The difference is I agree that the measures in the bill will make it more likely that people will get caught and also more likely that people will be convicted, but I disagree that it will have an effect on the minds of people when they are in the moment, because there's a thing called announcement of fact whenever any new law is brought in. People hear about it. It's discussed in the media. It's televised. For the first six months, it looks as if it's working. It's great. There's a huge reduction in the rates of impaired driving. There's a huge reduction in the number of deaths. Then it slowly ticks back up. It doesn't tick up to where it was before, but it slowly starts to tick back up.
We saw that in British Columbia with the immediate roadside prohibition scheme where our lowest period of time in impaired driving in B.C. was in the six-month period when we had no immediate roadside prohibition scheme because there was so much media attention paid to it that people were staying off the road they were so scared of being caught because there was a constant discussion about being caught.
The other thing about the discussion we have that's taking place often is about the morality of impaired driving, the potential consequences that you might injure or kill somebody, and that doesn't work to deter people. People who are drunk are not getting behind the wheel thinking they might injure or kill somebody. They are getting behind the wheel thinking they can make it home. If you create that perception not that you're going to hurt somebody, but if you try to make it home somebody's going to stop you and you're going to end up before a judge, that's what works. It's the fear of getting caught.