Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Nov 1956

Vol. 160 No. 5

Private Members' Business. - Road Accidents—Motion.

Mr. D. Costello

I move:

That it is expedient that, in view of the great number of road accidents, many of them fatal, a Joint Committee consisting of ten members of the Dáil and five members of the Seanad be appointed to consider what action should be taken to secure the greater safety of pedestrians and road-users; such Committee to have power to send for persons, papers and records.

It is, I think, unnecessary to dwell at any great length on the problem of road accidents. It is a problem unfortunately only too well known to us all. The latest figures available demonstrate that this problem has now reached crisis proportions. It seems to me that the figures for our road accidents, both fatal and non-fatal, indicate that drastic and immediate action must be taken. The figures for last year's road accidents highlight the problem which this country has to face. There were 282 people killed on our roads. That is an average of over five persons a week. There were 5,200 persons injured, averaging over 500 persons per week. These figures are all the more startling when compared with the experience of recent years. Even in the year before there was an increase of nearly 500 in accidents of a non-fatal nature on our roads. A comparison of last year's figures with the figures for even six years ago demonstrates still further how urgent this problem has become, for in the space of six years the number of fatal accidents has increased by no less than 42 per cent.

The main cause of road accidents, the main contributors to the accidents that happen on the roads, are the drivers of motor cars. Nearly 50 per cent. of the accidents which occurred last year were directly the result of the negligence or carelessness of motor drivers. It is also of importance, in considering the problem before us, to appreciate that over half of the accidents occur in built-up areas. It is further important, when endeavouring to find a solution to the problem, to bear in mind that a large proportion, over a quarter of the persons injured on the roads, are pedestrians, and of this number a very large part consists of young children under the age of 10 or elderly people over the age of 65.

It may be that our road users have in the last few years become more careless and more negligent. The causes of the startling increase in accidents may be many, but it is probably mainly attributable to the fact that the number of new cars coming on the roads has greatly increased in recent years; in fact, as compared with 1948 the number of new cars registered last year was doubled. There is no doubt that there are many more people driving cars now than even six years ago.

I have suggested in the motion which I have put down that a Joint Committee of both Houses of the Oireachtas should be set up. The method of appointing a Joint Committee is one which is not frequently used in this House, but is used much more frequently in other Parliaments. It seems to me that a problem such as this is one which would be eminently suitable for such a committee consisting of members of both Houses of Parliament. It seems to me that the problem is so urgent that it is much more advisable that a Joint Committee of the two Houses of the Oireachtas be set up rather than a commission. The experience has been that a commission is a much more slow-moving body, and the problem does not permit of delay. The advantage of a Joint Committee would also be found in the fact that it should be possible to have its meetings in public, and publicity, urgently needed publicity, could be given to the problem by the publication of the evidence given by the witnesses who would attend and ultimately by the publication of the findings of fact and the findings of recommendation which they would bring in.

It would not be necessary here on this motion to anticipate, perhaps, the working of such a committee if one were set up, but in dealing with this motion I should like to suggest five courses which should be taken in order to alleviate the problem that exists. First, I think there should be greater co-operation between the local authorities, the Gardaí authorities and the Department of Local Government. Secondly, I think there should be improved regulations for the control of traffic and pedestrians. Thirdly, I think there should be increased expenditure by local authorities on road safety regulations. Fourthly, there should be greater supervision by the Guards for the enforcement of road traffic regulations; and, fifthly, I think there should be a nationwide and persistent publicity campaign.

It does seem to me to be necessary to have greater co-operation between the three authorities in the State concerned with the problem—the Gardaí authorities, the Department of Local Government and the local authorities. I think there would be a very strong argument indeed for the setting up of a board, a road safety board, which would comprise representatives from, perhaps, the Commissioner of the Guards, a high official from the Department of Local Government and representatives from the county managers in order to keep constantly in touch with the problem and in order to recommend changes which may be necessary from time to time in the regulations and in the enforcement of the regulations. I have suggested that these regulations need to be improved. It is now over 20 years since the Road Traffic Act was passed and it is about 20 years also since the main road traffic bylaws came into operation. The problem has now grown so great that these require urgent amendment and improvement.

I think that we should adopt in our built-up areas a speed limit and that we should have compulsory stopping places. There should be special pedestrian crossings and I think it is urgently necessary to amend the law with regard to drunken driving. Other countries, notably Sweden, have up to date legislation dealing with drunken drivers providing for medical examinations and a blood test for any persons suspected of the crime. I think the Minister and his Department should investigate the possibility of bringing in such blood tests for persons accused of drunken driving. We all appreciate the difficulty which District Justices have of deciding in many cases whether a person has infringed the law in this respect. Human nature being what it is, the evidence very frequently is of a conflicting nature and it is very difficult to arrive at the truth in many cases. It may be said that persons who should be convicted get off and that persons who are convicted should not have been so convicted. It would seem to me that such a blood test would be an objective proof which would be of material assistance, if practicable, in dealing with drunken drivers.

The local authorities must greatly increase their expenditure on matters dealing with road traffic. It is an undoubted fact that there has been a great improvement, particularly in the City of Dublin, in the matter of traffic lights and of controlling road junctions but there are still many junctions in which traffic lights are urgently needed. There are many junctions at which there are no signs indicating which is the main road and where the right of way lies. Expenditure on these items, I am convinced, could materially assist the flow of traffic and lower the incidence of accidents. People do break through traffic lights. Traffic lights do not always stop accidents but there can be no doubt that they have had a material effort in keeping down the number of accidents, particularly in the City of Dublin.

Anybody who has had experience of the Garda authorities will appreciate the excellent work which they do in tracking down persons who are guilty of a breach of the bylaws or of the Road Traffic Act and bringing them to justice, but the work of the Garda authorities has been mainly one of finding the criminal rather than of preventing the crime. In recent years there has been adopted here, on a very small scale, a system of motor-cycle patrol guards. I do not know the number in the force, but I know it is very small indeed and it seems to me that, if we want to prevent dangerous driving and to stop the drunken driver before he has an accident, we need many more patrol guards on motorcycles. I am not in favour of the system of patrol cars which operate around the city at the present time, mainly because of the expense involved and the waste of manpower. It seems to me that a Guard on a motor-cycle can do just as effectively what three Guards in a car can do. Anybody who has driven a car knows the deterrent effect of seeing a motor-cycle Guard before or behind one.

Statistics are available for the authorities and it is well known—it can almost be prophesied—where the accidents will occur. Certain of the main arteries out of Dublin, for example, are regular places for accidents and, although the Guards at the present time do their best, on foot or on cycle or with the patrol cars which are available, I do not think that they are equipped adequately to deal with the problem at the present time. If there were more Guards on motorcycles on these roads where it is known that accidents occur regularly, I am sure the incidence at these places would be reduced.

Tribute should be paid to the many voluntary organisations who have done magnificent work in publicising the problem and in bringing to the notice of the public the gravity of the situation. Sections of the Press also have assisted in trying to bring home the urgency of the situation. While these efforts are commendable, more is needed. Other countries, for example, England, have a very widespread publicity campaign on hoardings throughout the country, which we should and could very easily adopt here, without too great expense. It seems to me that, if we had a proper publicity campaign and, particularly, made use of the hoardings near dangerous crossroads and throughout the cities and in and outside country towns, it would have an effect in bringing about greater care on the part of drivers and also pedestrians in using the roads.

Whilst it is possible for the Government to take action by improving the regulations and the law, whilst it is possible also for the police to be reorganised and to adapt the force towards preventing the commission of offences on the road, ultimately, the solution lies with the road-users themselves. For this reason, this House can give assistance in the problem by passing legislation and by recommending action to be taken but the main task that this House has and, if it is decided to set up a joint committee, the main task that that committee will have, is to arouse the public conscience to the reality of the very grave situation and to re-awaken the conscience of the public to its responsibility in reducing road accidents. If this motion has that effect, I will be indeed gratified.

Mr. Rooney

I wish formally to second the motion, reserving my right to speak at a later stage.

Mr. Childers

I move the amendment standing in the name of Deputy Lemass:—

To delete all words after "That" in line 1, where it firstly occurs and substitute:—

"Dáil Éireann is of opinion that, in view of the increasing congestion of traffic on the roads and of the large number of fatal and serious accidents, the Government should without delay bring before the Dáil comprehensive proposals for dealing with the problem."

In moving his motion Deputy Costello made a number of very intelligent proposals and with a great deal of what he said we on this side of the House would be in full agreement, but we are not in favour of increasing the number of committees, boards and councils which the Government has formed and which seems to be an excuse for not taking courageous and firm action to deal with difficulties as they arise. We do not believe that commissions and councils are a substitute for definite action and action which members of the Government can take, having got all the advice they need from the competent officers in their Departments who, in turn, can secure all the advice they need from members of the public and from the associations that already exist for dealing with road traffic.

We are very much against Deputy Costello's proposal in view of the fact that the main body of traffic rules to amend the 1933 Bill was virtually ready in 1946 at a time when I had the privilege of being Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government. I spent many weeks in conference with the then superintendent in charge of traffic regulations. We had legal advice given on all these matters and the main heads of proposals for dealing with modern post-war traffic had reached a stage when they could form part of a Bill.

Nine years have elapsed since then and we on this side of the House feel that the delay has been unnecessary, that even if one might say the traffic had to grow to some extent beyond its limited nature in 1947 shortly after the war, most of the proposals that were then made were valid, that they could have been put into a new Bill. That Bill provided for making Statutory Orders which would require to lie on the Table of the House before being passed to make such amendments as were required, and the Bill could be amended at a later date in the light of facts that might arise showing that it was defective in some way or other. In any event the main outline of the amendment to the present legislation was reaching its final stages and there was absolutely no need to appoint any more councils, committees, boards, to deal with this matter.

Mr. Rooney

Why did the Deputy do nothing from 1951 to 1954?

Mr. Childers

I am perfectly prepared to admit there was a deficiency then. I am prepared for the Minister for Local Government to say if he wishes that there has been a continuous delay in this matter but at least whatever we did or did not do between 1951 and 1954 is no excuse for appointing yet another commission to deal with the problem which will require a certain amount of courage and about which the Minister will have to make a certain definite decision on which he should have the advice necessary already. As I remember the facts that were available in 1947 dealing with road traffic fatalities, I doubt if there has been very much change in them since. Deputy Costello has given a good many of these facts, namely, that 60 per cent. of accidents, for which drivers were responsible, were largely due to the excessive speed or to being on the wrong side of the road; half of them took place in built-up areas.

A very large number of accidents, on the other hand, were due to the carelessness of pedestrians and cyclists and to a lack of care on the part of cyclists, particularly in city districts. A great number of accidents were due to unlighted cycles at night or cycles with inadequate rere reflectors or reflectors covered with mud, or cyclists who turned their lights on only when traffic was approaching. In a disproportionately large number of accidents, motor cyclists were concerned and were alone on the road at the time. No other vehicle was involved and quite a proportion of the deaths related to occasions when there were not two vehicles but simply one isolated person. A high proportion of the accidents took place at lighting-up time in built-up areas at 6 p.m. when persons were returning home from work. The question of lighting in cities and in certain of the major streets was a definite problem.

One of the most important features at that time was the fact that 90 per cent. of the accidents for which drivers were responsible took place in the case of drivers of over two years and under ten years driving experience, showing quite clearly that the new driver was to a very little extent responsible for fatalities and the drivers of considerable experience seem to grow in caution and common sense. I remember noticing that women drivers came very well out of the analysis of accidents both as a proportion of their own group and as a proportion of the total group. There were years when they were responsible for no death or injury whatever.

Then we investigated the whole problem of accidents due to drunkenness and there we found ourselves in the difficulty mentioned by Deputy Costello. First of all, the normal test for drunkenness adopted by the Guards masks a great deal of intoxication, and even if blood tests were adopted or the new American device of blowing into the balloon and the bluer one becomes the drunker one is, there is another problem. A problem has been shown up by comprehensive experiments undertaken by a company in the United States and one which the Minister would have to face in dealing with this problem. The tests were undertaken of thousands and thousands of drivers who were made to sit in stationary vehicles with three lights and three pedals. The length of time was taken that it took the driver to put his foot down on top of the pedal from the time that any one of the three lights was lighting. I think the test included some 30,000 persons.

One-third of them were tested without their being treated in any way; one-third were told they were being injected with alcohol, who were in fact injected with water; and one-third were injected with alcohol. It was found, unfortunately for those who think there is an easy solution to this problem, that the fact of taking a moderate amount of alcohol slows up the speed of reaction. The normal driver, not overtired and naturally a good reactor would take half a second to get his foot on top of the pedal which would mean that if he was travelling at 60 miles an hour he would travel for 44 feet before he would start to brake the car. With quite a moderate mixture of alcohol, excessive fatigue or imminent sickness, the time would rapidly increase to one and a half seconds so that the person travelling at 60 miles an hour would drive 132 feet before he started to apply the brake. Further evidence showed that the persons concerned were completely unaware of their slow reaction and believed in fact their reaction was more rapid.

Therefore, the whole question of testing drunkenness requires very careful examination. Deputy Costello suggested that we adopt the Swedish system which would, I think, meet with a great deal of opposition because it is extremely severe. It means that persons who were not concerned in any accident can be examined whether coming from a party or a dance and automatically put off the road if their blood content exceeds a certain proportion of alcohol regardless of whether they appear to be sober or otherwise. That law, of course, has different applications in different countries. In Switzerland, a blood test is automatically taken when an accident occurs and, if the person is associated with an accident, irrespective of whether or not he is responsible he automatically loses his licence for having been associated with an accident and having an alcoholic blood content in excess of the minimum allowed.

If Swedish law were adopted here, a person who partook of a small whiskey would have to wait half an hour before he was considered safe from the point of view of driving a car. The Minister would have to take great care before he applied that particular regulation and I do not know that ten members of the Dáil or Seanad would be particularly good witnesses in giving him advice as to what action he should take so far as Swedish legislation is concerned.

We dealt with the question of accidents due to sudden curves, particularly sudden curves after a long straight stretch of road. I remember that the figures for accidents on the Bray road, where the road narrowed, were very, very high indeed showing that local authorities would have to play their part in financing the steps taken to reduce the accident rate. We had a number of discussions on the desirability of applying a medical test to a licence applicant and, as usual, the question arose of the appalling expense involved in such medical tests, although we were confronted with very clear evidence showing that a considerable number of short-sighted drivers were on the roads who, nevertheless, declared they were physically fit to drive and a considerable number of persons with not only short sight but defective sight which had not been corrected.

I agree absolutely with Deputy Costello in relation to the gross inadequacy of halt signs at the present time. There is only a very small number of these throughout the country and in 1947 the Garda Síochána said that it would be extremely difficult to increase their number without having the Garda necessary for their enforcement and that people would pay little attention to them. I must say I have noticed in recent years that, on the whole, motorists are fairly good in observing these signs where they exist and measures to compel local authorities to establish more of them would seem to be overdue.

One of the great difficulties we faced was the absolute total insufficiency of Guards dealing with traffic. I do not know whether the Minister has been informed by his colleague, the Minister for Justice, that there are now sufficient Guards, but I very much doubt it. One might say that the Bill relates in considerable degree in its effectiveness to the number of Guards available for traffic enforcement.

We had considerable discussion on compulsory driving tests and we received a good deal of evidence privately from foreign police organisations which had been compelled to adopt compulsory driving tests that their effect on reducing accidents was far less than was supposed by the general public. Most of these police associations told us that they had the same experience as we have here. The majority of accidents are due to carelessness, excessive speed, and not to lack of knowledge of how to handle a car and that, as they occur mainly in the group of persons with over two years and under ten years driving experience, it would appear to be the case that the new drivers were responsible for hardly any accidents at all, although without a driving test, they might be presumed to be particularly vulnerable.

There were three theories in regard to the matter. One was that there should be a comprehensive driving test for all drivers with all the attendant expense and the necessary increase in the number of officers or appointed persons essential. There was a second theory that it would be sufficient to ask a few questions on the highway code before a person could receive a driving licence, and there was a question of making, at the same time, the highway code enforceable to a greater degree in regard to the signals given by drivers and the use and type of traffickators and so forth. That, of course, also involved extra staff.

There was then the third theory that nothing should be done about it for the present. I do not believe that any particular group of members of the Dáil or Seanad, or, indeed, any other group, can give the Minister much more advice than he has already on the files in his Department on that question.

One of the most important aids to safe driving lies in comprehensive school education. I was disappointed to hear from the Minister for Education in answer to a recent parliamentary question that the lectures by the Guards and the showing of films to children were now a thing of the past and that the teachers are now supposed to give the instruction. I think that ought to be a matter for consideration in any Bill introduced here. It was the opinion of many experts in road safety that the children need someone other than their teacher to give them instruction in road safety, someone who comes newly into the school, who has a personality fitted for the job and who can make the lecture interesting, spectacular, unusual and present it in a lively way, even a humorous way, in order to grasp the children's attention. The ordinary teacher who is accustomed to dealing with children may not be the most suitable person, however competent, to give lessons in road safety.

I agree with Deputy Costello that the amount and character of the publicity in relation to road safety is ludicrously inadequate. I think all Ministers in successive Governments have grossly underrated the value of propaganda in almost every phase of our national life, from the appallingly backward propaganda of the Department of Agriculture to every other form of State propaganda. I think there should be more films and more imagination shown in relation to the publicity carried out in order to reduce the accident rate on our roads.

As Deputy Costello said, the fines imposed have now become hopelessly inadequate having regard to the reduction in the value of money. That will assuredly be part of any measure the Minister introduces.

We also found out—I am afraid my memory fails me somewhat at this particular point—that much of the law dealing with prosecutions was out-of-date and required amendment. We found that an enormous amount of the time of the Guards was spent in serving summonses personally for trivial offences where, in fact, ample precedent had already been set in regard to other offences for the serving of summonses by post. I do not know whether the law has changed since or whether it has become possible for the Guards by some statutory Order, to get around it but, if I remember rightly, at that time even summonses for unlighted bicycles had to be served personally, thus taking up an enormous amount of the time of the Guards.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. O'Donnell)

Personally by the Guard, yes, but not personally on the offender.

Mr. Childers

There are a great number of cases where they could be served by post and where it was agreed by all concerned that they could be served by post. That was not the case in relation to these offences in 1947. I do not know what has happened since. We had evidence that there were about 80,000 prosecutions a year of which, as far as I remember, nearly half were for unlighted cycles. That in turn, raised the question, which is dear to the hearts of those in the legal fraternity, as to whether or not fines on the spot for trivial offences were justified. There seemed to be a great deal to be said for fines on the spot. Fines on the spot appear to be the order of the day in a great many civilised countries with a very high appreciation of the rights of the individual in all legal matters.

The practice has become common in countries with a great respect for the law and the rights of the individual and the Minister, introducing his measure, will have to make up his mind, first of all, in respect of what offences he might apply the principle; secondly, whether he would apply it 100 per cent. and, thirdly, whether he would leave it open to the person approached by a Guard whether he would pay the fine on the spot or refer it to a District Court. The third course seems to have had considerable support because people seem satisfied that the traditional appeal to the law is right. There were those who felt that the time of the Guards was being wasted in dealing with such a large number of trivial offences.

Then there was the question of bylaws in connection with traffic and there appeared at that time to be a need for revising legislation in that regard. So far as I can recall, efforts were made to persuade the Dublin Corporation to deal effectively with the growing parking problem. The Dublin Corporation were warned, in no uncertain terms, that unless major steps were taken, by 1970 there would be considerable permanent parking along the two canals and that within a few years after cars would be parked in places like Donnybrook because of the growing number of cars.

No comprehensive efforts have been made to deal with the parking problem in Dublin either by the collection of parking fees on a proper basis, the money to be used for creating parking spaces or ramps, or by any other method. I remember that there was presented to the Minister for Local Government ample evidence from other countries and from cities of the size of Dublin where considerable parking revenue had been secured sufficient to pay a considerable proportion of the cost required to provide good parking facilities.

There were also fantastic suggestions like creating a vast parking space under Stephen's Green, for roofing in the Liffey and other such methods. All those were examined and there was great opposition to many of them. It all forms part of this problem. Deputy Costello referred to what are known as zebra crossings. These appear not to have had the same popularity here as elsewhere. The question arose as to whether the Minister for Local Government should take certain powers to enforce them. Deputy Costello also dealt with the vexed question of imposing a speed limit in built-up areas.

We received information privately from motoring associations and from police organisations abroad that the speed limit laws in built-up areas were ruthlessly disobeyed by a considerable portion of the driving public, and it was considered that it would be futile to impose a speed limit in built-up areas unless there were enough Guards to enforce the law—that it would make a mockery of the law to have a speed limit unless there were an adequate number of officers to enforce it.

At that time we were of the view that there did not seem to be any possibility of securing enough traffic and that it would be hopeless at that time to impose such a law. As the Minister knows, that situation has changed. There are a great number of modern television devices that can now be used by the Guards. In this country we are terribly behind in the use of modern devices of every kind and I am afraid we will remain lax in these matters. There is a device whereby a car following another car can, by means of a photographic device, tell whether it is exceeding a certain speed and can take the number of the car and a photograph of the car itself.

If the Minister considers that on general grounds it would be good to impose a speed limit in built-up areas he need only inquire technically how far that device has been developed, whether it is very excessive in cost. Such devices are going to be the future means by which speed limits can be imposed. It involves a much smaller police force because of the number of cars that can be trailed by a police car. The Minister would have to consider the argument that police cars are immediately identifiable, because in this case they must not be. That, in turn, involves questions of law and tradition which would have to be examined by the Minister.

There are a great many other matters such as the standardisation of the use of cats eyes and the degree of curve to which they should apply. We were under no doubt at the time that the inspection of cars was not half rigid enough, even within the law as it stood and nobody seems to have made up their minds on the matter. At the present time of growing congestion on the roads, the extent to which the Guards inspect cars will have to be examined by the Minister when introducing his Bill.

There were many other matters relating to the dimming devices in cars and so forth. In examining this general problem at that time, we took a realistic view of the necessity for decreasing the time taken by commercial transport in getting from one spot to another and I think that the Minister for Local Government, when he decided there should be no more road improvement grants in the current year——

Mr. O'Donnell

Main road improvement grants.

Mr. Childers

——main road improvement grants, could not have made the excuse that there were no accidents on these roads. If we cannot move from the centre of Ireland to Dublin at a speed that compares favourably with the increase in traffic the cost of transport goes up, the number of roads required goes up, costs increase and we have got to face realities about it. We cannot remain an old fashioned country with a lot of curves on the roads to avoid a particular type of accident that occurs to a particular type of driver speeding on a long straight stretch of road. That is not facing the real position.

In connection with this, if I remember rightly, a lot of interested associations presented evidence and were interviewed either by myself or by officials of the Department. We received many outside views and much outside advice. We had conferences with the Safety First Association on the general question of the accident level on quite a number of occasions. I feel that the Minister for Local Government, who himself is acquainted with the law should, by 1956, be quite capable of introducing a comprehensive Bill without requiring a committee to frame the Bill or a board to operate it.

He can do it himself; he has all the advice he needs. It should largely be a Committee Bill. It is one of the occasions when the Minister might even feel that a free vote of the House in respect of some of the more contentious measures would be advisable. None of us is going to enjoy the prospect, for example, of dealing with such a matter as a compulsory driving test. I do not believe that all the evidence in the world that ten members of the Dáil and Seanad could get would increase our knowledge on that subject. I believe it can all be given by the Minister, and the Minister can have the courage to make a proposal one way or the other and we can then discuss it here in the Committee. I do not believe that the members of the Dáil and Seanad sitting in Committee would ever determine whether that was a wise course or otherwise.

I believe the Minister will be shirking his main responsibility if he does not take action himself and introduce this comprehensive Bill. My last word is this: I think, as in the case of practically everything else in this country, the major problem he faces is an educational one, and I believe there is less talked about education than any other subject in this House. I think it affects the whole of our national life. We always shirk the responsibility of dealing with problems of increasing education, and I am perfectly certain in the long run, the education of the individual in relation to this problem of road safety would be a major contribution to the reduction in the number of deaths and injuries, and that apart from that, the Minister will have to ensure that evil-doers are punished and that the law, particularly in regard to drunkenness, is enforced and the penalties are increased.

Mr. J. Lynch

I second the amendment. Like the mover I feel there is no justification for setting up yet another committee. We all know the propensity of this Government to set up committees and appoint commissions for specific purposes, but I think the Minister himself, before he enjoyed the facility of a State driver, was probably one of the longest distance drivers to this House and he should know the defects that there are in the existing law in relation to control of traffic on the roads.

I would like to say, in case the impression has gone abroad as it seems to have gone abroad, that the legislation and regulations which we already have dealing with road traffic are inadequate, that I think that is a false premise. I believe the Road Traffic Act of 1933 was a very comprehensive document and that whoever was responsible for the framing of it deserves the congratulations of the community in so far as it did, within reasonable limits, regulate our ever-increasing traffic fairly well over a number of years, having regard to the date of its passing. I take it that the former Cumann na nGaedheal Government and the new Fianna Fáil Government as it was in 1933, had a lot to do with it, and to give these people their due, they displayed a fair modicum of foresight in envisaging the big increase in the use of the roads by mechanically-propelled vehicles even though they did not, perhaps, envisage such an increase as has taken place.

Most people who have some years experience of driving in cities, towns or on country roads, know where the defects in our present legislation and regulations lie. All of us have our own pet aversions on the roads but, by and large, I think we are all in fairly common agreement on the defects that have been shown by reason of the ever-increasing volume of traffic, particularly the type of traffic that is being used much more now, that is the mechanically-propelled bicycle. I think that the root of this whole problem lies in one word—courtesy. If there was more courtesy there would be far fewer accidents and far less necessity for regulations. Certainly there would be far fewer accidents, but most people who get behind the wheel, feel that unless they can beat the other fellow to the crossroads or unless they prevent him from overtaking on a straight stretch, they are not competent drivers whereas, in fact, if they only realised it, holding back for that split second to let the other fellow have his way if he is so anxious to get ahead, would not affect their progress or interfere much with their arrival at their destinations.

I have my own pet aversions on the roads and it would be very difficult for any Minister or committee to propose a remedy for some of them. I would instance particularly the person who fails to dim his lights. I do not see what remedy or redress we have against such a person. He is one of the greatest menaces on the road. I would say in relation to lights we could have some system whereby a maximum candle-power could be provided. I have some little experience of continental driving and, without making any particular inquiries about it, it seemed to me there was a maximum candle-power beyond which no firm of motor-car manufacturers could go. I think that is something we might reasonably adopt here. I see no reason why anybody, because he can afford a car in the luxury class should have, in addition to two head-lights, two spotlights underneath and perhaps another beam light, to make sure he will find his way properly.

Personally, I believe spotlights should be made illegal because they have a peculiar habit, unfortunately, of changing their position, and instead of picking out the left-hand grass margin—as I presume they are intended to do—pick out the spot just between the eyes of the oncoming driver. That in itself causes a great deal of confusion on the roads, and I am sure a great number of accidents.

In speaking in the debate on the Estimate for Local Government last year or the year before, I advocated something that I am sure is not likely to be popular but which I feel in the interests of the people concerned is now becoming essential and that is the adequate lighting of push bicycles at the rear. I feel no matter how effective a reflector is, it is not adequate in present-day traffic, particularly on main roads. I feel there should be a red light and not simply a reflector at the rear of each pedal bicycle. I myself came upon a number of accidents, and unfortunately two of them were fatal, caused by a driver overtaking a pedal cyclist, being blinded by the lights of an oncoming vehicle and not seeing the cyclist until he had mown him down. If the cyclist had a rear light it is ten chances to one that he would not have been killed or seriously injured. It is in the interests of the pedal cyclist that the Minister should seriously consider whether or not the present idea of insisting only on a reflector is sufficient. I sincerely doubt it, having regard to my own experience on the roads.

I wholeheartedly agree with the previous speakers when they say that the marking of our roads is totally inadequate, particularly nowadays when many of our country roads are almost as good as the main roads. I think for the benefit of those who are not used to those roads and who without realising it might come on a road equally as good as the road on which they had been travelling, there should be a system of sign posting much more effective than that which we have at the moment. I am particularly keen myself on the necessity for having "stop" signs across by-roads coming on to main roads such as they have in England.

Deputy Costello suggested that traffic lights of themselves were not sufficient guarantee against accidents because there is always the chance of drivers in a hurry who want to "crash" the traffic lights, but there is also the case of traffic lights being in a position where the driver does not expect them to be. I know that if he is keeping a proper look out he should see them but very often it happens that he does not see them, particularly in places where there is neon lighting in the immediate vicinity. If the driver is a stranger in the area and he comes on traffic lights in a place where there are other coloured lights, it is very difficult for him to distinguish between the traffic lights and the lights over a pub or a chemist's shop. Where that applies there should be some system of giving a warning such as: "Traffic Lights Ahead."

Speed, of course, is one of the main factors on the roads, and I suggest that in this country, with its limited length and breadth, speed is not as essential as many people seem to think. The Minister himself, as I said, possibly had to travel one of the longest distances from his own constituency to the House before he became Minister—perhaps 180 miles or so— and I am sure his experience was that taking it easy as against taking chances would cost him no more than 15 to 20 minutes in the total run. I am convinced that a person travelling from Belfast to Cork would save no more than half an hour on the whole run by taking chances.

Mr. D. Costello

In Cork they always go the other way.

Mr. J. Lynch

Not to Belfast.

Mr. O'Donnell

Even Lords Mayor travel up there at times, I understand.

Mr. James Tully

There are no Lords Mayor in Donegal.

Mr. J. Lynch

I am not going to comment very much on whether or not we should have driving tests, but I am in whole-hearted agreement with the suggestion that we should ensure that those who get driving licences, whether at the beginning or within a reasonable period, should know the rules of the road in relation to giving signs. I think a Deputy—he is no longer a member of the House; he learned a salutary lesson—said during a similar debate here that when a lady has her hand out the window of a motor car the only thing one can be sure of is that the window is down.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

It is not confined to the ladies.

Mr. J. Lynch

As I said, he received a salutary lesson; he is no longer a member of the House. As Deputy Dockrell says, it is not confined to the ladies. What is possibly even more serious is the failure to give any sign at all. A person going to pull up into his left stops suddenly and a car behind may crash into the rear unless the driver behind is very careful indeed. It is true that many farmers, many members of our rural community, are buying cars at the present time. They are used to the easy living of rural Ireland, and by reason of the fact that they have been driving ponies and traps for many years and have been driving cars only a short time, they are not fully appreciative of the dangers attendant on the driving of mechanically-propelled vehicles and are not fully appreciative of the necessity to give adequate signs, both to traffic that is oncoming and traffic overtaking from behind.

Mr. James Tully

They are the most expert drivers you could meet.

Mr. J. Lynch

I am not denying that. What I am saying is that, being a rural community, we are of necessity an easy-going race and we certainly do not give traffic signals such as they do in England. I have travelled a little in England and I must admit that it is a pleasure to drive in traffic on the English country roads because you know exactly what the driver coming against you or going ahead of you is going to do. I feel that many accidents would be avoided if we had some system, even short of a driving test, of ensuring that people who hold driving licences should know the minimum of necessary signals.

One could go on for a long time referring to one's own pet subjects on the shortcomings of our traffic regulations but I think a word should be said in favour of the pedestrians. As far as I know we do not legally regard our pedestrian crossings in this country. They are there in the cities and towns only as tokens, only as an indication that one might, if one is lucky, safely cross in a particular place. It is said in Cork that the people do not use the pedestrian crossings and that this is largely due to the fact that there is no greater safety on a pedestrian crossing for a pedestrian than there is any other part of the street. Motorists should regard pedestrian crossings for what they are intended to be, and if they do not, the Minister should take very definite powers to deal with motorists who refuse to have regard for pedestrian crossings.

Many of the shortcomings to which I have referred are matters that can be properly dealt with even under existing legislation. Section 179 of the Road Traffic Act provides for almost every contingency and it empowers the Commissioner of the Garda with the consent of the Minister to make regulations covering circumstances that arise in almost every contingency in relation to driving motor-cars, driving cattle, pedestrian crossings, giving and observing signs. I feel if the Minister even had a look at that section many of the defects of the present legislation could be overcome without the necessity of delaying action further by the setting up of a select committee and he would be making a useful contribution in relation to road safety in this country.

Mr. O'Donnell

I hope the House will appreciate my intervention at this stage, having heard a fair cross-section of the views expressed in the House. As Deputy Lynch just pointed out, many of the suggestions which have been made could be implemented by Section 179 of the Road Traffic Act of 1933, but in my opinion no sooner was that Road Traffic Act of 1933 the law in this country than it immediately became obsolete. It was immediately after 1933 that we first had the introduction into this country of high-powered and very fast American motor-cars and to facilitate this traffic we proceeded to build speedways all over the country, without making any attempt whatsoever to control conditions in which they would be driving on these speedways and the speed at which they would be driving. That continued, with the result that we found ourselves in our present position and nothing was done from 1933 until the present day to remedy this matter.

The fact that the public are aware of the importance and urgency of the road traffic problem is evident from the frequency with which motions are put down in both Houses, the Dáil and the Seanad. That the Government are, likewise, aware of their duty will be evident from what I have got to say.

I propose, first of all, to attempt to put the problem, as I see it, in its proper light. In the first nine months of this year there were 3,995 accidents, an increase of nearly 200 over the corresponding period of last year. In the same nine months of this year, 236 persons were killed, an increase of 45. The figures are sobering and challenging. Anything in reason that we can do to reduce them is justified, but do not let us, on that account, take steps that appear to give an answer but, in reality, will not get to the roots of the problem.

I may say that, bad as the figures are, they show that the increase in accidents has lagged behind the increase in vehicles over a period of years. Again, bad as they are, they are relatively better than the corresponding figures for Great Britain and the Six Counties. On the basis of either the population or the number of motor vehicles in use, there was a far lower incidence of accidents involving death or personal injury here in 1955 than in either Great Britain or the Six Counties. I am mentioning this, not to play down the seriousness of the entire problem, but to show it in its proper light. Perhaps official action here, in the matter of road construction and law enforcement, has not been as ineffective as it is sometimes made out to be. Unfortunately, the accident statistics show that there are unreasonable road users. The increase in multiple-death accidents seems to be largely due to the abuse of speed made available to the public by modern cars and modern roads, to which I have already referred.

I trust that the work of main road improvements will be renewed in due time, when we have brought our county roads up to a reasonable standard and when we have brought road signs and road traffic lights and regulations and bylaws up to requirements. But, in the meantime, the unreasonable minority of road users must be educated and disciplined.

The Government have been so impressed by the problem of traffic accidents that they established, last August, a Special Committee, consisting of the Minister for Justice, myself and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Government, to survey the whole field. One of the first things that struck us was the need for proper signposting and marking of roads on a uniform basis, and for the guidance of the public in their use. It was, therefore, decided to press ahead with the making of traffic signs regulations under the Local Government Act of 1955. The House will recollect how we debated the particular section here on the introduction of the Bill. These will be ready for issue very shortly and will set out a system of signs and markings for use throughout the country.

The new regulations will follow a system recommended by the United Nations Organisation for adoption by all States. The mere fact that there will now be uniformity in this matter throughout the country should help to inculcate that sense of discipline on the road which we so noticeably lack and to which many Deputies have referred. Concurrently with the new traffic signs regulations, the public may expect new bylaws from the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána, amending the general bylaws for the control of traffic.

The amending bylaws and the new regulations have been designed to supplement one another so as to provide traffic rules suitable to modern conditions. Among the features in them I may mention that markings for pedestrians crossings and the rights of pedestrians will be strictly defined. Other roadway markings will include a broken central white line on roads to caution traffic to keep to its left. My own personal view is that a judicious use of this line on heavily-trafficked routes should help considerably to reduce accidents, and I speak from experience. As Deputy Lynch pointed out, I travel considerable distances to and from my constituency. Prior to the introduction of these white lines here, I had experience of them in the Six Counties and I really am convinced that the white line to indicate the centre of the road will assist in keeping down road accidents. "Major Road Ahead" and "Stop" signs as well as stop-lines will also be given legal force. I think all Deputies, including Deputy Declan Costello, who moved the motion, referred to that and I can assure them now that all these will be given legal force.

Here, I may say that extravagant expenditure on new road signs is not involved. Some people have suggested that it might cost a considerable amount, be it out of the Road Fund or out of local taxation, to provide new signs, and I think that was referred to here when I introduced the Act of 1955. A gradual replacement of existing signs will be recommended in a covering circular letter, but some important signs should be replaced as early as possible, for example, the "Children" sign, the "Major Road Ahead" sign and the "Stop" sign. An Order will be made authorising the retention of existing signs for the time being.

May I take this opportunity to appeal to the public to see that traffic signs are not damaged and to ask parents and teachers to advise those under their care to refrain from interfering with them? There is nothing more exasperating to a motorist travelling in an area with which he is not well acquainted than to find road signs damaged and sometimes turned in the wrong direction.

Mr. James Tully

And not by children.

Mr. O'Donnell

And not by children. In my own county and in a number of other counties, particularly along the western seaboard, I am indeed ashamed to admit that a number of road signs have been maliciously broken down and I would take this opportunity of appealing to the public to respect these road signs and to remember that in a case of emergency they may be most beneficial to road users.

I have arranged for the issue of a booklet early in the new year, which will contain, not only a summary of the law on road traffic and illustrations of the new traffic signs, but a detailed statement in simple language of the rules which every good driver, cyclist and pedestrian should follow. It is intended to be laid out in an attractive, arresting way and will be issued in Irish and in English. While it will be on sale to the public at a nominal figure, a copy will be given free to every holder of a driving licence. I trust that every member of the road-using public will make use of this booklet. If road users study it and follow its advice and instruction, the number of accidents must drop.

A number of amendments to road traffic law were effected in the Local Government Act, 1955, but it has long been evident that a review of the whole code was desirable, having regard to the growth in the volume and speed of traffic. This was undertaken by a group of departmental representatives, which examined every proposal for amendment of the law mooted in recent years. The Ministerial Committee which I have mentioned then took up the task and examined the whole question afresh. Proposals for legislation were then submitted to the Government, which has directed the preparation of a Bill, which I hope to introduce during the present session. I do not wish to anticipate the debate on that Bill but I feel it desirable to meet the public interest in the matter by indicating at the earliest possible stage what its main provisions will be.

It will be a comprehensive Bill and will replace fully a number of enactments dealing with road traffic, including the Road Traffic Act, 1933, which I now say is obsolete. It will provide for a general speed limit of 30 miles per hour for all roads in cities and towns and for such other roads as may be determined by the Minister for Local Government. This speed limit will be a prima facie one, that is, the onus will be on a driver exceeding it to show that his actual speed was in all the circumstances a safe one to use. In this way, while ensuring that in ordinary circumstances a vehicle in a built-up area is not driven faster than 30 m.p.h., the arbitrary element of a speed limit is avoided so that a vehicle can be driven at a reasonably higher speed on suitable roads at times when light traffic warrants it.

The question of a driving test is a vexed one and has needed lengthy consideration. An actual test in driving for all new drivers involves considerable difficulties in Irish conditions. It imposes a certain hardship on drivers and would be expensive to operate in rural areas where the population is widely dispersed and the ratio of drivers is very low in relation to other countries. I am advised that it would cost an annual sum of £40,000 to provide such a driving test, a physical driving test, for drivers in this country. I do not wish to commit myself fully in this respect, as the House will appreciate, but what I can say at this stage is that I have definitely in mind a simpler scheme than an actual physical driving test which will give most of the benefits of an actual driving test without its attendant disadvantages. I am considering requiring each new driver to satisfy the licensing authority that he knows the chief requirements of the law and has informed himself of the rules for correct road behaviour.

As some Deputies have pointed out, it is not the new driver who is mainly responsible for accidents. Most people who get a new and expensive machine know how to steer the car, how to apply the clutch and brake, how to change the gears, but the cause of the trouble, in my opinion, is lack of road craft and ignorance of road rules and regulations. However, that is a matter which we will debate on a later occasion.

In addition, we have in mind provisions empowering the court to require a person to undergo a full driving test and a test in knowledge of the rules of the road in a case where he is convicted of certain offences which suggest that he lacks a proper sense of his responsibilities and knowledge of how to behave as a road user. This should get at the small core of incorrigibles devoid of a sense of civic duty and deaf to appeals.

An offence, carrying a maximum punishment of five years' imprisonment and a fine, will be introduced for dangerous driving resulting in death or grievous bodily harm to another. The law regarding driving under the influence of drink and disqualification from driving is being remodelled.

It is proposed to bring up to date in several respects the powers of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána to deal with traffic movement and parking. Here I may say that experience of the working of the 1933 Act has been drawn on to draft a certain reshuffling of the duties and powers of the Garda in road traffic. The intention generally is to drop what have proved to be unnecessary functions in order to make more Garda time available for attention to the things that really matter. I may mention here a proposal to introduce "fines on the spot" for minor traffic offences. This provision is being very carefully drafted to ensure that, while the present time-wasting process is cut out, nevertheless the right of a citizen to resort to the courts is fully preserved.

I have mentioned a few of the things that will appear in the Bill to give an idea of its comprehensive nature. The experience of all concerned with the administration of the law has been fully drawn on, and I believe that the Bill will show a serious and objective effort to produce a code of law designed in the light of our own conditions to give the maximum impetus to the drive to reduce accidents and improve traffic movement. We are not so vain as to think that the last word in wisdom on the subject rests with us, and we shall carefully consider every suggestion put forward during the debates on the Bill. The need for producing the Bill as soon as possible has prevented us from bringing in interested bodies at this stage. We have considered all the suggestions that emanated from them and the public over a period of years and we shall be only too glad to consider their comments on the Bill when it is published.

So much for the law on the subject. The enforcement of the law is a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Justice, who, I understand, has requested the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána to do what can be done to reduce accidents under existing law pending the enactment of the Road Traffic Bill. The Commissioner's policy has been to deal with the erring road user in the matter of minor traffic offences by way of caution and advice in the first instance rather than by prosecution. He feels that the Garda power of prosecution should be concentrated on the more serious offences and that persuasion is the better method to get the co-operation of the great body of road users.

I understand that a certain success has attended his efforts in dealing with the Dublin parking problem in this way, and I would urge every road user to co-operate with the Garda Síochána, obey their directions and accept their advice with goodwill and understanding. Any restrictions or directions are issued in the general interest. That the Garda have been active in dealing with serious offences is evident from the fact that 256 prosecutions were taken for drunken driving in the first half of 1956 and 2,117 prosecutions for dangerous and careless driving.

I have dealt with the State's approach to this problem, by way of road works, legislation and enforcement. I need hardly say that, no matter how much we spend on roads, how many laws we pass, how many prosecutions are taken, real results will not ensue unless the public themselves play their part. I have already stated that there is no lack of public interest in the subject. What is necessary in that every road user carry this interest a bit deeper and decide that it is up to himself as an individual to play his part, to remember as a motorist, a cyclist, or a pedestrian, that he has a two-fold duty—to take care and to show consideration to others. Whatever our faults as a nation, lack of courtesy has not been one of them. Is it too much to expect that a nation with our traditions should set an example to other nations in its use of the road? I hope not.

I am sure that, having heard what I have said, the House, while agreeing with the spirit of the Deputy's motion, will be satisfied that the appointment of a joint committee would merely delay the various steps being taken. Therefore, I am sure the Deputy will withdraw the motion. As the amendment has been dealt with by me in what I have stated and by the fact that I have undertaken to introduce legislation forthwith, it will be understood that the amendment is being accepted in that respect.

Mr. D. Costello

I am sure the members of the House have listened with great pleasure to the announcement which the Minister has just made of the introduction of new regulations and the introduction in the very near future of a new Road Traffic Bill. The figures which the Minister gave at the outset of his remarks underscored the remarks which he later made and demonstrated how vitally necessary immediate action is. The Government, we are glad to note, is to introduce new legislation. In the course of the debate on the Second Reading of the Bill, I presume much of what has been said here this evening will be debated and an opportunity will be given to Deputies to introduce such amendments to the Bill as they think are necessary. We can appreciate the remarks that the Minister has made about the views of his Department not being the final word and wisdom. This would be a measure of a non-Party type. Indeed, as Deputy Childers or Deputy Lynch, I think, said we would all have our own pet theories. Some of these theories might find support in the House, and I would ask the Minister to bear in mind the views of Deputies in this matter when the Bill comes before the House.

Debate adjourned.