The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Bellotti) says that the police are confused, which shows why we should have a bigger debate rather than simply piling in about what appears to be fashionable.

At present, the police are not using their existing powers consistently across the country. In Merseyside, half the drivers stopped and tested are above the legal limit—clearly, there is not enough testing in Merseyside. We can make the same argument for parts of London. Police chiefs should decide that, unless it is impossible, drivers involved in traffic crashes—they are not accidents, but crashes—especially where injuries are involved, should have their breath or blood alcohol concentrations tested. That would detect and deter more people.

The argument against random breath testing is that it produces only one in four of the people who are caught in New South Wales or Sweden—three out of four are caught in targeted testing. Before people get carried away with the fashion, they should look at the figures, because the reduction in deaths matters more than anything else.

Some people can explain what it is like to receive a phone call in the middle of the night, rush to the hospital not knowing whether loved ones are still alive. They know what it is like to explain a death to younger siblings and children left behind, and what it is like to raise children, nurture them with love and care, and have them taken away before they have lived a full life. Such suffering demands that we do not go for fashion or partial research, but continue what we have been doing in this country—reduce our drink-driving rate to a lower level than in any other country where research has been done.

I ask the House to resist the ten-Minute Bill and join in continuing to tackle this immensely serious problem in ways that will continue to be effective.