Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Nov 2004

Vol. 592 No. 2

Road Traffic Bill 2004: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Mr. Broughan

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. I welcome the kind comments of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, on section 24, in which he gave me and my party credit for the two Bills I introduced into the House in 2000 and 2002, following our campaign on car theft and "joyriding" crime, which has resulted in so much tragedy and death. While section 24 will address these issues, it is regrettable that the scope of the section is so narrow and that the penalties to be imposed on "joyriding" criminals and those who supply them with vehicles are not more severe. However, it is a step forward for which I commend the Minister and I again thank him for his kind comments, which are deeply appreciated on this side of the House by the Labour Party.

Like many Members I have concerns about implementing the metric system. Yesterday we heard very interesting contributions from all sides of the House on the new metric speed limits. Given that the motor industry has not prepared for this change, we may be entering a dangerous period. My colleague, Deputy Shortall, will try to amend some of the safeguards in the legislation. While I welcome section 11 on exceeding speed limits, the provisions therein require considerable development.

There is general agreement on all sides of the House that the holocaust of death on our roads over the past ten or 15 years, with 4,000 or 5,000 people dead and 4,000 or 5,000 families devastated for years and decades afterwards, is utterly unacceptable. Given the death toll perhaps the Minister should have introduced a much more comprehensive and far-reaching Bill particularly addressing what happens after a fatal road accident. We do not give sufficient attention to the investigation of a death crash. We do not follow up treating the crash as a serious criminal incident, which has taken the life of one of our citizens. In the past I asked questions of the Minister then responsible, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and others as to whether we should have a much more determined system of investigation. The approach seems to be almost apologetic largely due to the tragedy that has befallen the families concerned.

A recent court case resulted in a lengthy sentence for the driver of the vehicle involved in a horrific crash in my constituency in which three young men died, and three families and the whole district of Donaghmede was devastated. While that case stands out, as it was so horrific, many other tragedies also occur. The public feels there is insufficient examination and while I know the Garda makes a report on all serious accidents, which may be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions, we do not have a regime to take these cases sufficiently seriously.

This has been a disastrously disappointing year. Following the massive tragedies last weekend, we are again reflecting and asking how we can bring these to an end. We a need much more far-reaching Bill than this one. We need the involvement of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to try to cope with the weekend mayhem — most of these tragedies occur at weekends. We are again approaching 400 deaths this year.

When we look back at the terrible events in Northern Ireland from 1970 and the number of fatalities and the destruction that horrific war caused to the nation and the people of the island, we can reflect that in the past 15 years or so we have had an even worse holocaust on the roads of Ireland. Government has a grave responsibility to address this matter. In so far as the Road Traffic Bill begins to introduce a more coherent system of signage and sanctions, I welcome it as a step forward.

I welcome the Minister's comments on section 24. When I introduced anti-joyriding Bills in 2000 and 2002, I was told their two main elements were unnecessary and that the 1968 and 1995 Road Traffic Acts adequately covered the problem. They do not and, year after year, joyriding has continued.

Looking back at my Bill in its final incarnation in the run-up to the 2002 general election, key differences between it and this Bill are apparent. In section 3 of my Bill, on summary conviction, a person who sold a vehicle to a minor would be fined €2,000 or given a 12 month jail sentence, with a fine not exceeding €32,000 or a term of imprisonment not exceeding seven years on indictment. The criminals who give or sell cars to children must be severely dealt with. Will the Minister examine the penalty in section 24 and make it more resolute, including punishment on indictment and a prison term for those responsible?

The other major difference is that the Bill sponsored by the Labour Party provided for the offences of supplying or offering to supply a vehicle to an under age driver and of organising, directing or participation in the unlawful taking of a mechanically propelled vehicle for the purpose of dangerous driving in a public place. I had hoped the Government would define the crime of joyriding. This crime should not have such a title, however. It should be called death-riding or grief-riding, as local Dublin newspapers have referred to it. In section 2 of the 2002 Bill, I set out equally severe penalties for those who took part in the crime, defining organising, directing or participating in the taking of a mechanically propelled vehicle as an offence. Deputy Shortall might revisit this on Committee Stage to extend section 24. Death by dangerous driving or serious driving offences do not encompass the disgusting anti-social crime of joyriding.

The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs comes from the south west of the city and is familiar with this crime. The parks of the south west, just like those of the north and west of the city, are littered with the remains of burnt out vehicles. The Bill should be strengthened because joyriding has not died out, it still exists. In the run-up to Hallowe'en, there were repeated episodes in one area of my constituency. I arrived on a Monday morning for a constituency clinic and saw the remains of five burnt out vehicles, some of them close to households where tormented families had to endure this behaviour during the night.

The Garda has been responsive and brave in pursuing these miscreants and Dublin City Council has also improved the physical infrastructure of the north fringe of the constituency, which has improved the situation on some roads that had been overtaken by development. The problem of joyriding, however, continues. It has not died out and the opportunity is lost in this Bill to introduce a more severe and powerful sanction against people who perpetrate this crime.

The Labour Party understands the nature of the problem. In the lifetime of the previous Dáil, I made 30 contributions on joyriding and raised it with the Taoiseach on many occasions. The sanctions under the Road Traffic Acts are not sufficient and we need a new approach. I was surprised, however, to hear that some of the funding available to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for the youth diversion programme for 2004 has not been spent and money remains for youth diversion and support for youth workers who do such great work in some of these areas. The Labour Party published a ten point programme, of which the Bill I introduced was one aspect, to encourage youth diversion and to combat this problem.

A common feature when dealing with the horrendous death and injury toll on the roads, joyriding and even traffic management is the role of the motor industry. It has been disgraceful. In the run-up to the budget, we will receive glossy brochures from organisations such as the Society for the Irish Motor Industry. It will sell 150,000 vehicles this year but it has not addressed our concerns on a range of issues. Why are cars being sold without a wiper on the back windscreen? Why are cars allowed into the State that have blinding headlights? There are problems with mirrors that cannot be adjusted.

Section 2 of the Bill, however, demonstrates that the previous and current Ministers have not had any negotiations with the motor industry. Speed limit signs will be metric from 1 January 2005 but the imperial speedometer will still be used by the majority of people. The metric speedometer is tiny compared with it. Someone in my family has a car registered in 2004 and even it still has an imperial speedometer. The motor industry should address this issue but it has never been called to account for its lack of action in this area. Some of the wealthiest families in this State owned important motor car marques here for a generation and became extremely wealthy but they have not taken action on these matters. From the start of 2006 we will have the European speedometer with the metric dial to the fore but most of us do not drive brand new cars and we will have to use the imperial measure for many years. There has not been any discussion of this or other safety issues.

With the honourable exception of Mr. Conor Faughnan of the Automobile Association who addressed some of these matters, the Irish motor industry has never taken responsibility for what happens to cars when they become old bangers at 13 or 14 years old.

Four years ago, I asked for an end-of-life, or a death, certificate for cars. A constituent who traded in a 16 or 17 year old car was told it would be brought to Hammond Lane and destroyed. She traded in the vehicle and a week later she was rambling around a shopping centre when she saw her old car being driven around the carpark. There is a grotesque lack of responsibility in the car industry and I would like that addressed by the Minister as a key issue. There is quite a large market for automobiles. A beautiful, glossy presentation from SIMI refers to 150,000 units. The market has been a bit flat this year and only 150,000 units — new cars, etc. — were sold. It is a huge market and some people have become massively wealthy as a result. While I accept the industry has provided much employment, I do not accept the motor industry has taken responsibly for its own products.

Unfortunately, we have had no indigenous car industry since Ford's in Cork. We had an industry on the northside in Santry during Mr. Haughey's time in the early 1980s but we have had no indigenous industry for the past 15 or 20 years.

Despite the fact this is a smaller market, we should insist on standards. In the context of this Bill, will the Minister take strong measures, if necessary, to get the car industry to take safety seriously? Deputy Andrews made a very salient point yesterday when he said there are vehicles which can travel at speeds of 150 miles per hour plus. One would only drive at such speeds in Mondello Park if one was into motor sport. However, I fail to see the necessity for cars to be able to travel at such speeds.

The former Minister, Deputy Brennan, had a run in with the city council over what I called the famous Keegan signs. These crazy signs were put up by the director of traffic with arrows going right and left — in fact, there were arrows going upwards, so one could have taken off on some streets. I thought he wanted areas of the city to be known as J4 and J3 and one would move from J3 to J4. We might be in J1. The signs were chaotic and the Minister rightly put his foot down. We need some coherence in regard to traffic signs.

The most effective signs in my constituency are the 30 mile per hour signs on the actual road. As one drives along, one sees massive signs. I asked for such signs to be painted on the Grange Road heading out to the M50 and I am delighted the city council did so. We need more coherence and we should lay down standards for local government in regard to signage. One only needs to go outside the gates of the House to see the chaos. The director of traffic in Dublin needs to take cognisance of that.

Mr. Moloney

I wish to share time with Deputy Callanan.

I welcome the Bill and the opportunity to speak on it. While we recognise the introduction of speed limits based on metric values is the main purpose of the Bill, the concern of most speakers so far has been road safety. Most speakers referred to the number of road deaths. Although there have been many publicity campaigns over the years, the message does not appear to have sunk in. What must we do given that all those campaigns have had little effect? The figures are somewhat down. However, when one considers the huge difficulties caused to families over the years, one would imagine the impact would have sunk in, but it has not.

Concern about road deaths is not confined to one party. I am glad the Bill introduces the offence of supplying mechanically propelled vehicles to minors. I congratulated Deputy Broughan when he introduced a Private Members' motion in this regard. Although we did not support it, obviously, we agreed with the sentiments. That problem was once confined to urban areas but it is now an issue in rural constituencies. It was seen as something funny but, unfortunately, the availability of 17, 18 and 20 year old cars caused huge concern and road deaths, of which I have seen so many in my constituency at first hand.

As a member of the Vintners' Federation of Ireland, I often wonder whether in the past it was glamorous for someone to drink and drive. Although the campaigns over the years have brought about public recognition that that day is gone, they have not seen off the issue of drinking and driving. While I welcome the Bill and recognise its main tenet, it is, nevertheless, important that it should consider how we further reduce the incidence of road death.

The Bill provides for a number of other initiatives, notwithstanding the issue of speed limits based on metric values. These relate mainly to the introduction of amendments to the legislation on the administration of fixed charges and the penalty points system introduced under the Road Traffic Act 2002 which focus, in particular, on the outsourcing from the Garda Síochána of certain functions relating to fixed charge payments, which I welcome. The Bill provides for a number of changes to the Taxi Regulation Act 2002 to assist the operation of certain key provisions contained in that Act.

We all aspire to a reduction in the number of road deaths. Even what is considered an acceptable figure of 300 should cause us huge concern. While we quote and compare figures on road deaths, we cannot do enough. I call for a greater combined effort to get try to get the message out that we are not doing enough. When we compare safety standards across Europe, we see ours are not nearly high enough.

I take the point made by Deputy Broughan when he quoted the various pre-budget statements from the motor industry. While the members of SIMI ask us to take their concerns on board, it is important that the industry also takes our concerns on board. Much more could be done by the industry in the lead up to the budget when it could make a pitch for greater road safety and an increase in standards.

The introduction of the penalty points system in 2002 has further increased progress in the area of road safety. From November 2002 to end of September 2004, the number of road deaths has fallen from 775 to 675 in comparison with the previous 12 months. The above measures have helped to save in the region of 100 lives if one basis it on the previous figures. People should be congratulated on this. The Government's target is to ensure there are no more than 300 deaths on the roads by 2006. In setting our goals up to the end of 2006, we are supported by the knowledge that the strategic approach we have adopted has been shown to deliver greater benefits in the long term.

It is always worth noting that the most successful countries in the EU in terms of implementing reductions in road casualty numbers on a sustained basis are those which adopted such an approach. In adopting our road strategy we can learn from the experience of states such as the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK which are among the leaders in the European Union in terms of road safety performance. We have also adopted many of the recommendations of those organisations which have made a contribution to road safety. Often the point is made that accident statistics come about either through dangerous driving, excessive speed or alcohol. We must also examine the whole aspect of making roads safer and increasing the level of investment to ensure this. Many Deputies have made the point that Garda activities seem concentrated mainly on rural roads. Such emphasis often displays poor judgment.

Recently I took a submission from people acting on behalf of the elderly and while it may be somewhat over the top, I believe it could be worth considering. Persons over 75 have made an appeal that the Department should consider the possibility of a licence which would allow them to drive within a five mile radius of their homes. Any breach of that would clearly be outside the terms of their insurance cover. This appeal has been made to me on a regular basis and while I initially thought it was silly, I have nevertheless come to accept the reason for it. Certain constraints could be put in place as regards such a proposal and it might be confined to more rural areas.

Equally, the general impression is that on certain rural roads there is increased Garda activity while on main roads, where there is a higher incidence of road traffic accidents, there is not the same level of intensity. That is something that must be examined. However, legislation alone is not sufficient to tackle the issue of road safety. We must seek to change the country's entire driving culture. It is imperative that young people appreciate the responsibilities attached to holding a driver's licence. I commend the Irish School of Motoring which, in conjunction with Mondello Park race track, is launching a new initiative to teach young people to drive responsibly and promoting education on the dangers of speeding. I also congratulate the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, who is embracing this initiative and will attend the launch shortly.

A debate on road safety must include the condition of the roads. While I am aware of the adage "a bad workman blames his tools", it must be conceded, nonetheless, that bad roads contribute to traffic accidents. I recognise the progress made by the Government as regards the road upgrades programme under the National Development Plan 2000-2006. To date, 44 projects, a total of 210 km, including 76 km of motorway and 233 km of dual carriageway have been completed. This should be part of a strategy that ensures we maximise road safety.

I commend the introduction of fixed charges and penalty points as another step towards reducing deaths on our roads. I welcome the relevant provisions for this in the Bill, which I believe will put sufficient networks in place to fully support fixed charges and penalty points. Certain aspects of the pilot IT system are to be outsourced to relieve administrative pressure on the Garda and we all welcome that. This will ensure that the system functions more effectively. There have been delays in notifying people they have received penalty points and this measure should obviate that.

I welcome the measure in the Bill that will give greater clarity to the role of the Courts Service. The Bill seeks to review speed limits. Indeed the first offence to incur penalty points in 2002 related to speed limits. The current general speed limit is to be replaced by separate limits applied to national and non-national roads outside urban areas. To this end local authorities are involved in reviewing speed limits in 43 locations.

In response to those who have criticised some of these speed limits I emphasise that unrealistically low limits would bring the whole system into disrepute. If people are to believe in the efficacy of speed limits, they must have confidence in the system and believe they are sensible. I welcome provisions in the Bill that will see speed limits on secondary or country roads reduced to 80 kph. The legislation also provides for car speedometers to be kph-denominated in accordance with European norms, in line with the relevant EU directive. I commend the Bill and anticipate it being supported in its overall objective of trying to reduce the difficulties of road traffic and in particular the incidence of death on roads.

Mr. Callanan

I welcome the Road Traffic Bill 2004. The purpose of this legislation, as with many other Bills brought forward by the Government, is to make roads safer. Section 5 provides for a speed limit of 50 kph to apply in built-up areas. This replaces the current 30 mph in built-up areas. Section 6, which introduces a new speed limit of 80 kph will apply on all regional and county roads outside built-up areas. This is equivalent to 50 mph and replaces the current 60 mph speed limit. A new speed limit of 100 kph will apply to all national roads outside built-up areas and is provided for under section 7. This speed limit will replace the present general limit of 60 mph on all national roads outside urban areas. Section 8 establishes that the speed limit for motorways will be 120 kph. This replaces the current motorway limit of 70 mph.

The main changes in the Bill are a reduction from 60 mph to 50 mph on all regional and county roads. These roads are generally not fit for great speed and by slowing down the traffic there should be fewer deaths and accidents. I acknowledge the work done by the Department over the past few years in terms of road improvements. The Government has invested heavily in road construction under the National Development Plan 2000-2006. To date, 44 projects, totalling 310 km, including 76 km of motorway and 203 km of standard dual carriageway, have been completed. In addition, work is under way on 20 projects, totalling 203 km, including upgrading 157 km to motorway and dual carriageway standard, while another eight projects, totalling 58 km, are at tender stage.

As regards the five major inter-urban routes, at the end of 2003 nearly 30% had been upgraded to motorway or dual carriageway standard, with work currently under way on approximately a further 12%. This ensures that priority is given to addressing the needs of urban bypasses and traffic congestion. I welcome the start of the Loughrea bypass and thank the previous Minister for bringing this about. It will mean a great improvement for the town of Loughrea as well as for motorists travelling from Dublin to Galway. There have been tremendous bottlenecks in Loughrea and it will be great to see it bypassed by the end of next year.

Planning to CPO stage is going ahead on the Dublin-Galway M6 motorway and I look forward to its completion as soon as possible. For far too long new roads were constructed in the eastern part of the country while neglecting other areas. The Government is now building roads to the regions. There is still much work to be done on regional and county roads to bring them up to an acceptable standard.

There is a chronic problem on the Tuam-Galway road, at Claregalway, for example, as seen on the news recently, with an enormous build-up of traffic. A bypass is needed there. There is also the Loughrea-Gort-Ennis road, which is not up to standard and needs improvement. Good work has been done in improving accident blackspots in many locations. Dangerous and narrow bridges are a problem in rural areas and need to be addressed, as well as verge trimming on regional and county roads, to improve visibility and help reduce accidents. Verge trimming along county roads would significantly improve safety.

There is a problem in County Galway with telecommunications poles, which are extremely dangerous. The Minister should contact Eircom to ask it to co-operate with the National Roads Authority to remove the poles where necessary.

In the west, we are very supportive of the provision of a railway to link our major towns and reduce the volume of traffic on our roads. Commuter trains from Tuam to Galway and Ballinasloe and Athenry to Galway could be provided very quickly and at little cost.

The Bill makes it an offence to sell a mechanically propelled vehicle to a minor, which is very welcome. Many accidents have taken place as a result of minors driving cars which go out of control.

As a member of the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business which prepared a report on the cost of insurance, I welcome the Bill. The Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003, the legislation on fraudulent claims, the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Bill 2004 and the Road Traffic Bill are contributing factors in the continuing reduction in the cost of insurance. As Ireland and Irish roads have been made safer, the cost of claims has been reduced. I call on insurance companies to reduce premiums further on the enactment of the Bill, which I commend to the House.

Mr. F. McGrath

I wish to share time with Deputy Gormley.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. F. McGrath

I welcome the opportunity to debate the important Road Traffic Bill 2004. Most people in our society have a car and most families have two while some have three. Traffic is significant in our lives and if we do not face up to finding constructive ways to deal with it, we will continue to choke our cities and towns. Poor planning and years of neglect mean we are playing catch up in terms of traffic issues. There is hope, however, and a way to deal with the crisis.

Before I turn to the detail of the legislation, I wish to discuss the key issues of public safety and proper planning and development of our roads on which we must focus. As the safety of citizens must be placed at the top of the political agenda, I welcome and recognise the positive aspects of the Bill. We face the nightmare of many workers having to spend three to four hours per day in their cars, stuck in traffic in order to get to work while others travel on overcrowded trains and DART services. This is completely unacceptable. We must face up to this reality and get something done soon. There are young couples who do not get home from work to relieve their child care services until 8 p.m. This does not constitute a proper quality of life and is a recipe for disaster for the broader society. The people involved must be included in today's debate. We must deal with congestion, pollution and the stress experienced by members of society.

When one considers the legislation, one sees that its primary purpose is to introduce a new system of speed limits based on metric values. The Bill also provides for the adoption of changes to the administration of the fixed-charge system for traffic offences including the out-sourcing of certain functions of the Garda. It also introduces a new offence relating to the supply of mechanically propelled vehicles to minors, which is especially welcome. The Bill extends and clarifies the application of exemptions from traffic and parking restrictions for emergency vehicles and provides for other miscellaneous changes to the Road Traffic Acts 1961 to 2003 as well as for certain technical amendments to the provisions of the Taxi Regulation Act 2003.

Section 8 provides for a default speed limit on motorways of 120 km per hour to replace the current limit of 70 mph. I confess that I have been one of those who has breached the current limit and in the last few days received penalty points. While I put up my hand and accept full responsibility for travelling at 14 mph above the limit, I urge the Minister to consider proper limits in suitable and recognisable areas. Where a person is travelling at 14 mph above the limit and driving very slowly, he or she still manages to incur penalty points. It is something the Minister should examine.

In the context of traffic issues, it is very important to examine the details of the debate on the Dublin Port tunnel which affects my constituency. I challenge the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, who said last week that those of us who raised the concerns of local residents did so on the basis of inaccurate information. I remind Deputy Cullen that there have been 176 recognised incidents in the Fairview-Marino-Drumcondra area. There have been cracks in ceilings, external cracks, cracks in walls and toilets have shaken during tunnelling. There have been significant noise and disruption, floor boards have been twisted and serious damage has been done to conservatories. Hairline cracks have appeared as have cracks in garden walls, roof tiles have been displaced and panes of glass have shattered. Mirrors have fallen off walls. These are just some of the incidents I raised with the Minister last week and I hope he will take my concerns on board. Prior to the commencement of the construction of the tunnel, a number of other routes were suggested, the choice of which would have made a great difference to the local community. I raise these issues during this discussion on the Road Traffic Bill on behalf of the people of Marino, Fairview, Santry and Drumcondra.

Section 9(3) provides that local authorities must enter a consultation process when making by-laws. Section 9(3)(a) requires county councils to consult urban authorities in their counties on proposals relating to local roads while section 9(3)(b) requires local authorities to consult the Garda Commissioner on proposals for inclusion in by-laws. In each case, a period of one month is allowed for the receipt of representations following the date on which a consultation notice is issued. The word “consultation” is often abused as one will find if one asks the residents of Marino, Fairview, Santry and Drumcondra about consultation with them on the Dublin Port tunnel.

It is important that we refrain from hammering the motorist again and again in the context of traffic and the motor industry though it is now trendy to do so. The Environmental Protection Agency's estimate of CO2 emissions from the transport sector is too high as it is based on fuel sales in the State. The high rate of fuel smuggling to the North and of cross-Border fuel purchases severely distorts the State's fuel consumption statistics. It is estimated that up to 670,000 tonnes of fuel representing 19% of recorded fuel consumption in the State was consumed in the North. As the reverse was the case in the base year 1990, the growth in CO2 emissions recorded in the EPA report is grossly exaggerated.

Improved vehicle and fuel emission standards and new EU directives lead experts to say emissions of non-CO2 gases by cars have declined by more than 50% since 1990. Emissions per vehicle are now almost as low as one quarter of the 1990 level. Improvements in fuel efficiency are set to continue under the commitments made by the motor industry to the European Union and I acknowledge this progressive development. The average CO2 emission per kilometre for new passenger cars sold in Ireland fell to 160 g per kilometre in 2002 representing a decrease of almost 10% since 1995. These are sensible issues to raise involving sensible proposals which the Minister should consider very seriously.

To deal with public safety in the context of road traffic requires behavioural changes. I accept that people must change their attitudes to speeding. We must consider accidents and when they happen. As it is usually between the midnight and 3 a.m., gardaí working on traffic duty should focus on these times. These hours are also very busy for the Garda in terms of public order. I welcome any development in this context and urge the Government to consider the introduction of traffic police whom we urgently need. We have moved on in terms of drink driving and most people accept the rules in this area as a part of life.

Local authorities and the Minister must address the issue of dangerous bends on small roads from the point of view of construction. We must invest in road safety awareness which has been treated in the past as a joke in schools and the wider society. I welcome this debate and call on the Cabinet to consider these constructive proposals which are based on reality, common sense, road safety and, above all, the public good.

Mr. Gormley

I regard the legislation as cowardly and a missed opportunity. One of the last acts of the former Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, was to introduce a new road safety strategy which states: "The advancement of full random breath testing is strongly recommended for the purpose of establishing a clear deterrent for motorists against drinking and driving." Unfortunately, we tolerate drink-driving and those selfish, irresponsible and dangerous people who choose to drink and drive. The Minister tolerates drink-driving by not addressing it properly in the legislation. He has failed to tackle the issue. He does not have the courage or the bottle to tackle drink-driving.

Mr. Durkan

No pun intended.

Mr. Gormley

The failure to tackle drink-driving will mean that between now and the next general election, 300 people will die on our roads because of drink-driving. That should not be tolerated under any circumstance. If 300 people were to die in an accident of any description, there would be a call for a public inquiry and a call for immediate action, yet we allow this to continue because, apparently, it is part of our culture. We accept it. I do not agree with the previous speaker who said we are now dealing with the issue. We are not. I remember as a young person looking at advertisements on television which stated: "Accidents do not happen, they are caused." By not tackling this issue we are allowing the drink-driving culture to continue. As a young fellow I worked in pubs and saw, as all Members have seen, people stagger out to their cars in which they could hardly get the key in the ignition. When they eventually did, they drove off and God knows what happened. I remember on one occasion people asking Joe how he managed to stay between the white lines the previous night. His reply that he was not trying to stay between the white lines but between the hedges. That is the attitude. On another occasion, a person said to me that he thought he drove better after a few gin and tonics. This is the culture with which we are dealing.

Anyone who tries to come the heavy is a party pooper. We must change that attitude and the way to do it is through the introduction of random breath testing. If the people coming out of any pub were tested, I guarantee a number would be over the limit. However, we do not test them. We pussyfoot and do not try to deal with it. If someone is caught, he or she gets a slap across the wrist. The judge who spoke out last week was right when he said these people should be put in jail. Their licences must be taken away. They must be hurt because they have hurt families who have lost loved ones or, even worse, left people brain damaged or paraplegic. This is the reality of drink-driving which we choose to ignore and which the Minister has chosen not to address in the legislation. We have all seen the horrific injuries, yet we turn a blind eye to it. That is not good enough. We hold publicans responsible for people who smoke on their premises, yet they allow people to drink as much as they wish and get into a car. Surely there is something inconsistent and bizarre about that.

Recently in France there was a landmark case where a couple was charged for giving someone too much wine to drink in their home. That person got into the car and caused an accident. The people who gave that person the wine and allowed that person to drink were held responsible. This is the type of case we must examine if we are serious about tacking drink-driving. Unfortunately, we are not serious about tackling it. I urge the Minister to deal with drink-driving now. The scale of the human tragedy is too much to bear and we are turning a blind eye.

We also turn a blind eye to the question of speed because cars are manufactured to travel at very high speeds. The macho culture is encouraged at all times. We see it on driving programmes where people race around and test the car to see how quickly it goes, how fast it can accelerate and so on. I saw on the Jeremy Clarkson programme the other night where he was driving a four wheel drive up a mountain to see how it could perform. It does not make any sense that cars are manufactured to travel at very high speeds while we try to curtail their speed. Surely we could have a governor in the car to make it go at a certain speed only. There are those who argue that it might be dangerous because one might try to overtake and it might affect the acceleration and so on. I do not accept those arguments. If we are serious about speeding, surely we can introduce such a measure.

These are the issues with which the Minister should deal. The question of speeding, especially in urban areas where there are children, is not being dealt with. We introduce ramps and people complain about them but we are not enforcing the law. The penalty points system is not working. Initially it was seen as a deterrent and there was a reduction in speed. After that, people said they would not get caught. That is the reason we need a specialised traffic corps to catch those who speed. We will see the result once heavier penalties are imposed. Those penalties must be a deterrent.

People are affected by what affects their wallet. If they knew they would lose their licence, they would behave in a more responsible fashion. There is no doubt, and it was said earlier in the debate, that those responsible for most of the speeding tend to be younger males. We see that all the time and Deputy Broughan referred to it. I welcome his contribution and thank him for many of the initiatives he has introduced and for his constant questioning of the Taoiseach on the issue of death-riding. It is an issue we have been slow to address because we see the car as indispensable. To take away a person's licence, even if he or she is not dependent on his or her car, is seen as a harsh measure. If that person has abused his or her privilege to drive on our roads, the licence should be taken from that person. It is time we got tough on drink-driving and speeding, but I do not see that in the legislation. I urge the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, to give the Garda those powers. He will be aware that I do not always say the Garda should be given more powers, but in this instance society will benefit. I do not believe the Minister of State would trample over civil liberties.

At present, gardaí can only test a person if they suspect he or she will cause an accident or if they have seen him or her wobbling on the road. If they really wanted to know, they could go into pubs and see people drinking numerous pints, something which would let them know whether people were over the limit. Despite this, they cannot do it, and there is something wrong with that. Will the Minister of State implement the recommendations of the road safety strategy and allow gardaí to perform random breath tests? Were he to do so, I guarantee the number of fatalities on our roads would be reduced.

Mr. McGuinness

I welcome the Bill which affords Members the opportunity to raise many issues with which we are all familiar, including road safety, speeding on roads, traffic accidents and the need for investment, through local authorities, to provide necessary infrastructure and traffic calming measures. Having listened to Members, I note they are availing of the opportunity to deal with all the specific issues that affect their local communities. This highlights the need for a further debate on the overall approach to road safety, traffic management, including its management in urban centres, and investment in the road network.

We last had such a debate seven years ago during the last Dáil in which we discussed the use of tachographs in trucks. Members also took the opportunity to explain their positions on road safety and to identify legislative measures that would assist the then Minister for Transport and policing proposals that would assist the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The issues we discussed in that debate are the ones about which we are talking today. Some of the problems have worsened while new issues have arisen. There is great concern about road safety.

This House can pass legislation, but its implementation and policing are matters for others. We must go further and discuss road safety in our second level schools in order that we can get the message across just as teenagers are about to take driving lessons or take up jobs for which they will have to be able to drive. Most of us need a car because of the lack of a public transport system. It has been highlighted that there is a deficit in the provision of public transport, not just on routes between urban centres and Dublin but within those urban centres, all of which are growing rapidly.

Another Bill is to be introduced to deal with the testing of young drivers and the issuing of licences, be they for commercial vehicles or cars. As one who spent time driving a truck, I realise there is a great need for education. Such education should begin in second level schools and be provided constantly by transport companies to those who use vehicles as part of their work, whether they drive fleet vehicles or otherwise. This would draw attention to what is happening on our roads and what needs to be done.

This Bill outlines the specific measures to be introduced regarding speed limits. We must consider most of its provisions in the context of what is happening in local authority areas. In urban centres in particular, finance is a considerable problem. It is difficult for local borough councils or corporations to acquire the funding required to plan and put in place a proper transport management system. To this end, we should provide them with the necessary funding.

As I say time and again, we all like to refer to our parish pump. In that regard, let me draw attention to Kilkenny city which is no different from other growing urban centres. We have difficulty in determining the best plan for traffic management in the city and funding is required to solve the problem. A proposal has just been made for an inner relief road, but planning can take forever. Waiting in line for funding can also take some time. The resulting burden on local communities can be breathtaking.

I was part of a local group which objected to part of the inner relief road passing through the established community of Wolfe Tone Street. I do not believe for one minute that the second option, that of passing through a greenfield site, should have been ignored. Local communities must be protected. If it is proposed to run roads through established housing estates, as is about to happen in Kilkenny, we should object. The Minister should intervene, particularly where there is an alternative solution. There is a need to oversee major projects to ensure the rights of communities are protected, bearing in mind that they may have enjoyed these rights for a long time.

Another issue that arises in Kilkenny concerns the €31 million allocated for the completion of the next phase of the ring road. We hope construction will begin in the coming year. Plans such as those for the inner relief road or ring road in Kilkenny can result in better traffic management in urban centres. Coupled with a suggestion I have made regarding the management of traffic in urban centres, such plans could solve many problems prior to the State having to spend considerable sums on bigger projects. If one attends to the smaller issues in cities and counties and ensures the existing infrastructure works properly, the State will not have to spend as much on the major plans being suggested. This can be said for roads that connect major urban centres. Perhaps major motorways are not required; perhaps the upgrading of the existing road network and the provision of essential public transport could save the State money.

When I note the speed at which certain vehicles travel, particularly trucks, I note CIE was once able to transport safely, by rail, a great volume of cargo all over the country. Perhaps in another Bill we could consider the possibility of increasing rail freight, thus reducing the number of trucks on the road. There are many reports on the subject. The proposals made in these reports should be costed and the costs compared to those of the road infrastructure schemes for which we are providing.

I admit Ireland is trying to catch up with other European countries in its road infrastructure. Reference was made to driving elsewhere in Europe. I drive occasionally in France and must say its road network is excellent. However, there is considerable investment. If one does not want to drive on the motorways, one can use the secondary roads. Both types of road have good signage and there are many opportunities to note the route one is taking, particularly when driving at night. The roads are well lit and have plenty of markings. By comparison, the secondary roads in Ireland require considerable investment. Reference was made to removing the bends. This would require a great deal of planning and investment but should take place. Many other associated problems could be dealt with effectively through the provision of proper on-road markings, lighting and signs. If one travels on country roads, as many of us do in our constituencies, one will have to agree there is a great deficit right across the country and a need for plans to deal with them.

The Bill makes reference to the introduction of speed limits by local authorities to regulate the speed of traffic passing through housing estates, for example. This is a good move. Empowering local authorities in such matters is the correct approach because their decisions can have a real, positive and tangible effect on local communities. The more powers we give local communities, the more they will find a local solution to local problems. This would be even more cost effective than having solutions imposed on them.

Funding for housing estates is an issue with which Deputies and Senators must deal. It is pointless erecting "slow" signposts at entrances to housing estate. The provision of ramps and appropriate lighting and signage has a major effect on the speed of traffic through estates. This is not just hearsay, it has been proved in my local authority and in local authorities throughout the country. Because of the success of the scheme, more communities are now organised and asking for extra lighting and extra signage. The basic sign is "children at play" and "ramps ahead" is another. Local authorities have difficulty funding that type of approach. Legislation can be passed in this House, but if we do not apply adequate funding, the job will not be done on the ground. One of the jobs local authorities are crying out to do on the back of representations made by local communities is to provide proper traffic management, road improvements and ramps in these housing estates.

Deputy Carey spoke about the use of company cars, which is associated with activities in large greenfield sites on the outskirts of the city, adjoining housing estates. I am pleased that the fine introduced in this regard is in the region of €3,000, which is an absolute necessity. When I first heard the issue referred to here, it was associated with bigger urban centres such as Dublin, Limerick and Galway. However, this is now happening throughout the country. Young teenagers use these cars in greenfield sites and cause serious problems not just for the residents, but for themselves, because the cars they use are extremely dangerous. People who supply these cars should receive the maximum penalty. While it is stated clearly in the Bill, there is a need to continue to review the fine so that it will not still be €3,000 in ten years' time.

Last night, we received a submission from the motor industry. It was a well-constructed presentation relating to the budget, which had a bearing on road safety. Imported cars in particular should go through a stringent checklist in regard to road safety, and this should be reviewed on a regular basis. Tax on cars should also be reviewed. When it was running at approximately 40%, capital gains tax yielded much less money than it is now yielding at 20%. The former Minister, Deputy McCreevy, often cited this aspect to indicate that high tax rates do not always yield the highest amount of money but, if a tax rate is sensible, it will allow for far greater activity in the marketplace and provide a far greater yield. As this has been proved, we should examine VRT. Whether we like it or not, cars are part and parcel of everyday life. Movement towards a smaller number of cars can only be achieved by provision of a proper public transport system and proper pedestrian and cycle facilities, implemented by beefed up local authorities that can make decision in that area.

In the meantime, we must examine car taxation. The motor industry made an interesting submission. Given that more than 50,000 people are employed in the industry, it is a significant industry. The sale of an average car will yield in the region of €9,000 for the Exchequer. This is the type of in-built cost that applies in the motor industry. The Government and the Department should work with the motor industry in the area of education. I found the people in the industry to be a willing group of people, anxious to get involved in this area. While they were anxious to tell their story in regard to VRT, they have a case to make. Over the years, members of the industry have made a significant investment in their showrooms in presenting their product. If they were encouraged to work with the Department in highlighting issues such as proper education in regard to driving, highlighting the issue of drink driving and ensuring there are appropriate penalties, everyone would gain. What is needed is education and all sectors working together to ensure greater safety on our roads.

The example of the smoking ban is something we should examine. When the silent majority was supported by legislation, smoking in the workplace and in pubs, which was a contentious issue, stopped. Now the UK and other European countries are examining what happened here. The drink driving laws in this country are being examined in other countries. France is considering changing its drink driving laws. Because of the drink driving laws in France, the consumption of wine has dropped dramatically, which is of concern to the wine producers in the country. A change in culture is taking place. However, everyone in the motor industry, in this House and those who use our roads must come together to provide the best legislation possible. Perhaps some of the solutions need not be re-invented, they can be taken from other countries and applied here.

I am pleased that the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, has arrived to listen to the road safety issues.

Mr. Durkan

He is into traffic calming.

Mr. McGuinness

He will have a calming effect on the House. I welcome the Bill and encourage the Minister to examine other legislation to enhance this area which is extremely important to all of us. I would also encourage him to provide the investment needed and to ensure that the powers associated with the investment are given to local authorities so that we can channel our efforts through them. We must get the support of those involved in the motor industry. I commend the Bill to the House.

I welcome the appointment of the Minister of State, Deputy Callely. I know he has a keen interest in this area and I wish him well in office.

Mr. Durkan

I also welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, and wish him well in his new portfolio. I have no doubt he will be as colourful in his application to his new portfolio as he was in the last one. I am sure this colourfulness will not be outstripped by the colourfulness of his shirts and ties, which I welcome and encourage.

Mr. Callely

I hope the Deputy approved of all I did.

Mr. Durkan

I approved of the colour scheme most of the time. Occasionally the stripes get a bit dizzy and I get a bit worried at that stage.

I am not as sure as everyone else in the House appears to be about the effect of the Bill. When I was a member of the county council some years ago, an engineer used to point out the statistics and technical evidence to back up his case that the more signage there is, the less likely it is that people will see it. In other words, if one plasters the wall with 10,000 advertisements, advertising everything from soap powders to foreign travel, the impact of the signage is minimal. If one erects three or four signs, the public is likely to see them, take them on board and the signage is likely to have some effect.

When debating road traffic Acts, we must examine road traffic accidents and the continued death toll on the roads. I do not accept that accidents and deaths on the roads are attributable to any one cause. There is a multiplicity of causes, and the State is responsible in respect of many of them. They include the quality and condition of the roads, the width of roads, lighting, road surface, potholes — somebody trying to negotiate a bend may encounter a massive pothole a foot in diameter and at least a foot deep. All of these contribute to accidents on the roads and nobody seems to care a pin about them.

It is common for roads to be so narrow that two vehicles cannot pass, and somebody travelling the road for the first time might not realise that. I know of one road in my constituency where two vehicles may pass at a number of locations but there are also a number of locations where they cannot. This creates problems for drivers who have not previously driven on the road. They presume the people who designed the road knew what they were about and that the road is sufficiently wide to accommodate two vehicles.

Road resurfacing is another cause of accidents. Bitmac surfacing is put on a country road or a road linking two urban areas, but in order to save money and surface ten more yards, somebody decides the road surface should be no more than ten or ten and a half feet wide. The result is a massive channel on both sides of the road such that the driver of a motor cycle or car meeting another wider vehicle and moving as far as possible to the left in order to accommodate the other vehicle ends up in a trench about a foot deep and is unable to get out. That happens all the time.

Let us consider the confusion that is likely to be caused by the various speed limits and the number of signs alerting the motorist to hazards that lie ahead. The Bill proposes to introduce an ordinary speed limit, a built up area speed limit, a regional local roads speed limit, a national roads speed limit, a motorway speed limit, and a special speed limit or roadworks speed limit. This can vary dramatically depending on the whim of whoever decides the speed limit, its purpose, and the length of time it will operate. It can be very entertaining to motorists as they queue up behind it from time to time.

Let us now consider the situation if one has had to drive to the far end of the country and back, perhaps late at night. As we enter the outer precincts of a town or village the first sign that greets our eyes is one warning of traffic calming ahead. We may think that is fair enough and that there is a very responsible community in the town who have everything in order. Then there is a welcome sign in four languages — Irish, English, French and German — and we wonder why it happens to be in four languages. Fifty or 60 metres further on, perhaps less, there is a sign welcoming us to whatever town it is, informing us that it is twinned with New York, Boston, Paris and London, and that explains why there had to be multilingual communication with us as we approached the town. We have already encountered up to six signs in the first 40 or 50 metres. Moving a little further we encounter a sign admonishing us to slow down because there is a junction, or some other sign warning the public as to a possible hazard ahead. There are so many signs that a navigator would be required in order to keep the driver informed about all the hazards that lie ahead, and if there were so many hazards as the signs seem to indicate, a driver might have a nervous breakdown and leave the car in the belief that it would not be safe to drive.

None of these signs warn about manhole covers that protrude above the surface of the road, or recessed manhole covers that are four or five inches below the surface. I do not know how drivers can be in control of a car and drive in an exemplary fashion with all these distractions.

Traffic turning right on country roads at night is also a hazard. How does the motorist who wants to turn across the line of traffic decide where to turn if there are no traffic lights? Road markings have been recently introduced on some roads, but one would have to get out of the car and search for them with a flash lamp. An impatient motorist travelling behind a driver intending to turn right across the traffic may be wondering why he or she is slowing down when they were previously driving normally. Even if there is a sign the following motorist may not be able to see it because it is dark or the sign is not on the right side of the road where it can be easily seen.

It always amuses me that "no overtaking" signs are on the left hand side of the road. It is not possible to see the signs if they are on the left hand side of the road. Surely they should also be displayed on the right hand side of the road where they would be visible to the motorist who is intending to overtake. I can list countless accidents in my area which have been caused by motorists overtaking when they should not, and the reason is that a sign placed on the left hand side of the road is obscured by the traffic on that side and there is no sign on the other side which could be seen by an overtaking motorist.

In one particularly notorious location in my constituency 21 people died at a junction over a period of eight or nine years. It was not that one or two a year died. On some occasions three or four were tragically killed at one time. The reason is that the crossing in question was badly designed and motorists approaching it were not alerted to the fact that it was possible to drift too far out on the road before realising they were supposed to stop.

These are just a few of the factors that contribute to accidents on the road. They are part and parcel of the hazards motorists face every day. Good drivers, experienced drivers, drivers of high quality, can also face the unexpected. If a driver, wittingly or unwittingly, leaks oil onto the road, two things can happen. If the person realises this has happened he or she may alert the authorities straight away. If the person does not realise what has happened, the next motorist who comes along loses control on the wet surface even at 20 miles an hour. There is no traction whatsoever, and no control over the car; the vehicle takes on a life of its own and goes in all directions. If the driver is lucky and there is a rough patch where the tyres can get a grip, control can be maintained. I had one such experience some years ago on a bend. I was travelling at 25 mph in traffic. There was a heavy goods vehicle in front of me which had released oil onto the road. I drove around the bend and lost control of the car. I could not figure out what was wrong. I thought the steering had failed. However, when I checked the road I discovered that fuel oil had got onto the road. Like many others in this House, I have been driving a long time and have had some hair-raising experiences many of which involved factors over which I had no control.

Another major cause of road accidents is bad driving. I do not believe anything will be done about it in the Bill. It is the combination of bad driving on bad roads which are improperly maintained and poorly lit that causes accidents on our roads.

An issue rarely mentioned is the incidence of pedestrians stepping off the footpath directly in front of a motorist. This can happen for a variety of reasons, including, for example, that the pedestrian is pre-occupied and accidentally steps onto the road. The conscientious oncoming motorist slows down quickly in such cases. The invariable consequence, however, is that the motorist will be subjected to the hooting of the impatient motorist behind who is obviously engaged in important business and cannot be delayed. The presumption is that the first motorist is expected to drive over the unfortunate pedestrian. I can never understand why this happens.

For whatever reason, perhaps because they are not paying attention, pedestrians will sometimes step into the path of incoming traffic. It is a stupid thing to do but inevitable, just as drivers will occasionally behave stupidly. However, one cannot drive over pedestrians; they must be given space to collect their thoughts and remove themselves from harm's way. In spite of this, the genius motorist in the car behind may feel he or she has a far better appraisal of events and knows more about the rules of the road and the pedestrian's right to live. This motorist will, therefore, start beeping the horn to indicate that he or she — it is usually a he — is an important person on important business who must not be detained.

I do not understand how Ministers can profess to be experts on road traffic when some of them have not driven for as long as 20 years. This applies to most Ministers in the Government. The Minister of State, Deputy Callely, may be an exception but I am sure he has not driven for at least a few years in the ordinary course of his day's work.

Mr. Callely

That is not true.

Mr. Durkan

The Minister of State's predecessor admitted that he had not driven for several years. I cannot understand how Ministers suddenly become experts on traffic management and conditions when they are driven around the countryside at all times.

Mr. S. Ryan

The Deputy will have his own driver after the next general election.

Mr. Callely

That is wishful thinking.

Mr. Durkan

If I were the passenger of a motorist in the situation I have described, I would feel obliged to offer him or her advice. We all know what is said about back-seat drivers.

Mr. Callely

The Deputy's car drives itself at this stage.

Mr. Durkan

I saw the Minister of State in a Volkswagen car which was trailing a caravan. I am not sure if he drives that vehicle.

Mr. Callely

I do.

Mr. Durkan

It is ironic that Ministers, most of whom have not driven a car officially for 20 years, should claim to be experts on driving and road conditions.

Mr. S. Ryan

They will discover the reality soon enough.

Mr. Durkan

That is true and they will have plenty of time to become accustomed to it.

Mr. Callely

Does the Deputy now understand the theme of "Yes, Minister"?

Mr. Durkan

Another Deputy mentioned the need for fewer roads. I do not know how one could cater for increased traffic volumes if there were fewer roads. Some countries cope by establishing two tiers of traffic. If we can find a way to cater for increased traffic volumes by having fewer roads, it will be a unique system. I have not seen such a system yet but it probably works in the same manner as fibre optics.

Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, a woman of certain fame across the water, had a great idea which was hailed as a green revolution. Her plan was to build no more motorways because they were causing traffic congestion and encouraging more people to travel by car and an increase in the transportation of goods by road. She never told anybody the real reason for her decision which was a desire not to spend any money on building roads. It was no green revolution. As a result, her successors have had to face the task of building roads, ten or 15 years later, at significantly inflated prices. The same is happening in this country.

I mentioned accident black spots about which during the years I have tabled countless questions in this House. I have had countless questions refused on technical grounds on the basis that the Minister had no responsibility to the House. If that is the case, why are we dealing with Bills that impact on road traffic? It is about time this issue was finally clarified. There is no sense in legislation being dealt with in the House if the Minister then walks out and proclaims that he or she has no responsibility in the matter, has no intention of taking any action and does not want to hear about any problems that may arise.

There are hundreds of traffic black spots. At one such location more lives were taken in the same week in which I had a question refused on this subject. Apart from the irony, this is tragic and should not be allowed to persist. It should be possible, after a number of accidents have taken place at a particular location, to telephone a person who will examine the corner, bridge or junction in question. Without the need for a consultant's report which might cost €10 million, such a person should be available to handle requests and consider what can be done to alleviate the problem. It is as simple as that; it is not rocket science. Instead, we hear from the Minister that he or she has no responsibility in the matter, that it is one for the NRA or the local authority. As a result, the situation persists and there are more accidents at the same black spots. The Bill contains many provisions which are of little use. A proposal should be incorporated which deals with the causes of accidents, of which black spots is one.

I have already spoken about lighting and the proliferation of signs and their lack of effectiveness. On occasion I have been driven to despair in attempting to decipher road signs. It is sometimes unclear in which direction a sign is indicating that motorists should travel. Signs are sometimes so confusing that one would need to speak to the person who designed and located them in order to ascertain their purpose. It is not unusual that a motorist has to travel twice around a roundabout in order to discover where he or she should exit. One should be able to move smoothly and swiftly on a roundabout and be able to see the sign on time. There is a new sign at the roundabout one encounters on leaving Dublin Airport, with the intention of travelling on the M50 towards the city centre. It is difficult to exit this double roundabout without going back down the road one has just left, which leads back into the airport. Why are these problems not identified and rectified?

Another problem with roundabout signage relates to vehicle lighting. If a motorist is on a roundabout and the lights of his or her vehicle are focused in a particular direction, as they should be, the sign may be at a location which the motorist cannot see. Like a certain boxer, I could continue like this all afternoon. Short of disembarking with a torch to examine the road signs, one will be unable to decipher their intent. These contributory causes of accidents must be examined. A motorist coming around a roundabout who is unable to see where he or she is going is at risk of impact from other traffic. Such accidents happen all the time.

Mr. Callely

There has been good progress in this area.

Mr. Durkan

If a visitor from Mars was to spend a weekend driving in Ireland, he or she would go home very confused after witnessing the so-called improvements of which the Minister of State speaks.

Ms O. Mitchell

That person would be lost.

Mr. Durkan

Such a visitor would be left wondering as to the type of ragamuffins running the country.

On their introduction, penalty points were hailed as the answer to all our problems. In Britain the penalty points system is under review because, for some reason, the numbers of road traffic accidents and fatalities have increased since its introduction. There is a problem with this approach. Graduated penalties should also be considered. A penalty should apply to a motorist caught driving at 20 mph over the speed limit. However, a motorist who is caught driving 2 mph or 3 mph over the speed limit should be treated somewhat differently. While precision is the order of the day, applying a penalty in respect of such a short gap over the speed limit is a little excessive.

Mr. Callely

I hope the Deputy does not have a vested interest in that respect.

Mr. Durkan

I was looking at the stripes on the Minister of State's suit the other day and I got dizzy afterwards.

Mr. O’Connor

I am happy to give a minute of my time to Deputy Durkan because his contribution was entertaining. I wish him well. It is a shame he will not get a chance to be in Government for 20 more years because he might have been good at it.

I do not share the Deputy's views about the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, because I am a well known fan of his.

Mr. Durkan

He has so many fans he must be embarrassed.

Mr. O’Connor

The Minister of State will be badly missed in the Department of Health and Children but he will bring a breath of fresh air to the Department of Transport. He has served the House by giving us much information about his brief.

Ms O. Mitchell

There is something of a vacuum there.

Mr. Durkan

It is not a breath of fresh air that is needed there.

Mr. O’Connor

I wish the Minister of State well. He will do a tremendous job. There is grudging respect among Members on all sides of the House for the work he is doing.

Mr. Callely

I thank the Deputy for his comments.

Mr. O’Connor

I am glad Deputy Durkan agrees with me.

Mr. Durkan

I did not agree with anything the Deputy said.

Mr. O’Connor

I am tempted to talk about Tallaght for 20 minutes, but I have decided not to. However, I listened to some of the contributions and I heard Deputy Durkan talk about Kildare. I was particularly entertained by Deputy Finian McGrath's contribution where he named almost every street in Marino, Fairview and other places across the Liffey where I would get lost. Therefore, I am not afraid to mention Tallaght the odd time during my contribution.

As I listened to the contributions, I was reminded of the fact that when I moved to Tallaght because of employment in 1969, all those years ago, it was a village. The infrastructure consisted of a number of country roads and there was a rural community there. If one was to go to Tallaght today — Members should take the Luas to The Square now that Christmas is approaching — one would find it is a tremendous place.

Mr. Callely

I did that last Sunday.

Mr. O’Connor

It is a great place. I hope more people do that.

All of us who are associated with Tallaght and have the honour of representing the people of that area can inform the House that the road infrastructure has improved tremendously during the past number of years, particularly since The Square was opened in October 1990.

I listened to some colleagues bemoan road developments and progress in that respect. While we will always have problems in this area and Members are entitled to raise concerns in this respect, the road infrastructure in my constitutency has improved greatly during the years. The M50 crosses my constituency and there have also been other road developments. It is often said there is a lot done and more to do. There is a need to develop the Tallaght bypass at Jobstown. I will continue to campaign for that. It is important the Minister understands the need for it. The roadway is used not only by many people from Tallaght and elsewhere in Dublin South-West but by many nice people who travel to and from Wicklow. It is important to keep the pressure on for the development of that road infrastructure

I wish to talk about a related matter and I note that other colleagues strayed somewhat from the subject of the Bill.

Mr. S. Ryan

Is this the Deputy's manifesto for the next election?

Mr. O’Connor

I have never changed my style. From the day that 7,155 good people of Tallaght sent me here, I continue to tell them what I want to deliver.

I wish to refer to the Luas which is now in operation. I ask the Acting Chairman to extend me some latitude to raise this matter in the context of the Bill. I am glad Deputy Olivia Mitchell is present as the Luas line through her constituency is a great benefit to her constituents. The Luas line to Tallaght is a great success. It is relevant to refer to the Luas in the context of this Bill. There are difficulties in terms of safety. There have been a number of accidents in Tallaght and elsewhere on the line. Unfortunately, there have been two fatalities in the south central area of the line, which is very regrettable.

It is important to refer to the Luas in the context of road safety. We all need to adhere to road safety in terms of the Luas. Deputy Durkan referred to the standard of driving here. Like most people I am not always comfortable driving, but sometimes one has to drive. Where I can use public transport, including the Luas, I do so. We must be aware that we are not only confronted with the normal challenges on our roads, which is true in every constituency, but now that the Luas comes through the city and out to the suburbs including the new town of Tallaght, it presents further and greater challenges. The Department has evidence that motorists are not respecting yellow box junctions, traffic signals and stop signs at Luas intersections, which constitutes breaking the road traffic laws. It is important to get the message across that there is an onus on road users and pedestrians to take due care along Luas routes. We need to promote that message as much as possible. I read during the week that the National Safety Council and the Department of Transport has called on road users and pedestrians to exercise due care.

I am old enough to remember the tram lines, although I am not sure I remember the trams in Dublin city, but I remember the tramlines being pulled up. I am fascinated that we have returned to such a system. Luas is a tremendous success. Many people in my constituency and in the Dublin South constituency, which Deputy Olivia Mitchell represents, along with other colleagues, are using it in great numbers. In the context of any discussion on road safety, it is important that we refer to and promote safety in regard to the Luas.

I note that the Minister makes particular reference to road safety. He said that the immediate focus of the Bill is to support the introduction of a new system of speed limits based on metric values. He made the point that the new system is about controlling and regulating our roads and making them safer. That is an issue whether one lives in Tallaght or elsewhere in the country. All of us are appalled when we view the carnage caused by terrible accidents on our roads most weeks. I am often fascinated early in the morning when I hear on radio, even on music stations, interjections of news of crashes here, there and everywhere on radio. They occur not only in Dublin but throughout the country. There is an issue of road safety involved in this regard and it is an important consideration in the context of this legislation which I support. It important that we continue to make this point. There but for the grace of God go any of us. A strong message needs to put across in this context.

I listened to some of the contributions during which strong points made about drink driving. All of us are responsible, particularly those of us in public life, and we should promote the idea that one should not drink and drive. I will not repeat some of the emotive statements made by colleagues. As we approach Christmas, the Garda will be particularly active in that respect. I am glad to note that the Government, through the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, announced additional resources will be made available, which I hope will help the position.

Mr. S. Ryan

Another promise.

Mr. O’Connor

It is more than a promise. We should not be flippant about the use of Garda resources at this time of the year.

I am no prude. Some colleagues have been codding me lately as to why I do not drink. I do not wear a temperance badge. I adopted the attitude I have to driving and drinking a long time ago. As a young person I used to drink, but I decided, particularly when I got involved in the community and in politics and was using my car a good deal travelling to and fro, that it was not a good idea. I find sipping a mineral, as expensive as it is, is what I want to do. I have no difficulty with social drinking but it is important that we strongly condemn drink driving and continue to do that.

I notice that other colleagues made admissions in their contributions, therefore, I will make one. Some people tell me I am not a great driver but that is their opinion. I have had only one crash. It was not my fault and it did not occur in Tallaght. It happened in Clara, a small village in County Offaly, famous only because it is the home of the Minister for Finance. I often think of Clara and of my little crash. We all bring our own experiences to discussions on road safety. We all have views about how lucky we have been when driving on the road. How often have we heard a neighbour say he or she was nearly killed while driving? Such incidents are not always funny.

Many years ago I took part in a discussion on road safety at a meeting organised by the Legion of Mary. A speaker made the point that road accidents are often caused by lack of charity and by people who simply refuse to be courteous or charitable. How many times have we seen motorists sounding their horns at people who take their time or who let an elderly person walk across a pedestrian crossing? In driving through a housing estate and observing the speed limit one often sees other motorists indicating that one should drive faster. The message I heard all those years ago is as relevant today as it was then. It is important for all of us to remember to be charitable to our neighbours and to give people the benefit of the doubt. How often have we seen accidents which could have been prevented?

A wide range of issues could be brought into this debate. Other Members have referred to the need for good street lighting and signage. While some of the observations were entertaining they were also accurate. Wherever we go we see confusing signs. Some years ago Clement Freud, a British politician who was also famous for other reasons, described on "The Late Late Show" how, as he drove south from Dublin he saw several signs saying, "Slow Down", "No Speeding", "Careful, Children" and so on. Then, a few miles from Naas, he saw a large sign saying "Kill". We need to take account of signs, improve them and keep the pressure on as far as signage is concerned.

Motoring will be particularly challenging in January because, while I do not criticise what the Minister is trying to achieve, I will have to struggle with change. I look around at my colleagues in the Chamber who, apart from Deputy Olivia Mitchell, are of the same generation as myself. Deputy Mitchell is much younger than the rest of us.

Ms O. Mitchell

Deputy O'Connor said it himself.

Mr. O’Connor

I am trying to figure out how to do a quick conversion in my head. Should I divide by three and multiply by two? Conversion will be a challenge and the Minister should realise that. I hope some assistance will be given to the public to cope with this change. I presume an education process will be put in place and that signage will be clear and plentiful. I hope the Minister is making the point to local authorities that they have a particular challenge in this regard. Those of us who are of the generation who were challenged by computers and currency changes will now be challenged once again. We will get by, but making this adjustment while driving will present a particular challenge. I hope people will find it easy to convert and to adhere to the new speed limits.

When I was a member of South Dublin County Council I had an argument with the National Safety Council about the operation of speed traps by gardaí. The council chastised me and said the public attitude to speeding had to be changed. That is fair enough. However, I am not convinced that we have the right speed limits in the right places and that Garda action is carried out in the right places. Statistics show us where and why people die in road accidents. Those statistics should be examined in the context of the Bill.

The issue of road safety within housing estates must be addressed. Seeing Deputy Seán Ryan here reminds me of a discussion I once had with the former Minister, Mr. Mervyn Taylor, on the subject of ramps and traffic calming measures. I made the point that the jury was still out on the issue of traffic calming. This is still the case. Like all Members I receive many calls about road safety in housing estates and requests for traffic calming measures. In my case these requests refer to Tallaght, Firhouse, Templeogue, Greenhills and even Brittas. People often seek traffic calming measures but not everyone agrees with the need for them. There is a particularly effective traffic calming measure in the Wellington Lane area where, as part of the process of opening the bridge to the south county constituency across the Firhouse Road, provision was made for traffic calming on the Wellington Lane. Many people queried the advisability of this measure and are still querying it. I still receive calls on the issue. I ask Members not to tell my party colleagues that I receive calls from Templeogue, but I do.

I am interested in what the Department and others are saying about traffic calming. Is it still the way to go forward? Many of my constituents advocate traffic calming throughout the constituency while others point out that a speeding car can bounce off a ramp and cause an accident. I speak as a representative of an area where there has been considerable progress in road traffic calming in recent times and where a number of projects are ongoing at present. Nevertheless, the jury is still out on the issue and one hears many different views on the matter.

The question of motor insurance is often brought to my attention. Is it not reasonable to expect that recent improvements in road safety would be reflected in a reduction in insurance premiums? I receive many calls on this issue, particularly from young people. The Minister and many other commentators have focused on the relationship between young people and accidents. There are many responsible young drivers who tell me about their difficulties in getting insurance, despite their interest in being responsible drivers. This remains a challenge. After the last general election I sat down and listed the issues which had been brought to my attention during the campaign. Motor insurance, particularly insurance for young people, was an issue. I have continued to campaign for action in that regard and I hope the Minister will take account of that.

I wish the Minister of State well and I also congratulate the Minister for Transport and wish him well in his new Department. Deputy Cullen was a good friend to all of us as Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. His work was appreciated on all sides of the House and was applauded, even by the Opposition. He has a challenging job in the Department of Transport in which I wish him well. I look forward to supporting the Bill as it progresses through the House.

Mr. S. Ryan

I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak on the Road Traffic Bill which the Labour Party welcomes but envisaged would be more wide-ranging in its nature. Given the problems on our roads and the need for action in particular areas, it would be more helpful if the legislation was more encompassing. It is, therefore, our intention to submit amendments on Committee Stage. I appeal to the Minister of State to take on board as many Opposition amendments as possible to ensure the widest possible consensus.

In discussing road traffic legislation the first point that comes to mind is the number of accidents causing injury and death. Last Monday morning I awoke to read in the newspapers of more deaths on our roads at the weekend. One newspaper headline referred to the continuing carnage with six more deaths bringing the number this year to 324. Provisional figures supplied to us last week showed that up to 1 November 2004 there were 313 fatalities. The corresponding figure for the same period last year was 288, giving an increase of 25. The figures speak for themselves. Regrettably, in spite of the introduction of the penalty points system, the numbers of deaths and serious injuries on the roads have continued to spiral upwards. We all have a responsibility in this regard.

Last Sunday morning there was a pile up on the M1. It is alleged that a driver reaching for his mobile phone was initially responsible. Irrespective of the cause, five people were injured, including a woman in the final stages of pregnancy. The road was closed for nine hours causing a ten mile tailback. Protective safety barriers are required along the median of our motorways but, to date, the National Roads Authority has refused to countenance their need. A constituent of mine who travels around the country as part of his work wrote to it on this issue and was informed in no uncertain manner that it was not its policy to install such barriers.

Local authorities design motorways in accordance with the National Road Authority's design manual for roads and bridges. It is my understanding that where a central reservation exceeds 15 metres in width, there are no provisions for protective measures. In such cases no funding is available from the authority, even if a local authority, through its elected representatives, directs the county manager and his or her engineers to provide for such barriers in the design of the motorway. Somebody must be answerable and accountable to the elected members, whether in the Dáil or county councils, for safety, including the provision of protective barriers on motorways. There have been many fatal accidents involving vehicles that veered across the median of motorways. For example, not far from the scene of last Sunday's accident, a priest from north County Dublin was driving home along the M50 one evening when another car veered across the median and killed him. I could cite many other similar examples.

The NRA must change its attitude to the provision of motorway barriers. I would welcome the views of the Minister of State because he has a role to play in this regard. There is an abundance of statistical information available from other countries, including the USA, which clearly illustrates that safety barriers — whether they are metal, open-box beam, concrete or flexible free-strain cable rail — save lives and reduce the extent of injury on motorways. It is illogical at a time when we are designing motorways and other roadways that protective barriers are not incorporated at design stage of national road construction. It would save lives to provide them, as well as save money for the State. It is inevitable that at some stage somebody will examine the situation and say there is a need for such barriers on the central reservation of motorways.

The principle purpose of the Bill is to provide for the introduction of a new system of speed limits based on metric values. The previous Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, gave a commitment that the speedometers all new cars coming on stream from 1 January 2005 would be converted to the metric system. I understand that up to 90% of new cars will have their speedometers converted to kilometres by 1 January 2005. Perhaps the Minister of State will confirm this.

The number of new cars sold this year is expected to be approximately 155,000, down significantly from the level of 230,000 achieved in 2000. As far as I can ascertain, the Irish car market represents about 5% of the English manufacturing base. Will the metric conversion of 5% of England's car production raise the cost of cars here? I hope that will not be the case.

Mr. Callely

Congratulations should be given to the chief executive of SIMI.

Mr. S. Ryan

I hope the conversion will not result in further increases in the costs of new cars. As the Minister of State will be aware, motorists are being fleeced as far as taxation is concerned. The Society of the Irish Motor Industry in its pre-budget submission indicated that total Government revenue from motor-related taxation in 2003 will be more than €4 billion. The Minister of State mentioned the chief executive of the Society of the Irish Motor Industry, Mr. Cyril McHugh. I compliment him on what he has achieved on the conversion.

Mr. Callely

Hear, hear.

Mr. S. Ryan

He stated that the €4 billion was made up of the following elements: excise on fuels, €1.586 billion; VRT on cars, €806 million; road tax, €680 million; VAT on motor vehicles, €437 million; VAT on fuels, €324 million; benefit-in-kind estimated at €80 million; VAT on repairs, €48 million; road tolls, €48.3 million; and VRT on other vehicles, €12.7 million. This clearly shows that the Irish motorist is being fleeced at a time when we are talking about the expansion of Europe. When the concept of Europe was being sold to the public, we were told there would be swings and roundabouts and that, for example, the cost of a car would reduce to be in line with the cost in Britain and Europe. However, we were sold a pup in that regard and Irish car prices are among the highest in the European Union.

The report, Roads Accidents Facts Ireland 2002, published by the NRA reveals some startling facts, which are worth highlighting. These are relevant when dealing with accidents and deaths on our roads. Single vehicle accidents were responsible in 30% of fatal accidents. This collision type, which involves no other road users, is strongly associated with excessive speed and alcohol. According to the report: "In two vehicle only fatal accidents ... the most frequently cited contributory factor is ‘went to the wrong side of road' (39%)." So the reason for 39% of the fatalities was that they were going up the wrong side of the road. Surely something can be learnt from this. Have we examined the type of signage provided in these areas or is there a need for this change?

The same report states that the number of fatal accidents between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m., the hours associated with drinking and driving, accounted for 32% of both fatal accidents and fatalities in 2002. It went on to state that 72% of fatal accidents occurred on rural roads and the figures also show the most vulnerable age group for death and injury in vehicle accidents is between 25 and 34 years. In preparing legislation to be enforced by the Garda Síochána and the other authorities that will deal with these matters, the stark reality is that if we took progressive action to deal with the problems identified in this regard, the age group, rural roads, drink driving, speed and the hours after pubs close up to 3 a.m., and implemented the existing legislation by targeting these areas, we could see a real change in the numbers of deaths and accidents on our roads.

What is the cost of a death? We have all been to a church when a young person is brought in a coffin and have seen the effect on his family, possibly his girlfriend and the wider community. We must address this problem.

I doubt if the figures for this year will differ significantly from those for 2002. If we are serious about dealing with the carnage on our roads, we must all consider our own actions on the roads and the example we give. An issue of real concern to many people, some of whom have come to me and other public representatives, is the reluctance of the Government to address the issue of the use of mobile phones while driving. It is totally unacceptable and frightening to see drivers of all types of vehicles and particularly large articulated trucks and public service vehicles driving on the roads and around roundabouts with a mobile phone in one hand and steering the vehicle with the other.

We have been repeatedly promised that something would be done about this matter. I am not claiming to be any different from anybody else. In my early days of having a mobile phone I used it while driving on a number of occasions — although not on roundabouts. I admit this was wrong and totally irresponsible. For a number of years I have had a hands-free system in my car and I would encourage every driver with a mobile phone to install such a system. I also ask the Minister to investigate making the installation of such systems mandatory on car manufacturers for all new cars. The Government should encourage other drivers to install such systems in existing cars. The Minister for Finance should consider introducing a tax relief for the installation of such systems. I would welcome the views of the Minister of State on this matter. Many other major industries get tax breaks, which help many people. However, such a tax break could help save lives and reduce the carnage on the roads, and we should give it serious consideration.

My final points relates to the transitional period. Have all the signs that will be required throughout the country been ordered and are they ready? Who will co-ordinate the erection of these signs? It is vital they are all erected at the same time. It is no use if one local authority does it one day and another the next day. We broadly support the Bill and look forward to the Minister of State giving meaningful consideration to amendments on Committee Stage.

Mr. Callely

It will be done; 53,000 new signs will be erected.

Mr. N. O’Keeffe

I welcome the Bill and congratulate Deputy Callely on his appointment as Minister of State at the Department of Transport. Since he was given the job, transport in Dublin has improved — I found it much easier coming to work this morning. I also congratulate the Minister, Deputy Cullen, who did an excellent job in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government before being moved to the Department of Transport where he has already displayed initiative and enthusiasm. It would be remiss of me not to pay tribute to the previous Minister, Deputy Brennan, who did some pioneering work in road transport. The fruits of his labour were visible on Monday with the opening of the Monasterevin bypass. I congratulate all of them and when the Minister of State links the Luas on the northside with that on the southside, he will be Taoiseach.

I drive from Cork to Dublin on a regular basis. When leaving the bypass on the Dublin side for Cork and merging with the road for Abbeyleix, there is a lane that has not been finished by the National Roads Authority or Laois County Council. This has been the situation for a number of years. There should be two lanes. I, therefore, ask the Minister of State to use his good offices with the authority and council to have this road completed. Unfinished roads are a thing of the past, particularly as regards safety. I have raised this issue in the House before but no progress has been made. It is on the left hand side when driving to Cork — I might get the Minister of State a job as a guest speaker some night and he can see it for himself. I hope he will refer to it when summing up because the area is covered by cones. It is embarrassing in this day and age for a road to be unfinished.

Mr. Callely

Is this where the driver swings left?

Mr. N. O’Keeffe

Yes, the old Portlaoise bypass. The second lane is not in use when a person swings left. What is the problem? Why is it not finished? If we build roads but do not finish them, it will hang over the Government.

Traffic problems are due to economic success and will increase, particularly with the number of cars being purchased. When I drive through the State, I envy the northern area compared to the southern area. The Monasterevin and Cashel bypasses were outstanding successes but I am lonely when I get further south because there is no bypass in Mitchelstown or Fermoy and I must sit in the car for an hour in both towns. The Minister of State might fast track construction of these bypasses. The Monasterevin bypass was built one year ahead of schedule, a credit to the contractors and the others involved. The National Roads Authority is doing a great job.

Everything that goes wrong with traffic is blamed on the Garda traffic division but it does an excellent job. Gardaí should not have to hide in gateways and behind trees measuring speed limits when most traffic is found on the main thoroughfares and bypasses. If they used unmarked cars, they could identify the dangerous drivers who cause most of the problems on our roads.

I am against the privatisation of the fines collection system. It is a national issue under the Constitution. We are inclined to shed too much of our business by privatising State property.

Much of the high speed driving is done in small cars, mainly by young people who drive recklessly. We have all seen how cars that size disintegrate in accidents. There is a need for education. Driver testing is one thing but people must be compelled to drive safely. If there was an incentive in the schools, there would be less carnage on the roads. It is usually smaller cars, between 0.8 and 1.5 litres in capacity, that are involved in accidents. The driving test is a success but it is not enough; there is a need for education and civic spirit.

There will be a 17 kilometres per hour speed limit outside schools. Many schools were built on national roads, a retrograde step on the part of the planning authorities. I am aware of the planning authorities giving permission for a school to be built on a national secondary road in a particular area in recent years and it is creating a problem. Parents ring the Garda to complain about speeding cars but the school should not have been built there in the first place. Many schools are built in such areas. The Department of Transport should lay down criteria that new school developments should be located in a safer environment.

I have no problem with the new speed limit signs. I learned to count decimal money many years ago and also the euro. Therefore, metric speed limits will not be a problem. Most cars have dual speedometers with both imperial and metric speeds marked.

Guidelines for speed limits are an issue. Local authority members are intelligent people but many table motions at council meetings for speed limit signs to get publicity locally. I do not want to choke the process in guidelines but there must be criteria for speed limits. The Bill provides that councils will retain the power to make speed limit by-laws. That is fine but many speed limits signs are erected not for speed purposes but to extend the limit of a town or village in order that land will be more valuable for development purposes. Speed limits should be about safety. Therefore, a safeguard should be inserted. I served on a county council for 15 years and know that zoning comes into this.

Deputy Seán Ryan referred to signs indicating a town, village or otherwise. I travel a fair bit and the signage is appalling in many parts of the country, especially on county and regional roads which leads to many problems in that people must break suddenly because they realise they are on the wrong road and must turn around. This needs to be addressed.

The Minister of State, Deputy Callely, is very much in demand and travels the length and breadth of the country. I would say the Minister of State and his driver travelling from Dublin to Cork, to the west or elsewhere have difficulties from time to time. The Minister of State may have two functions on the one day. I know how busy he is because he is a go-getter. He and his driver will make mistakes. The signage must be improved at all levels.

I support and have no difficulty with toll roads, which are a good development. They are a way of fast-tracking matters in terms of finance. One can see how lucrative they are and the amount of money being collected on all of them. Members of the House travel abroad on what are sometimes called junkets, trips, conferences or otherwise and see toll roads which are all over the world and which work well.

I ask that something be done about the Jack Lynch tunnel in Cork, which is in the hands of the National Roads Authority. The traffic jams in the tunnel are unreal in the morning and in the evening. It is getting choked up and it is a hazard in terms of the volume of traffic. It is not able to take the current volumes of traffic and the situation must be re-examined by the National Roads Authority. It was built many years ago when the economy was not as buoyant as it is now. Traffic has probably doubled in the area. The tunnel should be re-examined from a roads point of view. I urge the Minister to get a report from the National Roads Authority to see what can be done to alleviate the problem.

Traffic calming measures work well. I see them on many routes to Dublin, as do other Members, and they have been very effective in reducing speeding in villages and towns and there is less emphasis on gardaí trying to reduce speeding. The traffic calming project underway in Horse and Jockey, County Tipperary, will be very effective. It should have been done 30 years ago.

I am not altogether happy with the statistics released from time to time. I do not think we have proper statistical information on road deaths vis-à-vis other countries. I would like to know the number of drink-related deaths and drink driving deaths because they are lumped together and we are not getting a fair assessment. Motorcyclists should be in another category. Statistics are about giving true and accurate information and they are easy to compile in this regard.

I come from a rural area and I will be regarded as a bogman or otherwise when I say that it is difficult for people living in rural areas who want a social drink. I said this many years ago when Deputy Michael Smith was Minister for the Environment. Many people living in rural areas live in fear of going to the rural pub. I do not know how we can overcome that problem. I made the point that there should be two criterion — one for urban people and one for rural people.

I would like road deaths to be categorised in terms of age — for example, 40 to 50 years of age, 50 to 60 years of age and so on. That would give us a clearer picture as to where the problem lies. There is no doubt in my mind that discos should close or drinking should stop at 1 a.m. That relates to the Liquor Licensing Act. On a Sunday morning I usually have the radio on at 7 a.m. and I sometimes hear there have been three deaths the previous night somewhere in the country but no information is given on where those involved were coming from. When I read the newspaper on a Monday morning I might find they were coming from a disco, a dance or from some social occasion. Those involved might all have been drunk or loaded with drugs, as has been the case. This area must be tightened up. If it was, there would be fewer problems and less hardship for those in rural areas going to the pub.

In the areas of road traffic and drink driving, the gardaí are very considerate and are doing the best they can. They get a lot of abuse but it is very hard to do a job and to try to use discretion and to be fair to people. I travel the length and breadth of the country, as do all Deputies, and I would praise the gardaí as I travel the road from Cork to Dublin and back again. I wish the Minister of State well.

Dr. Cowley

When the penalty points system was introduced, people had a high expectation that they might get penalty points and that if they speeded, drove dangerously or otherwise, they would be in trouble. However, as time went on, people began to realise that there was a great chance that they would get away with speeding or otherwise. There was quite a change in behaviour for a period of time which brought us into line with other countries that had a much lower level of accidents than we had. There is a lesson to be learned.

In a recent parliamentary question, I asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to bring more gardaí on board. I welcome the significant increase in gardaí allocated to traffic duties. Having said that, there must be a sense of proportion and fairness which the Minister must ensure and which does not exist. Measures taken in the past have turned the public off in terms of implementation of the law. The clamping of cars was introduced to relieve traffic congestion but it appears that most income from clamping comes from people whose parking meter time has expired and who are not interrupting the flow of traffic, although I stand corrected on that. What is set out as something to improve the flow of traffic has been used for something completely different and that really annoys people. A sense of proportion and fairness must be evident.

If a motorist drives one mile per hour over the designated speed limit, he or she gets two penalty points. Surely a twilight zone should exist where a monetary penalty would be more appropriate. These are the types of situations which make people non-compliant. People would have greater respect for limits if there was a sense of fairness and proportion in the implementation of penalties.

Another measure, which would make a big difference to the number of terrible road accidents and the amount of disability which results from them, would be the provision of a helicopter emergency medical service which is available in every other European country but which we do not have. It would not be a substitute for what is in place already, that is, the good ground ambulance service, but it would be the missing link in having a truly co-ordinated, complete and effective pre-hospital and inter-hopsital transport system. People are losing their lives because we do not have a helicopter emergency medical service. It would be a flying intensive care unit which would be available to somebody after a bad road traffic accident to take them to the most appropriate hospital. With the Hanly report and the centralisation proposed, there is even a greater need for this service, which was highlighted a visibility study published last April.

Debate adjourned.