Call for ban on hands-free phones

Published on Saturday 1 July 2006 01:08

USING a hands-free kit while at the wheel is as dangerous as drink driving, according to a new study which concludes that all mobile phone use while driving should be banned.

The report, by the University of Utah, in the United States, studied the behaviour of 40 drivers on a simulator under various conditions.

Frank Drews, an assistant professor of psychology at the university, who co-authored the work, said: "We found people are as impaired when they drive and talk on a cell phone as they are when they drive intoxicated at the legal blood-alcohol limit of 0.08 per cent."

That level is the limit in some US states and the equivalent of the British limit of 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood.

Prof Drews said: "If legislators really want to address driver distraction, then they should consider outlawing cell phone use while driving."

The study comes months before fines for using hand-held phones behind the wheel in the UK are doubled to 60.

Those motorists will also have three penalty points added to their licences - which could mean some being banned from driving under the totting up procedure. Others could see their insurance premiums increased.

The tougher penalties are expected to come into force early next year. They form part of the Road Safety Bill being considered by MPs, which is due to become law this autumn.

In the Utah study, 40 participants drove a driving simulator four times - once each while not distracted, using a mobile phone, using a hands-free phone, and while intoxicated to the 0.08 per cent blood-alcohol level after drinking vodka and orange juice.

They followed a simulated "pace" car that braked intermittently. The researchers found that both hand-held and hands-free phones impaired driving, with no significant difference in the degree of impairment recorded.

The study found that compared with drivers who were not distracted, those who talked on either hand-held or hands-free phones drove slightly slower and were 9 per cent slower to hit the brakes.

They also displayed 24 per cent more variation in following distance as their attention switched between driving and talking, were 19 per cent slower to resume normal speed after braking, and were more likely to crash.

All three of the participants who crashed into the back of the car in front of them were talking on phones.

The research showed the drink-drivers drove more slowly than both drivers who were not distracted and drivers using mobile phones - but more aggressively.

They followed the pace car more closely, were twice as likely to brake only four seconds before a collision would have occurred, and hit their brakes with 23 per cent more force.

The study concluded: "Impairments associated with using a cell phone while driving can be as profound as those associated with driving while drunk."

Motoring groups and the government opposed a blanket ban, but called on drivers voluntarily to restrict their use of mobile phones.

Sheila Rainger, campaigns manager for the RAC Foundation, said: "We understand that in some circumstances drivers might need to use a phone, but we would recommend not using them at all while driving.

"Driving while using a hand-held phone is dangerous and using a hands-free phone is less than ideal."

A spokesman for the Department of Transport said it did not endorse the use of hands-free phones while driving, because motorists could become distracted and pose a hazard to other people.

He said: "Our advice to drivers is that they should use their phones sparingly and keep conversations short."

He added that the police could still stop drivers who were using hands-free phones if their driving caused concern.

The Scotsman revealed in May that the number of motorists taken to court for using hand-held mobile phones while driving had more than trebled in a year.

Greater police enforcement is thought to have increased prosecutions in the most serious cases since the ban was introduced in 2003, to a total of 2,122 drivers by April, compared with just 625 a year before.