New drunk driving law worries some west Edmonton restaurateurs

By Elizabeth Walters

EDMONTON — New legislation around the legal limit of alcohol for Alberta drivers has some west Edmonton restaurateurs worried it will hurt businesses without making streets safer.

Bill 26, which passed third reading last week, means drivers who are found to have a blood alcohol level of 0.05 would have their cars taken away for three days, as well as their licence suspended for the same amount of time. Before, drivers blowing between 0.05 and 0.08 could have their licence suspended for 24 hours.

Bill 26 will not mean a new legal limit, but it will mean higher consequences for reaching the warning level of 0.05 per cent. As always, a level of 0.08 per cent will result in a driving-under-the-influence charge.

Bottles

Will diners drink less now that the penalties are more severe? Photograph by Elizabeth Walters

Police aren’t expected to start enforcing the new law until early next year, but even before the bill passed, some in the hospitality business were worried it might stop people from having anything to drink while they’re out.

“My issue is that I think that law enforcement has to be enforcing the existing regulations; I personally haven’t seen a check stop since Thanksgiving,” said Amanda Babichuk, the owner of D’Lish Urban Kitchen & Wine Bar at 10418 124 St. “I don’t think that the current laws are being enforced enough to slap an extra law on there. I think they should just try to increase the penalties of these existing laws.”

People who have two glasses of wine over the course of a two- or three-hour dinner are not the dangerous drivers, but the new law may prompt them to have just one, she suggested.

“In my opinion, people who drink and drive are still going to drink and drive,” Babichuk said. “I think this is targeting the wrong demographic of people.”

The owner of Somerville, a wine room at 10723 124 St., worries the new law will discourage people from going out altogether.

“I think the idea of reducing drunk driving is of course an honourable one and with the right intention,” said Sheri Somerville. “I think targeting restaurants is absolutely absurd.”

The new legislation will have no effect on chronic drunk drivers, and the economic impact will be severe, she said.

“The federal government has set a limit,” she said. “I think for the provincial government to set a new limit is outrageous. So here we are trying to promote growth in our cities and at the same time sabotaging it by targeting people who go to restaurants.

“Most people will be completely intimidated and they won’t go out for dinner. That’s going to put going out in a whole new light, and I think people will make alternate plans, and it will devastate my business, I can tell you that.”

The law puts restaurateurs in a difficult position, said Jessie Radies, owner of The Blue Pear at 10643 123 St.

“I think it’s a complicated issue,” Radies said Jessie Radies. “I mean, we don’t want people drinking and driving, that’s for sure.”

Like Babichuk and Somerville, she wonders whether the law is aimed at the right people, although she notes similar legislation appears to have reduced the number of drunk drivers.

“For the sake of the community, we’re for it obviously,” Radies said. “As local business owners, we’re a little concerned about it because we know it has reduced liquor sales in other communities.”

However, Anita Lewis, owner of Café De Ville at 10137 124 St., feels the new legislation will not change her business.

“I don’t believe in drinking and driving, period, so that’s kind of our persona here at Café De Ville,” Lewis said. “We’re very contentious about our customers and that they have designated drivers and things like that.”

Edmonton Police feel the changes are not much different from what they have already been doing.

“It’s is not like a new legal limit, from our understanding,” said Sgt. Conrad Moschansky. “They’re just changing sanctions where we deal with people with a 24-hour suspension. So none of the numbers are changing per se, it’s just what happens to the driver.”

Even if the change is small, it’s a triumph for some.

“We’re completely behind the new legislation for Bill 26 and we applaud the Alberta government for what they’re doing and we know it will be effective at saving lives,” said Gillian Phillips, spokesperson for the Edmonton and area chapter of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving).

When similar legislation was passed in British Columbia, the hospitality industry campaigned against it, she said.

“And then once it actually came into effect in B.C., the sales evened out and it’s just an adjustment people are getting used to it, and the same thing will happen here in Alberta,” Phillips said. “Honestly, what cost and price can you put on saving lives?”

Phillips said some European countries have an even lower limit, and much less impaired driving.

“Do I see eventually us going down to 0.02 per cent? Probably not for many, many years, no? It’s taken us years of campaigning for our Alberta government to look at this new legislation, so I think it’s one step at a time.

“It’s about saving lives and hopefully from there we just snowball into more legislation.”

4 Comments

  1. These Worry wart’s never seem to worry when people are killed / injured by these “HIGHWAY TERRORISTS” .

  2. Free Albertan

    This law allows no due process and overrides existing Federal legislation. My guess is that this was Redford’s way to kiss up to the BC liberals in order to get a pipeline across their province and divert attention away from the deficit.  Redford’s idea of due process is to allow our police to be the judge, jury, and executioner. There is no proof is needed to seize your car or hand out a fine and no impartial judiciary is involved in this process.  This law will do nothing to stop the chronic offender and the drunk who blows way over .08 (the drunk who rammed into my car and injured me was 3 times the limit) but does keep push  MAAD’s personal campaign of complete prohibition onto the rest of us.  In Canada, .08 is the legal level of impairment, and this provincial law attempting to override the criminal code, must be challenged in court.

  3. Free Albertan

    This law allows no due process and overrides existing Federal legislation. My guess is that this was Redford’s way to kiss up to the BC liberals in order to get a pipeline across their province and divert attention away from the deficit.  Redford’s idea of due process is to allow our police to be the judge, jury, and executioner. There is no proof is needed to seize your car or hand out a fine and no impartial judiciary is involved in this process.  This law will do nothing to stop the chronic offender and the drunk who blows way over .08 (the drunk who rammed into my car and injured me was 3 times the limit) but does keep push  MAAD’s personal campaign of complete prohibition onto the rest of us.  In Canada, .08 is the legal level of impairment, and this provincial law attempting to override the criminal code, must be challenged in court.

  4. dui

    In San Diego the term DUI is used to describe the broader offense known as drunk driving. There is often times confusion about the different abbreviations used in drunk driving related cases as well as the difference between a drunk driving lawyer and a DUI lawyer. We’ll clear up some of the confusion here.