Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 7 Dec 2001

Vol. 546 No. 2

Road Traffic Bill, 2001: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am delighted to have an opportunity to continue my contribution to the debate on the Road Traffic Bill, 2001. I had highlighted the role local authorities play in terms of road safety and, in particular, outlined the plans brought forward by Dublin Corporation. Dublin Corporation has a road safety plan in place, which I commend, but I have to question one aspect of its activities in relation to quality bus corridors and cycle routes and, in particular, the design of the new bus lanes. I have experience of the Malahide Road quality bus corridor and cycle route, on which the design of some of the junctions is positively dangerous. Without being too parochial, I highlight, in particular, the Malahide Road and Collins Avenue and Malahide Road and Fairview junctions. What safety audits are carried out by the local authority when it designs such schemes? They are dangerous and need to be examined and rectified.

The poor quality of our national, non-national and urban roads is a major contributory factor to traffic accidents. North County Dublin, for example – I am sure this applies in every other county – is bursting at the seams from a traffic point of view. Country lanes carry huge volumes of traffic, both cars and trucks. These roads were not built for this volume of traffic. Their junctions are saturated, there are no facilities for pedestrians either walking along or crossing them, they are poorly lit, surfaces are poor and there is little or no signage. Because of these poor conditions, accidents will happen as surely as night follows day. Let us take the case of a motorist travelling in the countryside on a poor road behind a truck for 20 minutes. Eventually, he or she will more than likely take a chance and overtake the truck thus increasing the risk of an accident.

Raising the quality of our roads to improve road safety must be a top priority. Everything else is secondary. We have heard much in this debate about measures which could improve road safety and we have heard a great deal from the Minister. His Department has been sending out signals that it is re-examining the issue of the use of mobile phones behind the wheel. These are all reasonable propositions, but we need to get the basics right. Adequate funding must be provided to ensure all our roads, national, non-national and urban, are in a satisfactory condition and motorists can travel them safely. The Government can do something about this instead of introducing all sorts of bans and demands. Surely the job of the Department of the Environment and Local Government is, first and foremost, to provide safe roads through the local authorities. Much work remains to be done.

As regards some of the secondary issues I will deal, in particular, with the general safety of cars. I welcome the introduction of the national car test. While it has been painful for many motorists, cars must be safe. Road traffic safety will improve if cars are travelling efficiently and are well maintained. However, it is difficult to get an appointment in a car testing centre, particularly in the Dublin area. The Government should look carefully at establishing far more test centres for the convenience of the public.

I also wish to highlight the role of the media in road safety awareness. It has had a positive influence. Although the media occasionally hypes issues before quickly dropping them, it has been to the forefront in highlighting road safety and bringing about changes in behaviour. Everyone in society welcomes its role in that regard.

I draw attention to and welcome the fact that the Bill reassigns responsibility for the control of taxi stands and bus stops from the Garda Commissioner to local authorities. Local authorities are responsible for this activity at any rate. The devolution of powers from central Government to local government is always a good thing.

Enforcement is a central issue. I hope we have deployed enough gardaí to deal with enforcement of road and traffic laws and that the laws on drinking and driving, for example, are not only enforced at Christmas time. I understand why it is hyped up at Christmas, but it must be enforced throughout the year. The requirement for cyclists to have a lamp on their bikes is flouted daily and much more enforcement is needed.

There has been a major change in attitudes to drinking and driving. Young people, in particular, are at the forefront in bringing about this change. Tolerance of drinking and driving has decreased substantially. The "one for the road" mentality is no longer accepted, which is welcome and gives hope for the future.

We have the highest road traffic fatality rate in the European Union. I welcome and support any new measures which attempt to deal with the problem. Unfortunately, many measures, which might have been included in the Bill, are missing. Nevertheless, I welcome it as far as it goes.

I listened with interest to an interview on "Marian Finucane" during the week in which the guest, who had written a book related to good manners and bad manners through the ages, traced attitudes through the ages to such things as dress, eating and drinking and general habits. He pointed out how long it took people to adapt and learn the rudiments and fundamentals of, for instance, toilet habits, having excused himself for raising the matter.

During the interview, it struck me that perhaps the way in which we behave on the roads – the programme made a slight reference to it – including the bad manners which characterise the behaviour of so many pedestrians and drivers, is a relatively new phenomenon. I wonder how long it will take us to get to grips with these changed conditions. How long, for example, will it take us to learn to control road rage, which is also a new phenomenon? As we become accustomed to the new traffic conditions, I presume, we will learn to control road rage. We have all heard the phrase, coined, I believe, by Seamus Mallon, "Sunningdale for slow learners". Maybe we are proceeding towards a road code for slow learners. I hope it does not take too long.

Listening to Members criticising the driving habits and behaviour they have observed on the roads and in car parks, I could not help thinking that we could take some of these criticisms to heart by looking more carefully at the car park in front of this building and taking note of the number of cars parked astride the lines, needlessly taking up other spaces. A Cheann-Comhairle, if you have the opportunity, take a look at how often this happens and how many spaces are badly used. We should give a lead on the matter. Some of the cars out there are not parked at all, they are abandoned. I hope, by drawing attention to this matter, I will help some people to be more careful about how they park in the future.

Many accidents are attributed to drunk drivers, and rightly so. How many are caused by young inexperienced drivers? Statistics indicate how many accidents are caused by speeding. While there are many statistics on road traffic accidents, I am not aware of any on how many accidents are caused by badly designed roads.

There are many designated accident blackspots on our roads. When I lived in the North I used to approve of these signs because they did not exist north of the Border. However, roads along which one travelled ten or 15 years ago still have the same signs indicating accident blackspots. That suggests we are not taking these blackspots as seriously as we ought, otherwise they would be remedied.

We are not told how many accidents are caused by the wrong camber on a road. How many times on a comparatively new road or on a new road does one approach what appears to be a slight corner and suddenly one finds the car being pulled to the wrong side of the road? The car drifts towards the other side of the road because the camber of the road is not correct.

There are no statistics to indicate how many accidents are caused by the wrong speed limitations on particular stretches of road. There may be a speed limit of 50 miles per hour where that is clearly too low for the section of road concerned, or there may be a limit of 40 or 50 miles per hour where it is clearly too high. I am continually amazed at the unpredictable nature of these speed restrictions.

How many accidents are caused by frustration as a result of too many traffic lights on certain sections of road where there appears to be no justification for them? Let me give an example of a road on which I travel at least twice a day, the N4 or Lucan by-pass. Travelling from County Kildare to Dublin one must cross the county boundary. When one crosses the county boundary the speed limit is 70 miles per hour, it then changes to 50 miles per hour, to 40 miles per hour, to 50 miles per hour, to 40 miles per hour and to 30 miles per hour within a distance of eight miles. It is very confusing for people who are not used to that stretch of road. It is also confusing for those of us who are used to the section of road. It is frustrating for people travelling on the main road to the west, from Dublin to Galway, to have a speed limit of 50 miles per hour on a good section of road coming out from Kilmainham and then find there are traffic lights when they arrive at Palmerstown. The engineers who designed the road must have had a bad weekend when that section was being planned. It has been a source of frustration and anger to people since. There is no reason for having traffic lights in that position; an over-pass or an under-pass should have been built on that stretch of road. One then arrives at the M50 roundabout, another one of our roundabouts with traffic lights. Who designed these roundabouts? The idea of roundabouts is to eliminate the need for traffic lights. Very few countries have roundabouts similar to the one at the junction of the M50. This is frustrating for drivers. It makes one wonder about the engineering geniuses who were responsible for designing some of these roads. I listened to Deputy Haughey emphasise that money should be spent on good roads, with which I agree. However, if we are to build good roads we must think of the other aspects to which I referred.

The use of mobile phones while driving, which is the responsibility of another Minister, has been referred to. I have no doubt people using mobile phones while driving are responsible for a great number of accidents. There is an unanswerable case for banning the use of hand held phones while driving. It should be an offence for which there is a considerable penalty. At one time when one travelled behind a car that was swerving on the road one would say, "that fellow has got a wee bit more drink that he ought to have had." Invariably nowadays if one notices a car swerving, it is because the driver is using a hand held phone. Drivers cannot have proper control over vehicles while holding a telephone conversation. God only knows what bad news or good news that person is receiving over the phone which will distract him or her from the immediate task in hand, while trying to drive with one hand on the steering wheel. I ask the Minister of State to encourage either the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the Minister for the Environment and Local Government to make the use of mobile phones while driving an offence.

It is inexplicable that people who have proved themselves incapable of driving because they have not passed the test are allowed to drive on the roads. This does not happen in any other country in the world. There is no reason that should be the case. Any Minister or Administration who is concerned about the carnage on the roads should have done something about it. It should never have been allowed. If this happened in a Third World country people would say, strange things happen in these countries, there is inefficiency and they do not realise what they are doing but that there are not many cars on their roads. In circumstances where driving is difficult enough for experienced drivers in this country, learner drivers should not be allowed to drive on our roads.

More and more when I drive 20 or 30 miles, not to mention longer journeys, park my car and turn off the ignition, I ask myself if I had done something different or another driver had done something different on several occasions during the journey would I be still alive. That is the current reality on our roads and it is intensified by the fact that there are people on the roads who are not qualified to drive.

Jaywalking is another problem. If one leaves this House and drives to the first set of traffic lights, even though the lights are green, one is stopped on several occasions by people crossing the road. People seem to pay no attention to the fact that the traffic lights are against them. If one flashes the lights at these people or indicates any annoyance or concern they will turn around and give one the two fingers because they are well used to doing that. How many people have been prosecuted for jaywalking?

I welcome the fact that an increased number of people are wearing safety belts. I am here today because on one occasion, shortly after I was elected to this House, I was wearing my safety belt when I was involved in an accident. When people are next stopped at traffic lights, instead of using a mobile phone, they should look around to see how many people are not wearing seat belts. How many times have we seen children standing in the car between the front seats? Usually this happens when the mother is driving, but sometimes the father is also in the car. Can one think of anything more dangerous or more irresponsible than a child standing between the two front seats? How many have been convicted of that offence? These are those who say they love their children – they do – yet one sees their little darling standing between the front seats. If the driver has to apply the brake sharply, the child will go through the windscreen. That is totally irresponsible.

In recent years there has been a big improvement in road signage. It is not the same on country roads, where some seem to think it is a big joke to turn the signs around and have people going in the wrong direction rather like the Minister for Finance with his budget. The annoyance caused by people suddenly noticing they are going the wrong way or unable to read the signs properly is a big danger on the road.

In villages like Rathfarnham which are now part of the Dublin urban area there are no signposts indicating "This is Rathfarnham" or the signposts are inadequate with the result that people, particularly those like me, who do not know their way around some of these areas all that well, must stick to the middle of the road looking out for clues to where they are on both sides of the road. All these contribute to dangerous driving and bad manners on the road and are matters which the Minister ought to take into consideration.

The problem of deliveries to premises on street corners, particularly pubs most of which are situated on street corners, was raised in the House a number of years ago. It was strongly suggested that publicans were making enough money to make alternative arrangements and that they should not park big delivery trucks on street corners at peak hours holding up traffic and unsighting other drivers on the road. Something should be done about this. It would not take much money to rectify it. There should be by-laws which the Garda could enforce to address the problem. It is something which leads to frustration and danger on the road.

There is a disproportionate number of fatal accidents on roads adjacent to the Border. Deputies from Border areas are concerned about the matter and I have heard Deputy McGahon raise it on a number of occasions. It is a fact that there are a greater number of accidents and more severe accidents on roads adjacent to the Border. There must be some reason for this. Someone suggested to me that in Northern Ireland there is no political distinction made when people refer to the Free State, that those from republican, Nationalist or Unionist backgrounds invariably refer to this jurisdiction as the Free State and there is no political connotation in it. When the people of County Tyrone are going to County Monaghan they just say, "I am going over to the State," and there is no political point being made. However, it seems that on occasion there is a "free" state mentality expressed by those coming over the Border to the effect that they are out of that damn place in the North. That was particularly the case before the Good Friday Agreement when there was a different sort of attitude. I myself felt it coming over the Border. Unfortunately, that or something else must contribute to the fact that there are so many accidents which are caused by Six County Ulster men and women adjacent to the Border. Will the Minister state whether the penalty points system will be part of the new co-operation, North and South? Will offences committed south of the Border be held against a person with a Northern licence and will offences committed north of the Border be held against a person with a Southern licence? I do not want to be a killjoy, but there are too many being killing on our roads. Considering the carnage, when considering this Bill we must examine every possibility of reducing it. It is in that context that I ask the Minister to look at some of the suggestions I have made. I have done my best not to repeat points made by other speakers and hope the Minister will think that at least some of my points are worthy of consideration.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill which deserves the attention of everybody in the House. The Government's campaign to reduce the number of deaths and driving offences on our roads has been under way since the launch of the national roads strategy in 1998. That strategy has already resulted in a 12% reduction in the number of road deaths since 1997 and a 25% reduction in serious injuries.

The Bill allows the Government to step its campaign up a gear and paves the way for the introduction of the penalty points system, a key component of the national roads strategy. Opposition claims that the system has been stalled due to lack of resources are a prime example of a misunderstanding of the complexities and procedures involved in bringing it to fruition. Significant preparatory work has been carried out to ensure the proposed system is both effective and foolproof. The Government accepts that there is a need to be very careful regarding the formulation of the legislation regarding the system to ensure it will be constitutionally solid.

Measures are under way to link together related databases such as the Garda information technology system PULSE, the Department of the Environment and Local Government national driver file, located in Shannon, and the local authority records of licences issued as well as those of the courts system. This will need to work efficiently in order for points to be awarded. It is a massive software task on which work is proceeding with a significant chunk already completed.

Tenders were sought by the Garda in May this year for the development and implementation of the national fixed charges processing system within the PULSE computer system and a general PULSE central records achieving system area. I understand the tenders have been received and are being evaluated. It is expected that a contract will be awarded shortly and the system will be ready for testing by mid-2002 and in operation by the end of that year.

The penalty points system, however, is only one element of the Bill. Overall, the proposals in the Bill will play a key role in ensuring the Government achieves the target set out in the road safety strategy of reducing by 25% the number of fatal accidents occurring between the hours of 9 p.m. and 3 a.m., which are commonly drink related.

Almost 10,500 detections for drink driving offences were made by the Garda in the year 2000. Drink driving, despite the perception and reality of stricter enforcement and changed social attitudes, remains a major road safety problem. There has been a perception in recent years that we have somehow overcome the problem. Unfortunately this is not the case. Whereas there has been a sea change in social attitudes to drinking and driving, it still remains a major road safety problem. Over 10,000 detections for drink driving offences were made by the Garda in 2000, an increase of one quarter on the 1998 figure. Some 92% of blood and urine specimens and 82% of breath specimens analysed in 2000 by the Medical Bureau of Road Safety were above the permitted alcohol level for driving, while 61% of blood and urine results and 33% of breath results were more than twice the legal limit. There were 9,532 arrests for drinking driving offences by the end of September this year. The Road Traffic Bill proposes to extend the grounds on which a member of the Garda Síochána may require a driver to provide an evidential breath specimen to include situations where a driver is involved in a road accident or where the garda considers a road traffic offence was committed. This is in addition to the present grounds where a garda has formed an opinion that a driver has consumed alcohol. The increased levels of enforcement which the Garda put in place, advertising campaigns such as those of the National Safety Council and the proposed move to selective random breath testing strengthen the fight against drink driving. The Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, stated that he has an open mind on introducing new legislation to extend breath testing, which I welcome. He said he will take into account the views expressed during this debate.

The national road safety strategy also provides for the increased operation of evidential breath testing and increasing the number of sites to carry out such tests. At the end of 1999, four evidential breath testing sites came into operation, which was increased to 25 in 2000. Thirty two Garda stations now have evidential breath testing capabilities and that will increase to 40 by the end of the year.

The Government is pulling its weight to reduce the number of road deaths and to ensure the rules of the road are strictly enforced. The Opposition should be advised that additional mobile detection units, or GATSO vans, have been in operation countrywide under the Government's road safety strategy to clamp down on excessive speeding. Six vans are currently in operation and the Garda was issued with another 188 laser guns in 2000. A total of 34 in-car camera systems and two unmarked motorcycles with in-built cameras are currently in use.

A pilot project of fixed speed cameras was introduced on the N1 in Louth, Meath and Dublin. This new system will significantly increase the rate of detection of excess speeding. At present, there are fixed speed cameras on the N2, the N3, the N4 and the M50 with plans for an aggressive extension of them nationwide. The national road strategy has succeeded in reducing the number of road fatalities by 12% at a time when the number of motorists continues to increase. Allied to that is a 25% reduction in the number of serious injuries as a result of road accidents. More than 224,000 on the spot fines were issued last year compared to 179,000 in 1999 and 130,000 in 1998. The number of these fines issued in 2001 shows a further increase and today stands at 253,000. Also, 48,000 on the spot fines were issued for failing to wear a seatbelt.

We have also seen two resource packs for both primary and secondary schools, the introduction of the national car test and the driver theory test in June 2001. This test provides a supplement to the long-standing practical test and will encourage a deeper and more structured understanding by novice drivers of information and behaviour which will help them become safer drivers. Positive action is being taken by the Government, the Garda and all agencies responsible for road safety promotion to reduce injury and death on the roads.

I agree with the point made by Deputy Currie about people not parking properly in car parks, including those of Leinster House. There is nothing more disgusting than to drive into a hospital car park and find that one car is occupying two spaces by parking across the line. Another problem is drivers taking up spaces allocated for people with disabilities in hospital grounds, local authority yards and particularly at supermarkets. Recently, in my local supermarket I questioned a woman, in a car with three children, who took up one of two disabled spaces even though there were about 200 other spaces available. I will not repeat what she said to me. People have no respect for these spaces.

Deputy Haughey made a valid point about the use of country roads by people to avoid towns and villages. Limerick Corporation and County Council have a good network of roads, which has improved in recent years. The road from Adare to Annacotty will mean people can avoid the city. At present, to avoid going through the city, drivers go through the Raheen industrial estate and other areas in the morning. It causes major problems to people in these areas, particularly where there are national schools. Parents have to cope with a huge volume of traffic when they take their children to school because, to save a few minutes, cars avoid the main road into Limerick.

I also agree with what Deputy Currie said about the use of mobile phones. Many people use them while driving even though hands-free sets are available to avoid this. There are so many people who appear to be using mobile phones that I often think they must be talking to themselves.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. The Government's primary focus in updating this legislation is the safe usage of the roads network. I am sure there is no Member of the Oireachtas who does not have a close family member or friend who has lost his or her life prematurely through road death. I lost two good friends in traffic accidents in recent years. It is a horrific experience which one tries to figure out and to explain. We should use this legislation to ensure that fewer people lose their lives on the roads.

There are many reasons people die on our roads. In recent years the increase in the number of cars on our roads has led to congestion in rural areas as well as in major urban areas. In tandem with the legislation, every citizen must pay more attention to road safety. We all know the advertisements on television and radio which portray the carnage. At the funeral of a friend who died in an accident, someone commented that it gives us a sense of perspective. It does for about 30 seconds as people quickly move on.

Many speakers mentioned mobile phones. Public representatives are probably among the biggest culprits as we are constantly on the phone. How many calls do those of us who drive from Cork to Dublin or from Dublin to Cork make during the journey? Hands-free sets are available, but drivers seem to prefer using the phone up to the ear. We must ensure they use hands-free sets. They should be encouraged to switch off the phone to avoid distractions while driving. I acknowledge that some second level schools provide instruction in driving practice and driver education. Good driving practice and consideration for other road users should be taught to young people in school.

The phenomenon of road rage is now being dealt with in the courts. Everybody is in a hurry on our roads. A queue of traffic will irritate some one under pressure of time. Road rage is not the answer and should be condemned outright.

I am delighted to see the large number of infrastructural projects being put in place. I note that over the past year and a half there have been many objections in all constituencies to the development of the road network. While many towns and villages need new roads, people object to plans for new major roads in their locality. The argument is often made that they managed for years without a new road and they do not want one now. There was huge investment in national infrastructure during the 1920s and 1930s. This must be continued. If we are serious about road safety, we must provide the necessary infrastructure for safer driving.

A penalty points system is proposed in the Bill. It will take a couple of years for people to see the full benefit of this legislation once they have become accustomed to the new regulations. The national car test introduced two years ago is a very worthwhile initiative. We are all aware of the number of accidents that took place because of the number of faulty cars with defective brakes and lights being used on our roads. The NCT is, therefore, very important. We must ensure that, if we have a proper road network, drivers abide by strict laws such as those proposed in this legislation and that vehicles are up to standard.

The driver theory test is vital. We all learned the rules of the road before taking the driving test, but the new system ensures drivers will know them better. They will have to learn them well enough to complete a written test. I suggest that a refresher course should be considered for all drivers.

I agree wholeheartedly with Deputies Haughey, Currie and Wade on the issue of disabled drivers' parking spaces which are being misused by able bodied drivers. It is deplorable to see this happen in hospital car parks. The fines cannot be large enough for this offence. Parking spaces for disabled drivers are designated for those less mobile than the rest of the population. We should show leadership by pointing out to anyone who misuses a disabled driver's parking space that these spaces are provided for the exclusive use of people with disabilities.

I am happy to contribute to this debate and broadly welcome the Bill which deals with one of the most important issues to come before the House in recent years. As other Deputies have said, we are all alarmed at the spiralling number of accidents and the number of road fatalities on our roads. One message that should come from the House is that all these accidents could have been prevented. Accidents do not occur for no reason and are not outside anyone's control. They occur because of bad practice. There have been bad habits within the driving population for too long. Accidents ultimately occur because drivers are not abiding by the rules of the road. It is essential that we put in place a modern system of deterrents to ensure those who break the rules of the road are stopped and penalised.

My only source of disagreement with the Government is the length of time it has taken to have the Bill published and enacted. I am aware that the Minister did tremendous work in putting together the 1998 national roads strategy which included an indicative timeframe for the publication of the Bill. It is an indicative feature of our parliamentary democracy that, virtually four years after that document was published, we are only now debating this major legislation which is absolutely central to modernisation of the law. I do not wish to be churlish in making that point, but rather observe that parliamentary democracy moves very slowly. We should look to introduce a system whereby we could fast-track legislation which did not happen in this case. That was a mistake. The sooner this legislation is implemented the better.

Visitors to this country all comment upon bad driving practice in this country. Young male drivers, in particular, do not abide by the rules of the road. This is a new phenomenon because many younger men now have access to cars compared to 15 or 20 years ago. I live in a large housing estate in Dublin which contains 1,600 houses. Young lads of 17 and 18 years of age fly around the roads. They have no notion of how to drive. Many of them are using their parents' cars. They have provisional driving licences. The lack of Garda resources means that they are not being stopped and held accountable for their actions. Deputy Moynihan spoke about the problems on our county roads. The problem also extends to the housing estates of urban Ireland where it can be even worse. Many bad accidents occur in housing estates. The problem relates to young men and may be due to whatever hormones affect them. I am just out of that age bracket.

One way to confront this problem is by normalising the procedure of driving. Driving should be on the secondary school curriculum. Men are obsessed with driving. The same is not true of women who are much better drivers. Boys in particular who reach the age of 12 or 13 should formally be taught how to drive properly. By 17 or 18 most of them are on the roads causing havoc. I know that is not central to this legislation, but the Minister should work with the Minister for Education and Science to put this on the curriculum and thereby prevent more accidents.

I have seen the penalty points system working very effectively in other jurisdictions. The Minister has outlined his logic for reducing the penalty points on payment of a fine. It is ridiculous that, having committed an offence on the roads for which penalty points are allocated, if someone is prepared to pay money, those points are either reduced by half or eliminated altogether. This means that wealthy people who can afford to pay £50 or £100 on the spot, will continue to pay because they know they can get away with it. If they have not amassed 12 points in a three-year period, they are free for a further three years. This is a defect in the legislation which should be teased out on Committee Stage.

On page 35, the First Schedule to the Bill shows different classifications of offences. However I take issue with some of the penalty points allocated to offences. I am in favour of the principle of the legislation, but it is important that we get it right. People caught driving without a licence will receive two penalty points if they pay and five points if they do not pay. However people who pay having been caught for careless driving, which I believe to be a much more serious offence, will receive no penalty points. A wealthy person in his BMW or black Mercedes could continually drive carelessly, flout the law, pay up whenever caught and get away with it. However a poor person who may not be able to afford an on the spot fine, gets five points. We may need to return to this on Committee Stage. The Minister seems to suggest that in order to ensure greater compliance a monetary device is required. However this means wealthier people will be able to continually flout the law and get away with it. We need a mechanism to stop this.

One of the offences is a breach of duties on occurrences of accidents. People charged with passing by an accident or not showing deference to a garda at an accident may get five points, but will get no points if they pay up. We need to return to this on Committee Stage because it could be a defective part of the legislation.

I have a question about the three-year period. I may be two years and 11 months into my category of time and have accumulated 11 points. However when the three years are up, I go back to zero. We should have a buffer zone before and after the three years. That too should also be considered on Committee Stage.

Where will the money that accrues from this go? It is a feature of most modern legislation where we raise money, as we will under these charges, that we designate where the money will go. In my cursory reading of the Bill, I have not seen what the Minister is proposing. The money should go to a dedicated fund so that we know how much money is being raised and this can then be used for improving conditions for motorists. We should specify how this money will be spent.

There should be no time lag between the enactment of this legislation and the operation of the penalty points system. From my reading of the legislation this is dependent on the Minister for the Environment and Local Government making regulations. It would be a crying shame if we enact the legislation but the system did not become operational for a further 12 or 14 months.

Section 9 transposes into Irish law disqualifications under the European Convention on Driving Disqualifications. If an Irish national commits a serious road offence in another country it is wholly right and appropriate for that to have an effect in the jurisdiction in which he resides. Equally if someone from France or Germany commits a serious offence on our roads, they should be penalised in their country. I welcome that. However, this convention relates to serious offences and not to minor offences.

I now take up a theme mentioned by Deputy Currie relating to the North-South aspect of penalty points. Friends of mine in Northern Ireland have been obliged to take full cognisance of the equivalent legislation there for some time. A friend in Newcastle, County Down, recently told me she had four penalty points because of speeding offences between Belfast and Newcastle. I asked her if she were to drive to Dublin and exceeded the speed limit in this jurisdiction would the penalty points be added on. From my reading of the legislation, that will not apply. If that is the case it is a major defect. We need an all-Ireland approach to road safety and to the application of the rules of the road.

In November 2000 when I was Northern Ireland spokesperson for my party, I issued a specific statement about this. I asked a number of questions of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. He could not answer me. I asked him to state the number of drivers from Northern Ireland who were prosecuted for speeding on southern roads. I also asked the Minister to set out the procedure that is followed in pursuing people for offences of this nature who live outside our jurisdiction. There is none. For someone using our roads on a regular basis, whether travelling from Belfast or other parts of Northern Ireland to the Republic, we cannot stop them if they are involved in minor offences, as opposed to serious offences. It is essential we close off that loophole in the legislation. Has the Minister negotiated a specific protocol with his opposite colleague in the Northern Ireland Executive?

Under the transport annex to the section of the Good Friday Agreement which relates to North-South co-operation there is a provision to ensure an all-Ireland approach to this issue. Under the Bill someone from Belfast who does business in Dublin can travel regularly to Dublin and speed on the N1, which is the most dangerous road in Ireland in terms of the number of deaths, but the penalty points they would get in this jurisdiction cannot be transferred to Northern Ireland. If my reading of the Bill is correct – I believe it is – that is a major defect. It is equally wrong that people who reside in this jurisdiction are allowed to break the rules of the road in Northern Ireland without having penalty points imposed here. I ask the Minister to consider that. If it requires a specific protocol with his opposite number in the Northern Ireland Executive, which I suspect it will, we should have more time between Second and Committee Stages because we need to close that loophole.

Deputy Currie is right that the number of accidents and deaths on the road between Belfast and Dublin is higher than on any other stretch of road. I suspect one of the reasons for that is that drivers know they will get away with it. They know they can speed and be careless and reckless on the road and even if they are caught by gardaí, the penalty points cannot be transferred to Northern Ireland and vice versa. This is not a free state disposition, but a matter of fact. It is important for the Minister to analyse this issue to see if it is possible between now and passage of the legislation to work out a new protocol with his opposite number in Northern Ireland. This is an all-Ireland issue. If ever there was an issue we needed to address in terms of the unification of the country, it is the issue of road safety policy on the island. Bad practice in Newry is the same as that in Dundalk and we must stamp it out. One of the ways we can do that is to ensure that, as part of the legislation, Northern drivers who do not abide by the rules of the road in this jurisdiction have their penalty points transferred to Northern Ireland and vice versa. I ask the Minister to consider that.

I want to make a number of helpful suggestions to the Minister. I know we have debated the issue of provisional drivers before. I hold the view that a person should not be entitled to drive on our roads if he or she holds a provisional licence. I know the rules which apply in relation to a person on his or her first provisional licence, but it is bad practice. I do not know of any other EU country where someone who has not qualified through the system is entitled to drive unaccompanied. This loophole needs to be changed.

The Government needs to consider prohibiting cars which can reach speeds of up to 100 or 150 miles per hour. Why do we allow cars to be imported as goods to be sold if they can reach such speeds? If we allow such cars to be sold, we should ensure they have an alarm mechanism. If one does not wear a seat belt in a Volvo car, for example, a large red light will flash and an annoying noise will be heard until the person puts on the seat belt. We need the same type of device for cars which exceed the speed limit in this jurisdiction. I am interested to hear the Minister's views on that.

My party, through its spokesperson at the time, Deputy Naughten, made an excellent suggestion that, if young men took a more difficult form of the driving test, they would be able to get cheaper car insurance. I ask the Minister to consider that. Hazard perception training has worked well in Scotland. Once a person does the training, they are prescribed to be a safer driver on the basis that they have taken a more arduous test than the normal one. Drivers who take those tests should be given a premium by insurance companies. I know one company is considering that.

Large signs advertising a freefone number should be erected on our roads, particularly on the routes linking the major cities, such as the Dublin to Cork, Dublin to Galway and Cork to Galway roads, to enable people to ring the Garda and report immediately when a car is flouting the rules of the road. We all know of and are frus trated by lunatic drivers who zigzag in and out of traffic and we are not able to ring the Garda directly and report it to them. I know reporting is not part of our psyche – it goes back to the foundation of the State. One of the benefits of having a mobile phone in a car is that one can report someone if he or she is flouting the law. We need large advertising hoardings on our main thoroughfares to enable us to directly report people who breach the rules of the road. We meet these people every day.

My comments are an attempt to be constructive. I wish the Minister well with the legislation, which is long overdue. The sooner we have proper deterrents, the sooner we will be able to stamp out bad practice and bad motoring skills which have, unfortunately, been allowed to develop through the generations. Perhaps the Minister will reflect on the points I made during my contribution.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Callely.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. The House has not debated such an important issue for society since the national foot and mouth disease crisis earlier this year. Road safety has always been my priority policy and a debate on legislation to improve Ireland's road safety record is a step in the right direction.

As a rural Member of the House from Cork East, I must travel 137 miles from Mitchelstown to the Dáil and back again each week. Since 1982 I have seen countless road accidents on this weekly trip. Young people are killed or maimed for life and families are permanently devastated. Unfortunately, young men are usually the victims and also the perpetrators of these accidents. As we talk in this Chamber, road users are dying. It is time to act.

During the debate on the Bill we, as public representatives, must be self-confident enough to acknowledge that there is no such thing as Government or Opposition Deputies. We all have an obligation to support the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, in what is being done to tackle our poor road safety record. Furthermore, we all have a duty to constructively comment to the Minister on what needs to be done in the future to improve road safety. We know the Government has a commitment to road safety. The Taoiseach launched a high level group on road safety in 1998 which is made up of representatives of the Departments of the Environment and Local Government, Health and Children and Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Irish Insurance Federation, the Garda Síochána, the National Safety Council, the National Roads Authority and the Medical Bureau for Road Safety. In order to manage a responsible road safety policy the group established targets under the heading "road to safety, Government strategy for road safety 1998-2002." Thus, for the first time targets were set in the area of road safety to reduce deaths, accidents and speed and increase seat belt wearing. The setting of policy targets was not only an exercise in political accountability, many of these goals are on the way to being achieved. The Taoiseach, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, and his Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, must be commended for their record to date. However, there is a culture of irresponsible motoring. This culture has only got worse during the years and until it is tackled the media will continue to report on a high frequency of carnage on our roads. Ultimately, the various players involved in road safety, outlined above, will fight a losing battle until the culture of carnage is addressed.

While we debate the merits of this Bill, time is ticking and lives are being lost on our roads. Family members leave the house able-bodied and may never return, or do so as paraplegics. While effective television advertisements, which have been sponsored by the insurance industry and the National Safety Council, have attempted to shock road users into positive action, the culture of carnage persists. It is a difficult job and there is driver error. We have to be conciliatory in ways, but it is time to force road users to behave differently when they drive. The measures outlined in the Bill are, in effect, telling the irresponsible motorist that there is no more Mr. Nice Guy when it comes to irresponsible motoring behaviour. I welcome this hard-nosed approach to the issue and the measures in the Bill. Penalty points are being introduced, which will stay on a driver's record for three years and when a total of 12 are reached an automatic driving ban of six months will apply.

I listened to Deputy Hayes with interest. Small cars are able to travel much faster than the black Mercedes or the BMW.

I doubt the Deputy ever had a small car.

I was driving to Dublin recently at 6 a.m. Near Cullahill I was passed by two Fiat Unos, which have engines of about 1 litre. I thought they were having a race. Lo and behold, as they passed me a courier van passed them and I did not know if I would have to take my car in over the ditch. That is what was happening on our roads at that hour of the morning and it was totally irresponsible. I suspect that the two in the Fiat Unos were going to work. I was not driving very fast and the incident was so alarming that I stopped my car. Big cars are often much safer because they cannot get the speed up as fast as smaller ones.

The Bill provides for an increase in the maximum financial penalties for traffic offences from £150 to £630, 800, and more traffic cameras are to be installed on main roads. These measures are welcome. The problems are not all to do with the road user. Driver error can often be the result of bad roads. Deputy Bradford will have complaints, as I have, about the Portlaoise bypass. The left turn off that road to go to Cork is very badly signposted. After nine years the Cork section of that road has not been completed and features bollards which are impediments to drivers. The signpost is for Cork, Tullamore and Portlaoise. Many people from Cork have complained to me that they regularly miss the turn and in frustration are inclined to slow down and even turn back. There is a role for local government in sorting this out as a matter of urgency. If one fails to make the turn, one has to continue along the motorway and cross over to Abbeyleix.

There is much wrong with drivers, but at the end of the day we can do much to improve the roads. The Portlaoise bypass is a new development of the type we are seeking. I listened to Deputy Michael Moynihan talk of the opposition there can be to new roads, but here is a development that has not been completed. I am quite sure that accidents have taken place there, though I have not seen one. I am sure because of what I have been told and because of the numerous complaints I have received. Such accidents would be classed as having resulted from driver error.

We are making our roads faster and our engineering leaves much to be desired from a road safety point of view, because of human nature being what it is. There are too many junctions on many of our roads. Another road that will also be well known to Deputy Bradford is the road from Mitchelstown to Fermoy, in regard to which there were many motions at roads meetings in the north Cork local authority of which I was a member and on which Deputy Bradford still sits. The number of openings and entrances onto that road is unreal. I fail to understand how, when a road is being realigned and re-engineered, the side roads and cul-de-sacs onto it cannot be combined. I have seen experiments done in Scotland where they were all brought onto one side road, which is one way of alleviating the problem. The level of deaths on that road is exceptionally high as is the number who have been physically handicapped and will not walk again. The roadside is like a graveyard with little headstones and plaques identifying those whose deaths have taken place. It makes me quite sorry.

I am not overly-sympathetic to young drivers as regards the high cost of their insurance. The high insurance cost is a deterrent to young drivers speeding. One pays the price and if one wants value for money, one must drive accordingly with caution. The small car with the 1 litre engine is quite a problem. When I see those cars on the road with the large wheels and the double exhaust I shudder because those speedy fellows will end up in the ditch or cause multiple deaths. I often meet the Garda to talk about these drivers and cars and I am told that there is little that can be done. These guys drive madly and the speed limit is no deterrent to them as it is to Members of the House. We obey the law. I pay tribute to the Garda traffic corps. We hear that we should have a dedicated traffic unit, but the Garda traffic corps does an excellent job. Its members are dedicated individuals who are under a lot of pressure and come in for a lot of abuse. My experience of them is that they are quite good and one could not look for much improvement on what they do. They are long and late on the road. In many cases their job is a sad one because they are called in when there is death and injury.

I would like to see more unmarked Garda cars on our roads. We all know the Garda cars whether they are red, gold or green. They are easily identified from the letter "D" on their registration plate. If Garda cars carried the county registration and there was more casual driving by gardaí, they would identify more often the carelessness of drivers. That would be better than having them sitting at prescribed points identifying speeders. Members on all sides of the House see the carelessness in people's driving, especially on a Friday, when it is shocking. People drive on the inside and zig-zag all over the place. I have witnessed it all myself and I am not being emotional or hyping up what happens.

Another thing that astounds me is the overtaking by laden trucks on the road. I am sure Deputy Bradford has witnessed it as he travels the roads from Dublin to Cork. These trucks are subject to a speed limit of 50 miles per hour. When one truck is not able to get past another the two of them travel side by side, which is quite serious. I am astounded that there have been no prosecutions. Those trucks are a danger and should be tackled.

Has a curfew for young drivers ever been looked at? Curfews operate in many parts of the world where the same problems are encountered. They are operated in Australia, New Zealand and Canada from perhaps 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. when most of the accidents involving young drivers occur. Most accidents occur late in the evening or early in the morning and most are on national secondary roads or main arterial roads. I believe county and regional roads, which have been mentioned, have low levels of accidents and deaths. There is a high road accident death rate and I hope we can work towards reducing that to zero.

I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, on producing the Bill. While there is a need for a change in behaviour and attitude, I am sympathetic to people in rural areas who drive and who also like a drink. In this regard, I compliment the Minister of State on not having reduced the blood alcohol limit from 80 mg to zero, which it is on the Continent. He will know as a rural Deputy that people in rural areas, especially those who are retired, go to the local crossroads pub for a drink. They would be walled in and it would be worse than a curfew if the limits were changed. I know those who represent and live in Dublin, such as Deputy Callely, have a different view, but those who know rural areas will know that it is not a culture and that there must be some social outlet for these people. I welcome the fact the limit has not been reduced. I wish the Minister of State well with the Bill.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. The primary focus of any Road Traffic Bill is to improve road safety. I understand the proposals in the Bill are aimed at further enhancement of road safety and that must be welcomed.

On what Deputy Ned O'Keeffe had to say, although I may have been born and reared in the beautiful capital city of this country, Dublin, and am proud to represent Dublin North Central, I am familiar with rural life. I am fortunate to be able to avail of a facility in Deputies O'Keeffe and Bradford's county, Cork. The nearest town is 23 miles from me, so I know what rural life is like. I still do not agree with drinking and driving and wholly support and am proud of the advertisement on Eastern Regional Health Authority ambulances, which says: "Never ever drink and drive".

I also disagree with Deputy O'Keeffe when he spoke of a curfew on young people and made other comments to that effect about them. There is one thing I can say about them which would make many of us in the House hold our heads in shame, which is that they are much more responsible than the generations which have gone before. It is not uncommon to see young people in a pub enjoying themselves in the knowledge that they have a designated driver who will only drink mineral water or something similar. Young people take great responsibility and care in road safety. It is very unfair that they are often targeted as the cause of all road accidents. Unfortunately, a high proportion of young people are involved in them, but it is too easy to jump to the conclusion that they are at fault.

The Minister of State said that the main purpose of the Bill is the introduction of a penalty points system. He boasted that it is a feature in most countries with an advanced road safety record. However, there is an element of cherry-picking in this. Such countries also have a practical test for young people before they go on the road. I am delighted that a motion I moved at a meeting of my parliamentary party was agreed to which asked that, given road accident statistics, consideration be given in any review of the Government road safety strategy to education, information and practical experience being incorporated in the second level school curriculum, especially given that 400,000 first time applications for provisional driving licences will be made in the next five years. I am sure if I were to cherry-pick, I would find countries with a tremendous road safety record which have a practical test for young people. It makes sense to have this practical test if there are to be 400,000 first-time provisional licence holders on the roads in the next five years.

The Minister of State replied to a recent question by saying that the report, Road Accident Facts, 2000, showed that the highest number of casualties in recorded age groups occurred in the 25 to 34 age group and represented approximately 21% of the overall total for the year. A survey carried out by the Garda Síochána into the cause of fatal traffic accidents between 1997 and 1999 showed that driver error was the cause of 23% of accidents in 1997 whereas alcohol was the cause of 11% of accidents. The figure for driver error in 1998 was 20% and 22% in 1999. The figure for alcohol in 1999 was 16%.

If we are serious about improving the skills of young, inexperienced drivers, especially first-time provisional licence applicants, we should improve the education side of the road safety strategy. While I appreciate that to do this on a Twenty-six County basis would have a huge cost implication, we should be committed to doing it. I have already had discussions with the Irish Insurance Federation and have spoken to one of the largest insurance companies on this. Incidentally, I appreciate the tremendous public advertisements they have put on television networks to highlight road safety.

The Bill focuses on a penalty points system but I am not sure a person should be automatically disqualified after reaching 12 points in a three year period. We are pushing this a little too hard. Other areas need to be addressed first, such as road engineering and speed limit zones, for example, where there is a 30 mile per hour zone where there should not be. A lovely gentleman attended my clinic this morning. He was touching 70 years of age and had been driving accident free all his life. He brought to my attention that he had to pay a £50 speeding fine for the first time because he was caught on camera speeding in a 30 mile per hour zone. Both he and I agreed that zone should not have such a limit. There are issues of this nature which will become more apparent.

I am glad to have an opportunity to speak on this important legislation. It is a debate to which many Members wish to contribute. Those speakers to whom I listened during the debate have made interesting and valid points and I am sure the Minister will learn much from what has been said.

Since the Bill was published, road accidents have continued unabated. It is a national tragedy that so many people, particularly the young, are being killed in road accidents. Any legislation which will improve road safety and, thus, reduce loss of life on the roads must be welcomed.

Bad drivers, poor roads, defective cars and bad signposting all contribute to the difficulties that road users face every day. The legislation, including the concept of penalty points which has worked well elsewhere, is a step in the right direction. I accept that a modification of the penalty points system should be considered once it is in place and working. If it does impress on drivers the need to be constantly vigilant, it will be welcome. If such a system can reduce the amount of time being spent on administration by court and Garda officials in sorting out minor traffic offences, so much the better. While a penalty points system may help to reduce road accidents, it is only one of many steps that will have to be taken if we are to address the current large scale problem.

The statistics can be quite frightening but we must concede that there have never before been so many people driving on the roads. Given that fact, it was inevitable that the number of accidents would increase. There are many lessons to be learned concerning road safety. I agree with Deputy Kenneally that this subject needs to be part of the school curriculum. This matter has been raised previously and is currently being examined by the Minister. One can never learn good driving skills early enough.

A large number of drivers could, unfortunately, be termed bad or even dangerous. On many occasions, the Minister has referred to the driving test system which requires urgent review. It is worrying that someone who has held a provisional driving licence for just a day is free to drive on the roads with no experience and no full licence holder accompanying them. That situation is problematic because many accidents are caused by drivers who hold only provisional licences. That issue needs to be addressed.

We must also examine the system of driving instruction. An attempt has been made to introduce regulation of driving instructors and I am sure the vast majority of instructors would welcome such a system. They would also welcome the possibility of belonging to an affiliated group of registered driving instructors. The Minister needs to take that necessary step. We should examine what passes as a driving test, even though recent changes have included the introduction of a theoretical element. It strikes me as odd that annual statistics for driving test results show an almost constant 50% failure rate. One might ask whether driving instruction methods, or driving skills, have improved to any degree if the failure rate is so high among first time applicants year after year. On previous occasions in the House, I have expressed my dissatisfaction with the driving test system which should be reviewed because it is not working. Any system that produces a failure rate of 50% needs to be reviewed if we want to improve the quality of driving on the roads.

The quality of our roads also needs to be examined and, in particular, the quality of national primary routes. Dangerous junctions, bad signposting and bad lighting all contribute to accidents. Accident blackspots are listed as such, but they have remained unchanged for a generation. Whether this is due to lack of funding, lack of political will or a lack of direction, either from the Department or local authorities, these blackspots have caused numerous accidents, many of them fatal, over the years. Bad roads should not be accepted in this day and age.

Many county roads are narrow and have poor surfaces, but I am also talking about poor safety conditions on national primary routes. I travel most frequently on the main Cork-Dublin road which has blackspots, yet they are not receiving the remedial attention they require and that is entirely unacceptable. A small amount of money is made available by local authorities – although not, unfortunately, on an annual basis – to deal with accident blackspots. The Minister should give serious consideration to these issues.

It is unacceptable for road accidents to occur as a result of insufficient public lighting, bad signposting or dangerous markings at junctions. On a number of occasions I have overshot the runway, so to speak, at the Cork exit on the Portlaoise by-pass. The markings on that turn-off are inadequate and inappropriate. While it may be the responsibility of the National Roads Authority, it is such an obvious failure that I am amazed it has not been remedied, particularly as the bypass has been operational for quite a number of years. This sort of slow reaction at all levels is causing problems. A simple issue such as that, where a junction is not adequately signposted, should be resolved within weeks, yet the problem to which I referred has remained unresolved for five or six years. It is disappointing that nothing has been done.

I have tabled a number of parliamentary questions to the Minister about road signposting. It is time for us to examine the type of signposting we have been using for two generations. Most of our "Yield", "Slow" or speed limit signs are being totally ignored by drivers. While some drivers are irresponsible, in many cases it is a question of familiarity breeding contempt. More dramatic signposting is needed. The Minister should examine new designs for road signs because what might have been all right 30 or 40 years ago – when people pottered along in Ford Anglias and Prefects at 30 or 40 miles per hour – is not sufficient today. We have moved on from that and we need to move on in regard to signposting. It is not a question of rocket science to put new and more dramatic signposting in place because the current signposting is ineffective.

We concede that speed limits are ignored by too many people. Many county roads where the national speed limit applies and where, in theory, people can drive at 50 miles per hour and 55 miles per hour, are not fit to carry traffic travelling at that speed. On some of the country roads where accidents have occurred and where there is much agricultural traffic, particularly heavy lorries, it is unsafe for motorists to travel on those roads at 45 or 50 miles per hour. We need to make progress in regard to speed limits on many of those roads.

I often wonder if full documentation is available on the number of road accidents which occur on county roads. If that record was maintained either in local authorities or in Garda stations we would be able to look at county roads where there is an ongoing problem with a view to taking remedial action.

Deputy Hayes referred to cars travelling too fast and to high-powered cars as being, in many cases, a danger. Deputy Ned O'Keeffe made the opposite point that some of the more dangerous cars are the small, one litre engine cars which can go from nought to 65 miles per hour in a few seconds and are generally driven very fast by young people.

I wish to refer to the physical condition of many of the cars travelling today. Admittedly, as a result of the scrappage scheme introduced in recent years and the NCT the quality of the car is better and safer but not as good as it should be. The regulations in regard to car safety should be monitored. Car accidents arising from defective cars are a double tragedy because they could have been prevented.

Under section 13 the Minister is empowered to look at issues such as emissions and various issues which deal with the environmental side of motoring. Given that this is budget week, I was disappointed the Minister and the Minister of State were not successful in getting the Minister for Finance to introduce some incentives to make greener motoring more attractive. In regard to LPG, which is a cleaner fuel, we should have tried to put some incentive in place. New types of engines are being developed by a number of companies such as Toyota. Further incentives should be provided to promote the use of that type of car because the level of emission from the hundreds of thousands of cars travelling Irish roads every day is a cause for environmental concern. Additional budgetary measures should be introduced in the Finance Bill to make cleaner motoring more attractive.

I welcome the legislation. None of us wishes to be spoilsports, but we must have strong legislation in place to promote road safety and improve driving standards on Irish roads. Too many lives have been lost. Too many families have been devastated in cases where accidents should not have happened. This legislation plus many other measures, if introduced, can turn the tide.

I wish the Minister of State well in his ongoing efforts.

I thank Deputies from all sides for their positive and constructive contributions to an open and interesting debate on this subject. I am particularly happy to note that 30 Deputies contributed to the debate and that there is general welcome for this important and innovative legislation which will directly influence the safety of all road users. I listened with great care to the many thoughtful contributions which we have had over the four days of the Second Stage debate and I will endeavour to respond as positively and constructively as possible.

In the time available to me it will only be possible to address the main themes of the debate. However, the forthcoming Committee Stage debate will afford the opportunity to give detailed consideration to the specific issues in the legislation as many points have been raised here. I am please there is, in general, agreement on the proposal to introduce the penalty points system. There was only one voice demurring from that position. There is also agreement on the need to continually support and enhance the enforcement of our road traffic laws.

A number of issues have been raised by Deputies in relation to the proposed system which will be, I am sure, the subject of detailed consideration during Committee Stage. There have been suggestions that there was undue delay in bringing this Bill forward. That is a constant theme from Opposition parties. Most of the criticism centres on the penalty points system. Deputy Gilmore, whose overall support for the Bill I welcome, made particular reference to this point and stated incorrectly that the system was copied from other states.

I cannot accept that contention and I reiterate that the design of the penalty points system provided for in the Bill has been the subject of careful and detailed consideration. This was necessitated by the overriding need to ensure that the penalty points system will operate successfully within the overall administration and enforcement of road traffic law and against the background of the constitutional provisions, unique to us here, which apply to offences generally.

I have consistently acknowledged that while I would like to bring this proposal before the House as quickly as possible, great care has to be exercised to devise an effective penalty points system.

Deputies raised a number of issues relating to the operation of the penalty points system. Deputy Olivia Mitchell referred to the fact that there is no intermediate appeal provision included in the Bill in relation to penalty point offences. In addition, Deputies Mitchell and Keaveney inquired about the possibility of estab lishing reciprocal arrangements between the system to be operated here and that applying in Northern Ireland. Deputy Kenny stated that the system does not provide for differing levels of penalty points depending on the severity of an offence.

I wish to advise the House that the focus of the penalty points system and the fixed charge system, which underpins the operation of penalty points, are both based on the understanding that the right of an accused person to allow a particular matter to proceed to court is not compromised. When a person considers that he or she is not guilty of an offence, he or she has the option to go to court. This understanding reflects not just the current arrangements applying under the Road Traffic Acts, but it is also the case that court intervention forms part of the practice in other states that operate penalty points systems.

Penalty points systems in all the jurisdictions in which they operate are applicable following a conviction for an offence in court or alternatively following the payment of some form of administrative charge or penalty, which results in the avoidance of court proceedings. The level of penalty points associated with the making of such payments is invariably lower than in the case where a person is convicted in court.

The penalty points system set out in the Bill has been designed so that it can be accommodated within the existing provisions applicable to the enforcement of road traffic law in this State and, in that context, it exhibits significant differences from the separate systems that operate in Northern Ireland and Great Britain. It would not be possible in the short term to provide for full mutual recognition of those systems.

However, following a period of experience with the operation of the system here, the question of achieving such recognition will be pursued.

A particular example of the difference between the practice in Northern Ireland and the system proposed in this Bill can be found by reference to the fact that in Northern Ireland and also in Great Britain a court intervention is required before a person can be disqualified from driving as a result of the accumulation of penalty points. This means that where a person pays a fixed penalty so as to avoid an appearance in court in respect of a particular offence, the record of that payment must be opened to a court at a future date so that the disqualification can be put into effect. Under the proposed scheme in the Bill, there is no question of a record of the payment of a fixed charge and related endorsement of penalty points being opened to a court. In addition, the proposed system provides that there will be no direct court involvement in the application of a disqualification arising from penalty points. I understand that the current arrangements relating to court involvement in the United Kingdom in applying disqualification as a result of penalty points is under review at present.

As regards the question of applying differing levels of penalty points on the basis of the seriousness of an offence raised by a number of Deputies, I point out that the primary purpose of the new system is to instil a greater precautionary approach to drivers so as to prevent recurring breaches of traffic laws. It is not intended just to put people off the road. In addition, it must be recalled that the system has been designed to operate primarily on an administrative basis. In such a system the scope for graduation is very restricted and there are grave practical problems associated with determining the particular levels of seriousness of any particular incident. The system does, however, provide for different levels of penalty points for different categories of offences.

Deputy Mitchell also referred to the prospect that there will be a greater emphasis on the potential guilt of a registered owner under the new systems provided for in this Bill. In regard to that, I point out that the concept of registered owner liability is well established in traffic law here.

The operation of administrative charges and associated penalty point systems in all states where they apply is critically dependent on the registered owner being the first point of contact for the instigation of proceedings. This in no way compromises the innocence of the registered owner where he or she is not involved in the commission of the alleged offence.

The concept that the registered owner may be held responsible for the commission of offences under the Road Traffic Acts has been in place since the passing of the Road Traffic Act, 1961. This reflects the reality that it is not always possible to determine the identity of the perpetrator of an offence at the particular time of its commission.

Deputy Gilmore referred to the introduction, as he sees it, of new powers for the Garda to directly impose penalties on motorists. This is not the case. Care has been taken in preparing this legislation to ensure that the exclusive role of the courts in the administration of justice has not been affected.

The proposal set out in sections 11 and 12 reflects practice in many other states, in particular those that make extensive use of cameras and other technology to detect the commission of offences.

As is the case in many other states, the only person who can be associated with a particular vehicle at the initial stage of an investigation is the registered owner. That person is entitled to name another party who may have been using the vehicle at the time of the commission of the alleged offence. This is precisely in line with provisions in place since 1961.

Deputy Mitchell referred to the information technology developments which are necessary for the introduction of penalty points. It is essential to the administration of the system that it is supported by the computerisation of the national driver file. The central database of drivers or national driver file will be available this month. By next Monday, 16 out of 29 licensing authorities will have on-line access to the national driver file in Shannon, which means that the file will be instantly updated by these authorities as driving licence applications are processed. All authorities will have the system rolled out to them and will be on-line by June 2002. In the meantime licensing authorities who are not on-line will update the system by means of electronic file transfer at regular intervals. The necessary software amendments to the national driver file to record penalty points and administer the system have been made.

The successful operation of the penalty points system will also depend on information technology improvements being developed by the Garda Síochána and by the Courts Service in relation to fixed charge payments and court convictions for penalty point offences. Developmental work on the relevant information technology systems for the Courts Service and the Garda Síochána is proceeding. It is likely that the required interface between the three systems will be fully in place and capable of dealing with the recording of penalty points before the end of next year.

I would like to refer briefly to the question of the overall levels of road casualties in this country. Deputies Naughten, Currie and others indicated that Ireland has the worst casualty rate in the European Union. This is not the case. It is surprising that Deputies and commentators outside here continue to make this allegation. It is important that they should have the facts and know them. The latest data for international comparison show that Ireland's rate of road deaths per 100,000 population, based on the situation in 1999, was at 11, the eighth highest of the 15 European Union member states. Therefore, we are in the middle range. However, it is the Government's intention, as I mentioned last week, that Ireland will rank among the best in the European Union in terms of road safety performance. We want to move up from the middle range and we are certainly not the worst.

Deputy Naughten will be pleased to note that section 18 provides for the introduction of a new system of quality control on driving instruction by commercial enterprises. Many Deputies did not seem to be aware of the changes we have introduced. It is intended that driving instructors will have to undergo a compulsory test of their competence to instruct if they wish to continue giving instruction for reward. Where driving instructors are already registered with a recognised body/register, which meets certain agreed criteria, they will be exempt from this test.

There has been much research, examination and media comment on the vexed question of the involvement of young people in accidents. Research carried out in Ireland in 1997 shows that young drivers aged under 25 years of age were held to be responsible to a large extent for 55% of the accidents in which they were involved compared to 39% for older drivers. Our experience in relation to this issue is not unique and what is clear from international comparison is that in some states the problem of young driver accidents is of a greater depth than is the case here. In relation specifically to the question of formalised training, experience internationally does not show uniformly positive returns resulting from such schemes in terms of the involvement of young people in accidents.

Particular reference was made to the position of provisional licence holders. The House will be aware that the new theory test is already in operation and that steps have been taken to reduce the number of people holding such licences by significantly increasing resources in the driver testing service.

Deputies Gilmore, Keaveney, Clune, Smith and others referred to the issue of drugs and driving. I assure the House that it is currently illegal here to drive while under the influence of drugs to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of a vehicle. This is set out in section 49(1) of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, as inserted by section 10 of the Road Traffic Act, 1994. The Government Strategy on Road Safety 1998-2002 recognises that the influence of drugs on driving behaviour is an issue of increasing concern. Identification of the presence of drugs is, however, more complex than of alcohol. Consequently, considerably more work is needed to develop a more detailed regulatory regime in relation to drugs and driving. A number of research programmes are being carried out internationally in this area and the strategy commits the Government to monitoring and assessing these developments. The Medical Bureau of Road Safety is at the forefront of this research and is currently engaged in a two year programme of drug analysis of blood and urine specimens which will be completed next year. The results of the research will be examined in the context of future road safety strategies so that specific measures can be identified to address this significant problem.

Deputies Naughten, Gilmore, Durkan and others referred to the National Roads Authority and the role it plays in relation to road safety. Road safety issues are addressed by the NRA, in conjunction with local authorities, as part of the overall road project planning and design process with an emphasis on minimising the risk to road users. An important element of the road safety strategy is the carrying out of safety audits at various stages of the process, including prior to the opening of a scheme.

The road type utilised must have regard to current and future projected volumes. In line with long established policy, the NRA is determining the appropriate type against the background of a level of service objective for road users corresponding to an average inter-urban speed of at least 50 miles per hour. A higher level of service objective applies to the five major inter-urban routes, which are to be developed to the level of motorway high quality dual carriageway. In the case of these routes, the national development plan provides for a level of service equivalent to at least 58 miles per hour.

Travel on all roads, irrespective of the type of road involved, entails a risk to road users. Analysis of Garda road accident reports consistently shows that driver error is the major contributory factor to road traffic accidents. In excess of 80% of road traffic accidents in 2000 were attributed to this cause. In the case of two vehicle accidents where specific contributory actions were identified, the main driver actions responsible were going to the wrong side of the road, exceeding safe speed and driving through stop-yield signs followed by improper overtaking.

Some Deputies referred to the possibility of introducing a dedicated traffic corps. The establishment of a separate traffic corps independent of the Garda Síochána has been proposed from time to time. There is a traffic corps in every Garda division with special responsibility for traffic law enforcement. In addition, all uniformed gardaí throughout the State are involved in traffic law enforcement as required. Responsibility for the Garda Síochána rests with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. He has stated in the House that the establishment of a dedicated traffic corps, independent of the Garda, would not be as beneficial to the community as the existing arrangement, which allows traffic corps members to deal with crime other than traffic related crime.

Several Deputies expressed a view that the use of mobile phones while driving should be banned. It is not the intention at this stage to regulate for a specific prohibition on the use of mobile phones by drivers. However, the matter is being examined. The regulation of their use by drivers is being examined by the high level group on road safety and we await its views on that matter.

I thank everybody who contributed to the debate. We will have time to discuss the Bill in greater detail on Committee Stage, but I am pleased to inform the House of the heartening news that as of today, road deaths are down by 18 on the same date last year. I will give the House a thought-provoking statistic. If road deaths had remained at the 1997 levels, which existed before the strategy, another 130 people would not be alive today.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share