I will reiterate that our goal, along with many other jurisdictions, is to remediate drivers through the use of the device. By ensuring they actually operate their vehicle with it installed, that is achieved. If they never drive, they will not acquire the skills and knowledge on how alcohol affects their ability to drive. The number of drivers who do not understand the extent to which alcohol remains in their system, say, overnight, is astounding. The oversight and monitoring of our program helps to ensure they are using the device as prescribed.

Again - the circumstances presented for exceptions are not accepted just at face value alone. If you can't afford to fix your car and you never drive, your reason will not be acceptable. If you could not drive between downloads (~30 days) because your car was being repaired, and you provide proper documentation, that may be considered valid. Alternatively, if your financial circumstances make the program unfeasable for you to complete, you have the option of applying to an administrative tribunal to have your requirement to use the device terminated.

Our Government body does have the time and resources to review and adjudicate a large number of issues, reconsiderations, exemptions, etc.

Prohibitions/suspensions usually do occur prior to someone beginning use of an Ignition Interlock Device. They are separate issues for us - one is punitive and one is remedial in nature. We want drivers to be participating in the program because it provides the public with assurance that they have acquired the skills and knowledge to separate their drinking from their driving.

If someone begins driving again after a year of suspension for an alcohol-related infraction without participating in the use of the device, they have learned nothing about the affect of alcohol on their ability to drive, and they are statistically more likely to become become a recidivist.