EVEN by the outstandingly low standards of Scottish Tories, Maurice Corry's attack on the Scottish Government at First Minister's Questions was shocking.
The list MSP linked a rise in road traffic accidents to the SNP Government passing a policy – with the support of every Holyrood party – to reduce the drink driving limit.
His source for the rise in crashes was a study by an expert who actually said the “most plausible” explanation for this was insufficient police enforcement or media campaigning.
That little fact didn't stop the Tory MSP – and Holyrood made its opinion clear in response to his question.
Corry had asked: "Road traffic accidents in Scotland have increased by 7% as reported this morning in the Lancet, since the introduction of the Scottish Government's lower alcohol level limit for drivers in 2014. First Minister, is this a direct result of yet another failed SNP Government policy?"
"During the festive season that's irresponsible," one MSP shouted in response. "Embarrassing," said another.
A visibly stunned Sturgeon replied: “Well, as I recall, when this Parliament decided to lower the drink drive limit it did so unanimously, which obviously must mean that the Conservatives supported that, and credit to the Conservatives for supporting, because I don’t think it can reasonably be said that road traffic accidents are increasing because we’ve cut the drink driving limit.
“That makes no sense.”
The First Minister added: “In all seriousness right now, we are in the festive season, at this time of year, we should do that at every time of year, but particularly at this time of year, the message that should come unanimously from all of us to everybody across Scotland is do not drink and drive.
“And I find it deeply regrettable that today as we go into the Christmas period, we have a Conservative MSP somehow seeming to suggest that lowering the drink driving limit was a bad thing to do."
The Scottish Government cut the legal blood alcohol limit for motorists from 80 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood to 50 in December 2014.
Corry’s question was based a study by Jim Lewsey, professor of medical statistics at Glasgow University’s Institute of Health and Wellbeing, published on Thursday morning.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel