My understanding is that it will not be necessary. I hope that I have clarified the point.

Schedule 18 also makes provision for allowing up to a maximum of three preliminary tests to be administered to investigate whether a drug-driving offence has been committed. The preliminary tests would involve taking saliva samples. Provisions for taking more than one sample are needed to ensure that testing equipment can screen effectively for the presence of a sufficient range of drugs for the purposes of the new offence. If a suspect, without reasonable excuse, fails to co-operate with a preliminary test, he or she may be charged with the offence of failing to co-operate with a preliminary test under section 6 of the 1988 Act. That will remain the case when more than one test may be required.

The consequential amendments also provide the powers needed to require evidential blood or urine tests for the purposes of the new offence. Similar provision already exists for the specific drink-driving offence and the impairment offence under sections 5 and 4 respectively of the 1988 Act. Consequential amendments have also  been made so as to require a medical practitioner to advise that a person’s condition may be due to a drug before that person can be required to provide an evidential specimen.

Schedule 18 is technical, containing a series of minor, but nevertheless important, changes that give force to clause 37. I hope that I have reassured my hon. Friend and that the Committee will endorse the schedule.