Breathalysers in cars ruled out by the Government but it will mandate a raft of other safety features, including speed limiter technology

Daily Mail ·

The Government has ruled out mandating hardware that would make it easy to fit in-car breathalysers to new vehicles sold in Britain, while confirming it will require several other safety technologies. Following a Department for Transport consultation that closed in May, officials decided against making Alcohol Interlock Installation Facilitation (AIIF) compulsory, disappointing road safety groups who had hoped the measure would help curb repeat drink-driving offences.

AIIF is a standardised wiring and connection system that allows aftermarket alcolocks to be fitted to vehicles owned by drivers with previous drink-drive convictions, blocking the engine until a legal breath sample is provided. Instead, the Government will mandate a range of other measures from 18 safety features under consideration, including blind-spot warnings, tyre-pressure monitoring, drowsiness and attention-monitoring cameras, pedestrian and cyclist emergency braking, and Intelligent Speed Assistance, which warns or can actively slow drivers exceeding the limit. Ministers said AIIF would remain under review, though many new cars are still likely to arrive with it fitted anyway, as manufacturers avoid producing UK-specific models that differ from EU versions.

In short

  • Government won't mandate breathalyser-ready wiring in new cars
  • Speed limiters, drowsiness cameras and blind-spot warnings will be required instead
  • Road safety groups call the breathalyser decision disappointing

Steelman: both sides, in good faith

The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.

The case for

Supporters argue that mandating Alcohol Interlock Installation Facilitation represents a straightforward, cost-effective intervention to prevent repeat drink-driving offences. Since AIIF merely provides standardised wiring that allows breathalysers to be fitted to vehicles of convicted offenders, it imposes negligible cost on manufacturers and does not affect the general public at all. Given that ignition interlocks have proven effective at preventing re-offending and saving lives, and that EU harmonisation means many vehicles will be fitted anyway, the mandate would ensure consistent application of a logical harm-reduction tool that directly addresses a serious, preventable source of road casualties.

The case against

Opponents argue that whilst AIIF has merits, the Government's decision to prioritise other safety technologies is more prudent overall. The broader measures—intelligent speed assistance, drowsiness monitoring, and collision avoidance—benefit all road users rather than targeting a single offence group and likely offer greater return on regulatory effort. Furthermore, market and manufacturing forces suggest AIIF infrastructure will be widely adopted regardless of mandate, particularly given EU standards, making statutory requirements unnecessary. There are also principled questions about whether singling out convicted offenders' vehicles serves legitimate road safety purposes or extends into unnecessarily intrusive regulatory territory when alternative enforcement mechanisms can achieve similar outcomes.

Explained simply

Drink-driving, particularly among repeat offenders, remains a concern for road safety in Britain. Campaigners and officials have been considering new technologies that could help prevent drivers with previous convictions from reoffending.

One approach being proposed is an alcohol interlock system fitted through a standardised wiring system called AIIF. This device requires drivers to provide a clean breath sample before their vehicle starts, and advocates believe it could significantly reduce reoffending amongst previously convicted drivers.

When governments decide on mandatory safety features for new cars, they consider various technologies and must balance different priorities for road safety. These decisions are influenced by input from safety campaigners, research evidence, and manufacturers' capabilities.

Government Politics World

Read the full article at the source →

Log in to join the discussion