, going back to the police station for further investigation.

The numbers of people who do sobriety tests and totally pass them are very slim, because you've got something there to start with to get them to come out and do the tests. We're not just stopping people and randomly saying, “I want you to do these tests.” There has to be something there to start with.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Well, not quite, because my first question to you was about an officer in the normal course of his duties seeing a car, having no reason to believe that the driver is impaired, but having a legal reason—enforcement of the provincial highway safety code, for instance, if the tail light is off—to stop the driver and ask him, “Did you know your tail light is off? I'm going to give you a 48-hour warning to go and get it fixed”, for instance. Or, “Your muffler has partially detached”. It's in the course of doing this that the officer gains some suspicion that possibly this is a driver who is impaired. And then all of the other steps follow.

[Cpl Evan Graham]

Right, and for us it's the totality of the driving evidence or lack thereof and the face-to-face contact with the person. Then at that point we combine those two, and we may ask the person to step out. We don't look at them in isolation.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

I don't have any other questions. I'd just like to add to the instructions to our researchers, so I can do that afterwards, if you wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

What might that be, Madam Jennings?

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Ménard asked for further information from our researchers, and I just wanted to add to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Okay. It's been noted.