It appears Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) is taking a different and very tough approach in its efforts to curb impaired driving in the province.
The Crown corporation announced last week it was suing Catherine McKay, who killed four members of a family in an impaired driving collision in January 2016, as well as the two bars that served her the night of the incident.
It’s an unprecedented move by SGI, but one that actually has merit.
For starters, it’s not unheard of for insurance companies to sue those who drive drunk. It’s happened in other provinces. But in Saskatchewan, the home of no-fault insurance and a government-owned insurance company, this hasn’t happened before.
It’s no secret that Saskatchewan has a problem with impaired driving. This province’s impaired driving rates are the highest in the country. And for each person caught driving above the legal limit, you know many more are getting away with driving while impaired.
Various methods have been tried to discourage people from driving while impaired, including tougher regulations for those caught driving between .04 and .07. SGI has also tried various awareness campaigns, including the emotion-based television advertisement earlier this year in which victims of impaired driving were erased from family photos.
But too many people are still driving while impaired, and selfishly putting other people’s lives at risk in the process. And incredibly enough, people are criticizing get-tough legislation on impaired driving.
The only criticism that should be out there is if people think new standards and punishments don’t go far enough.
The Estevan Police Service announced earlier this year the Crown was looking to permanently seize the vehicles of people caught driving while impaired on multiple occasions. As of yet, nobody has had their vehicle taken away on a permanent basis.
Now SGI has announced they are going after McKay and the bars that served her the night she killed four people.
It’s great they’re going after McKay. She should be looking at a long, tough jail sentence for her actions, and if she is facing financial penalties besides court costs and fines, then that’s a good thing.
If people think they might be sued by SGI for drinking and driving (or other dangerous driving actions, for that matter), it might dissuade a few people from driving while impaired.
The much bigger issue is suing the two licenced establishments where McKay consumed alcohol the night of the accident. It’s hard to know exactly what happened at those bars that night, if they knowingly overserved her, if they tried to cut her off, and if they knowingly allowed her to drive home while impaired.
If they overserved her, and if they let her climb into a vehicle and drive off, then they should be held accountable. But as any bar owner or server will tell you, customers don’t always follow orders.
Most bar owners and employees are responsible people. The bar owners will empower employees to stop serving drinks to a clearly intoxicated patron. And they’ll urge an intoxicated patron to find a safe ride home.
It’s the irresponsible bar owners and employees who need a wakeup call. If the threat of a lawsuit prevents them from overserving an intoxicated patron, and then allowing that patron to drive home, and if that results in a reduction in the number of impaired drivers on the road, then this is a step forward by SGI.
