With a week going by following the unconstitutional ruling…

Not yet.

For now, the province is just saying that there will be a slightly different approach that will not go backwards.

No so.

There are two major law suits in the move. One has some 70 clients. But here is the current government position...

December 2, 2011 – Message from the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

A decision by the B.C. Supreme Court on the constitutional challenge of the Province’s Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) legislation was released on November 30th, 2011.

The Court did not strike down the entire IRP legislation, but found that “fail” range IRPs are unconstitutional because there is no meaningful review of roadside results in the “fail” range. However, the Court upheld the constitutionality of “warn” range IRPs.

Although the judge has released his decision, the formal terms of the order have not yet been settled and government legal counsel continues to review the decision.

In response to the decision, police will revert to the previous sanctions available, which include an immediate 24-hour suspension and, following further testing at the police station, a possible 90-day driving prohibition and possible Criminal Code charges.

IRPs will continue to be issued to drivers who blow a “warn” on an ASD, as these IRPs have been upheld.

We continue to review the decision and will provide further information as it becomes available.

S.C. (Steve) MARTIN Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

Until someone gets this back in court, this is the reality.

It will take months to sue and appeal.

My personal opinion is this is all about law and not about good results.

It is true that road tragedies have decreased since the implement of the BC law. However, I say it is because police got motivated and enforced more.

What has stalled is criminal convictions for impaired driving.

The Crown has not proceeded against anyone who suffered the BC law in criminal court.

The choice then becomes whether someone wants to pay $4000 in fines and expenses and gets a 90 suspension versus a minimum $1000 fine and a one year driving suspension and a criminal record.

What would you prefer?