Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 20 Jun 2006

Vol. 621 No. 7

Road Traffic Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

The ever-increasing number of fatalities on our roads, the number of accidents and the large number of people suffering serious injury as a result of those accidents rightly concern everyone in this House. No Member or political party should be engaged in trying to score political points on the back of people's suffering. However, criticism of the delay in introducing necessary legislation is valid. This is a long-awaited Bill, which the House should have dealt with well before now. It contains many provisions, which the Green Party supports. We have concerns, as already expressed by other Opposition speakers that some of the difficulties with existing road safety legislation may be repeated in many of the new provisions here.

We live in a difficult time where bad existing legislation is being challenged and members of the Judiciary on the basis of sound judicial principles are making decisions on drink-driving and speeding charges resulting in many cases brought by the Garda being struck out. Many of the hoped for effects of people not driving with excessive speed or with any alcohol are being totally undermined on foot of these decisions. This places a greater challenge on us as legislators to come up with the right type of legislation and not only words in a Bill that will make us feel better about the nature of the problem that needs to be resolved. There must also be confidence that this legislation when enacted can be enforced, both in terms of the resources necessary to ensure the Garda can bring charges and that subsequently when any actions are brought before the courts they can be prosecuted on the basis of sound judicial and constitutional principles. Unfortunately doubts remain in this regard.

The Bill introducing several new measures will be largely unopposed in this House and the Green Party will facilitate its passage. We will use the opportunity on Second, Committee and Report Stages to ask the Government to be more forthcoming about its confidence over how judicable the measures proposed are and whether the legislation can fill the many gaps that remain. One source of potential difficulty relates to the proposals on drink driving and the creation of distinctions between people on lower and higher blood-alcohol levels as well as the right to opt for on-the-spot fines and bans rather than going to court. Owing to the potential difficulties, there could be a role for the Council of State in ensuring the Act is tested before it is challenged by a citizen.

The Green Party's main criticism is the delay in introducing several of these measures including, for instance, the delay in random breath testing and the ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving. Over the years the Government has pointed to difficulties in introducing these measures. While the Minister's speech made no mention of it, it might be forthcoming in later presentations as to why what was difficult before is now possible. If difficulties still exist, what are they and how can they be overcome? The length of these delays has been unacceptable. The delay for random breath testing has been six years. It was first mentioned by Deputy Brennan when he was Minister for Transport. The first mention of a ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones was made by the former Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Mr. Bobby Molloy, before the last general election. After nine years in office, the Government parties should ask the reasons for such delay and prevarication. Have such delay and prevarication resulted in scenes on our roads that could have been avoided?

Many people have felt frustration at the driver-testing system. It must be admitted that the Government seems to be addressing the problem or at least getting exercised about it. The recent proposals made by the Minister and the agreement with the Department and the unions on driver testing might result in what has been an intractable problem emerging from the tunnel. The Government seems to be putting regulation of driving instructors on the long finger. It will not start until July 2007 and will be completed by 2008. As this is June 2006 and we will have a general election in the interim, I do not know why the Government believes it will take so long to implement.

As mentioned by other speakers, a major omission from the Bill is the lack of provision for drug testing of drivers. I have yet to hear an explanation from the Minister as to whether this relates to concern about the lack of appropriate technology or whether there are constitutional issues concerning a difference between testing for drugs and for alcohol. If there are difficulties it would be more honest for the Minister to take them to the floor of the House so we could collectively try to address them. Otherwise it will represent a huge lacuna in legislation we pass this week.

The disagreement between the Departments of Transport, and Justice, Equality and Law Reform on the issue of speed cameras and the involvement of the private sector has been unacceptable. As a result the idea has yet to come to fruition. The Committee of Public Accounts, of which Deputy Fleming is a member, has considered the practice of existing policy in this area. Currently someone challenging a speed conviction through the courts has a 90% chance of success in overturning any penalty imposed. Especially given the involvement of the private sector, the new proposals do not give me confidence that this is likely to change.

Another omission relates to the arbitrary way local authorities determine speed limits in their jurisdictions. There is a lack of consistency. We have similar types of road with different speed limits depending on the local authority area. People are asked to speed up and slow down on small stretches of road. While that was an innovation of a previous Road Traffic Act, the opportunity of seeing how that system has worked or failed in different parts of the country should have been addressed in this Bill. This may yet change on Committee and Report Stages. I would have liked the Minister to have made positive proposals in this area.

The biggest fear is that of legal challenges. As a representative from Cork, I am particularly concerned that drink driving charges were thrown out by Cork District Court. The judge in question, as the person with knowledge and experience, was entitled to and probably justified in making the decision but it was a particularly unfortunate decision given that road deaths in Cork city and county were higher than the national average in the past year. When people are walking away from a court, with drink driving cases brought by the Garda not being tested, I fear the Bill will not address our ongoing concerns.

I welcome the opportunity of speaking on the Road Traffic Bill 2006 and propose to highlight some of its key features. The Bill facilitates the introduction of mandatory roadside breath tests for drivers for alcohol in a targeted manner and provides for the introduction on a statutory basis of control of the use of mobile telephones and in-vehicle communication equipment by occupants of motor vehicles. It also establishes a framework for the engagement of private sector interests in the provision and operation of cameras and other technology for the detection of speeding offences. It provides for the adoption of a new fixed charge and disqualification for certain drink driving offences, an increase in periods of disqualifications relating to drink driving offences and other serious driving offences and the introduction of broader powers for the Garda to detain vehicles. While the legislation has several other features, I consider these its main provisions and all are justified, worthwhile and necessary.

The reason for this Bill, a further element in the suite of road traffic legislation passed in recent years, is the tragic number of deaths on the roads. Every person will have known someone who died in road traffic accident. There is not a town, village, street or townland in which a young person has not left for work in the morning or gone out in the evening never to return home because of a road traffic accident. This issue is, therefore, close to the hearts of many families. In this case, legislation passed in the House will have a significant impact on lives and will show that Members take seriously the tragic consequences of the large number of road traffic accidents on our roads.

I welcome the introduction of mandatory roadside breath tests which are long overdue. Although I have no legal expertise, I fail to understand the reason it has taken so long to address this issue. Why has the legal profession engaged in arguments about whether such tests should be allowed or are constitutional, how random should be defined and whether the number of tests should be carried out on the basis of the number of cars in a county or on every road in the country? I am tired of legal experts having debates which recall the question as to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin at a time when lives are being lost on our roads every day. I am also critical of the Judiciary which is more interested in entertaining these types of debates in courtrooms than convicting defendants when the substance of the case shows them to be guilty.

I welcome the provision on breath tests. I am pleased it was cleared by the Government's legal advisers and I look forward to its implementation. I particularly welcome the provision allowing persons found during a mandatory roadside breath test to be over the legal limit to voluntarily accept a fixed penalty, including disqualification from driving for a specified period. Those who avail of this option will be taken to court and, I hope, given short shrift from the judge and made to realise the consequences of their actions.

Issues of this nature should not be tested to an excessive degree in the courts. I hope people caught over the legal limit will accept the yellow or red cards the authorities promptly show them. While it is the right of individuals not to avail of the voluntary option and take their chances in court, I hope they will meet judges who are more interested in enforcing road traffic law than finding legal loopholes which would allow defendants to be acquitted.

I am concerned that this Bill and road traffic legislation in general does not deal with those driving while under the influence of drugs other than alcohol, including cannabis, hashish and ecstasy. This has created a legislative gap which allows many young people and others to smoke a joint or two at the weekend and drive without fear of prosecution. The House will have to surmount this problem in due course because the Bill does not provide for the introduction of a mechanism to address it. It must be given further thought and should be referred to an all-party committee for consideration. Every responsible Member will agree the issue must be tackled. I would be surprised if any Deputy opposed a proposal that would result in the prosecution of those who drive under the influence of hard drugs.

I expect one of the difficulties of any such proposal would arise in the area of drug testing. While I am aware that tests can identify the presence of some harder drugs in the blood, some of the drugs coming on the market are combinations of cannabis and other drugs. It is not, therefore, a matter of developing a simple blood test which would identify the quantity of a specific drug in the blood as it would be difficult to devise an overall test to identify all drugs. I would like those involved in the technical analysis of drug samples to assist an all-party committee in addressing this issue.

While I support the provision requiring a person who voluntarily accepts a fixed term disqualification to return his or her licence to the local authority, I am concerned about what will happen to such licences once they are submitted to the local authority. What mechanism will be used to ensure their return? The Bill makes no provision in this regard and I am certain insufficient resources will be available on the ground to implement this excellent idea.

Every time I raise the issue of road taxation, insurance or driving licences I am reminded of a case referred to me several years ago by a constituent whose insurance company cancelled a policy after several months. The reason given by the company was the failure of the policy holder to disclose all relevant information. The policy was cancelled, the balance returned and a document notifying the cancellation of the policy issued. I followed up the matter by tabling a parliamentary question asking how many insurance policies had been cancelled by insurance companies in the previous year in respect of vehicles which were still on the road. I was stunned to learn that between 10,000 and 12,000 policies had been cancelled. The practice was most common among the larger insurance companies. I would like to find out what is the current figure. A simple parliamentary question would extract this information.

There is a mechanism in law providing that an insurance company which cancels an insurance policy must notify the relevant Garda station to ensure local gardaí are aware of the cancellation as the former policyholder's car will continue to have an insurance disc displayed on the windscreen. In a number of cases, people have agreed to pay for insurance policies on a 12 month basis but, after making the first payment and receiving their insurance disk, their policies were cancelled because they stopped making payments. Insurance companies are using this legal provision as a means of debt collection, with the result that thousands of notices are being sent to Garda stations throughout the country about drivers with lapsed insurance. However, no mechanism is available on the ground for following up these notices. I am concerned that the provision to require people to surrender their driving licences to local authorities will fall into similar disrepute. I understand gardaí have other duties but this system is a shambles. When a company issues an insurance policy, the problems it faces in collecting debts should not impact on other road users in terms of cancelled policies. I would like that issue to be addressed in future road traffic legislation.

I welcome the Bill's provision to give the powers to the Minister to make regulations on mobile telephones and other communications equipment. That will allow the Minister to respond quickly rather than be forced to introduce primary legislation to respond to changes in technology. The ambulance service and gardaí are exempt from prosecution under this section but I would like to know whether private ambulances and Defence Forces and prison service vehicles are also exempted. Such vehicles may be covered by the Bill's provision for a defence of genuine emergency. I am happy that penalty points will apply in respect of using a mobile telephone while driving as soon as this Bill is enacted.

I welcome that the Bill deals with the role of the private sector in the operation of speed cameras because limited Garda resources should not be wasted on this area. It is not a security issue but a technical job which should be awarded to a company through competitive tender. However, certain issues will have to be addressed, such as whether private operators will have access to information on penalty points.

As Deputy Boyle noted, the Committee of Public Accounts investigated the speed cameras currently in operation and figures from the Comptroller and Auditor General indicated that nearly 50% of the photographs taken by speed cameras did not result in prosecution. Excuses given included bad weather, glare on cameras and heavy rain or snow. The remaining 50% of photographs taken include people who denied they were driving the car at the time, cars from other jurisdictions and faulty or unclear number plates.

I am concerned that the lack of quality control may continue into any new system. We should not try to reinvent the wheel but should learn from countries with similar climates. As I have learned from the Committee of Public Accounts, the public sector is not capable of introducing quality information technology systems. The Department of Transport and the Garda are not information technology experts and the lack of competence in the public service has meant projects are not properly specified from the outset. Rigorous assessment is needed before projects go to tender.

I am happy that fines are being increased in respect of expired licences. However, why cannot local authorities issue reminders to people when their licences are about to expire? It is easy to leave a ten year licence in the glove compartment and forget about it. Local authorities are well able to issue us with reminders to tax our cars and insurance companies remind us about our insurance policies. There is no reason, other than inertia, why reminder notices are not issued for driving licences. It is a lazy approach to merely increase fines without making provision for reminders.

It is welcome that gardaí are to be given greater powers to take uninsured vehicles off the road if they are not registered in this State. I would also like to see a provision whereby such cars can be put into private storage. I have visited several Garda stations in my constituency only to find their yards half-filled with abandoned vehicles because there is no provision in law to allow gardaí to store them anywhere else.

The Bill does not address the issue of insured drivers. I have open insurance, which allows me to drive any car, insured or otherwise. The Bill deals with uninsured vehicles but many drivers can be insured to drive any vehicle. I understand the intention behind this but the provisions have not been properly thought out.

In recent weeks, the Judiciary has caused the majority of the problems encountered by the Houses of the Oireachtas. One judge decided to let a person out of prison, only to have other judges reverse that decision. This inconsistency causes many problems. If a person is being tried for speeding or drink driving, that should be the substantial issue considered by the judge. However, most judges seem to be more interested in asking whether the garda properly identified himself or herself or gave the proper receipt to the defendant. All this must be considered. The Judiciary seems more interested in the minutiae of legal debate than the substance of the offence. It should use common sense in these cases. The substance of the offence should be examined in the correct proportion to technical issues.

I have been a Member for 15 months and road deaths have been an issue in this House every week since I was elected. I have compiled a list of the names and addresses of 174 people who died on the roads since 1 January, from a two year old child to a 95 year old man. This Bill should lead to a reduction in the road deaths in every parish, which affect everybody. I assure Mr. Gay Byrne that the Opposition has no intention of holding up this Bill. We must ensure that every aspect of this Bill is implemented so that this country is no longer one where 11 people per 100,000 die on the roads, compared to the European average of six people per 100,000. People will no longer be six times more likely to die if they travel by motorbike in this country compared to any other country. The Opposition will hold people responsible if the measures discussed are not implemented immediately.

We must address driver testing, speeding, drink driving and the quality of our roads. Last week a breakthrough was made. The testing of our young people has been a shambles over the past number of years because people did not wish to address the situation. Young people have no respect because of the manner in which they have been treated. A 52-week wait is unacceptable because they are charged extra by their insurance company in the meantime. Addressing this will garner respect from young people.

I do not know when 40,000 tests will be outsourced. An additional 10,000 applications were added to the waiting list last year. It is essential that the Minister works with these people seven days a week so that every young person can be tested within a six-week period. Fine Gael calls for a place where people can learn to drive under proper instruction, as is the case in Hong Kong. Inexperienced drivers would not have to learn on busy roads. If we do not see a reduction in waiting times, someone will have to answer.

A speeding blitz has taken place over the past few bank holiday weekends. Despite this and the increase in the number of penalty points for certain offences, the number of people killed has not decreased. Penalty points are being picked up where one drives a little above the limit. Every time one drives on a dual carriageway, someone is waiting around the corner with a speed gun. Where I live, on narrow roads where only one car can fit and the speed limit is only 80 km/h, one meets dangerous drivers. The people on this list of victims were killed in such places, on minor roads where no traffic corps operates and proper speed limits are not enforced. We have discussed getting planning permission from county councils to ensure proper speed limits. That will cost money.

Some 33 years ago yesterday, at 16 years of age, I witnessed a two-year old child being killed while crossing the road in Bettystown. The speed limit on that road is the same now as it was then and there are no ramps. That child has not been forgotten by her parents. We must have traffic calming measures outside our schools and the traffic corps in places beyond the edges of our cities.

It is a liability to drive in the country at weekends. There are crazy drivers on our roads, on motorbikes and in cars, young and old people trying to make up time on country roads at weekends. Until we address this, the list of victims will continue to grow. We must ensure speed limits are in the right place. Garda resources, including recruits, must increase. This will provide the back-up to ensure that the speed limit is implemented on every road in Ireland. Everybody must uphold the law.

As a publican living in the country, I believe people have become more responsible. Young people and older people of my age have been caught. From talking to fellow publicans, sales have halved because people of my age have stopped drinking in pubs. They know they cannot drive after drinking more than three pints. The trade is going to die but if it means saving lives, so be it.

This Bill contains aspects that seek to punish more severely those caught. We must make examples of those who consistently drink and drive. If a person is caught, he or she should be punished. In the event of a second offence, the punishment should be doubled or trebled.

Some 12 years ago my wife and I came across an accident while travelling to a function. A man had been driving while stone drunk and a girl who was the passenger was trapped in the car. It took half an hour for the ambulance to arrive. While the drunk driver would not acknowledge me, my wife or the garda, the girl slowly died as we watched the blood drain from her. The driver was banned from the road but exactly one year ago the same driver spent the day in the pub before driving a car he did not own and crashing into my father. My father was left to die at 81 years of age and the driver took to the fields. After many of us chasing him, the Garda Síochána arrested the man. When questioned, after finally accepting that he had been driving, his first question was who would pay for the damage to his car. That man cannot be prosecuted because my father would have to go to court to make a statement. These people must be put away without being given a second chance. When dealing with such people stiff penalties are required.

I have debated the issue of the quality of Irish roads and road signs for the past three or four months. I spoke to the Minister, Deputy Cullen, as he left the Chamber. Everybody is beginning to agree. This is the matter that will really test this Government and test Gay Byrne's resolve to remain as chairperson. Until this is addressed, there will be carnage on our roads.

I was in Roscommon, Longford, Meath, Monaghan, Louth and Cavan in the space of two days and it is not different in any county. Contractors who are given a job to do on a road are paid nearly by the square inch and, when they apply tarmac, the sides of the roads are left unfinished. Everybody knows what I am talking about. It is a council's responsibility at the end of the day and Fine Gael in Government will ensure that every county council will be responsible for its roads.

When contractors finish their job, the margins are not filled in. If a young or nervous driver pulls in to the side of the road to facilitate an oncoming lorry, the car hits the bank and veers out onto the road again. That is what happened two months ago to my neighbour aged 30 who is on the list to which I refer. He went in off the road to avoid a car, hit the kerb which did not hold, his car veered out and he ended up being killed. According to EU statistics, the bad roads and bad road signs of this country are responsible for 30% of deaths.

It is a pity the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government did not hold out. The Minister for Transport cannot do this on his own. We must have a Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who is prepared to provide more gardaí to ensure that speeding and drink driving are not issues, but we must have Ministers for Finance and for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government who are prepared to fund repairs to the roads.

The roads are a disgrace. It is the one area which has been let deteriorate. It is usually the one on which action is taken before local elections. I remember, even when I was aged ten, that upcoming local elections meant one could guarantee the boys would be out working on the roads. I suppose we must wait until then to see it happen again. There are potholes the size of small lakes in every county and one could fish in them at this stage. Given the amount of money available to the Exchequer, I cannot believe that roads are an issue.

Road signs are another issue. Last week a man was brought to court for cutting back hedges. This prosecution was taken under legislation protecting birds, with which I agree. Despite this signposts on every small road in Ireland are covered with white weed. No councils fulfil their responsibility anymore because there are no people on the roads with scythes or strimmers to cut the weeds. People have had accidents and are being killed.

I will always remember that, in my parish of Nobber, five people from one family — a mother, her two children, her sister-in-law and her niece — in one car came to a crossroads in Monaghan where there were no proper road signs. They went through it and were killed. The five of them were brought into the parish church in Nobber in one bunch. One can no longer go through that crossroads because it has been made a staggered junction, but it is too late for that family. Across the Border and in England, every road is marked. I crossed into south Armagh the other evening to do a job and the first thing I encountered was a small byroad which was signposted.

As one approaches a stop sign from a distance, it is the size of a sixpence. If we want to reduce road deaths, we must put up proper signs at every junction on every road, from Kerry to Donegal. We have tried drink driving and speeding campaigns. Everybody knows about those issues but the numbers of deaths on the roads are increasing. According to the EU figures, 30% of road deaths are caused by bad roads and bad road signs. As Ireland's roads are worse than everyone's, I can clearly state from the heart that 40% of the deaths in this country are due to bad roads and that is our responsibility, at local and national levels.

There are counties like my county of Meath that cannot afford to spend money on their roads because they do not have an adequate rate base from jobs. My county, I am ashamed to say, has the worst roads in Ireland. It would give me great pleasure to bring Deputy Olivia Mitchell or any Minister down the byroads of County Meath. The Minister would be ashamed of his life, yet he sees our council is in debt owing to the lack of employment. That is why I say it is the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government who must be responsible for ensuring that, where counties do not have the money to invest in these roads, it is done at national level.

As I said last week, there is no point in stating in this House on budget day all the money that is available while the list to which I referred continues to grow. It will continue to grow and will affect my family, that of the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, or someone else's family. We will continue to state weekly in this House how terrible it is. Looking at that list, it strikes me that there should be an immediate audit of where all these accidents occurred, why they occurred and a photograph of where they occurred. I noted that 22 or 23 of these people were killed in Cork, which is an area that could be examined.

The Road Traffic Bill is specifically to provide for what we, as Deputies, have had to speak about weekly. For the previous 47 years of my life, I probably witnessed as many road deaths as anybody. No doubt everyone in this House has come across them on occasion. Ireland has the worst record — 11 persons per 100,000. The European average is six persons per 100,000. One is six times more likely to be killed riding a motorbike on a road in Ireland than anywhere else.

One cannot blame the Irish people for everything. Although I do not say the Government does so, everything documented, even in the Bill, seems to address the driver or the young person. I say we are responsible. The number one priority of county councils, whether controlled by Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Féin or whoever, should be to ensure that every road our children take, whether by minibus, car or whatever, is safe. They are not.

As Fine Gael spokesperson on safety, I can guarantee that we in Fine Gael will ensure when we are in Government that every county council will be made responsible for the roads of this country. Instead of putting up flowers, with which many councils decorate the middle of a town, they will be filling in every pothole in every county. They will ensure that the verges of every road are properly filled in. We had a visitor from America who could not believe that we do not ensure that roads are finished, not just in the centre but to a tee.

Every road should be marked. I live on the N52 which is marked on the left-hand and right-hand sides with yellow illumination and down the middle in white, and driving home in the evening is a pleasure. Whether frosty or snowy, whether dark or bright, one knows where one is going. This Bill must be implemented to ensure that the list of people to which I refer is reduced. Over the past six years, 700 people died because of bad roads. They should not have died.

The legal side of this must be handled in dealing with drink driving. Speeding must be handled by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, by ensuring that gardaí patrol the streets and are given support. It is not good enough to have them patrolling the dual carriageways, handily catching people going home. They must patrol rural areas where people are being killed on bad roads or on roads where the speed limits are inappropriate. We must ensure that families do not have to go through the trauma that the families of the people in the list to which I referred went through.

At this stage, everybody must work together and there is no point in being nice about it. I welcome this great legislation. I had the pleasure of sitting through Noel Brett's presentation for two hours last week because the new board has everything covered under the chairmanship of Gay Byrne. We, in the Opposition, will not stand in the way of this legislation but we will hold Gay Byrne responsible for ensuring everything the board requires is provided. All the provisions in the legislation in addition to the requirements of the authority must be implemented to ensure our people are safe on the roads, otherwise 450 people will die again next year.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. As the Minister for Transport stated, this is the most important legislation to come before the House for a long time. It deals with driver negligence, which is the major cause of fatalities on our roads, and contributory factors such as driver error, drink driving and so on. As long as we look for excuses, we will never deal with those who are causing the fatalities. As long as they are given an out and told it was not their fault they were drink driving because they left a public house at 2 a.m. or it was not their fault that they drove a car into a ditch while driving at 80 mph because the road surface was bad, we are in trouble. We will never resolve this issue and until the blame is placed where it should be, which is on every driver, we are fighting a lost cause.

All Oireachtas Members are concerned about road safety because every time we read a newspaper or watch a news broadcast, we are reminded of the issue. Every road accident must be fully analysed. I asked the Minister if he would consider using the Health and Safety Authority to conduct the technical assessment of every fatal accident or dangerous occurrence on the roads. I used my experience as a former industrial safety officer to bring that proposal forward because a body used to dealing with similar incidents is required. The Garda must consider the legal issues and take measurements and so on for court cases but the analysis of accidents will lead to a solution in the long term. When Members refer to statistics that highlight that 30% of fatalities are due to bad roads, that will not get us anywhere.

A total of 30% of fatalities resulted from bad roads.

The legislation will assist in this regard. Because of the mixture of complex issues involved, it is important the legislation can ultimately stand up to minute scrutiny, particularly in the courts. It is a matter of huge concern to the public and Oireachtas Members that road traffic offences, which have been legislated for in the Houses, have been dealt with in an inconsistent fashion by the courts. Every amendment to road traffic legislation, whether it concerns speeding or drink driving, is inevitably challenged with cases often passing through the hierarchy of courts. Every attempt is made to find a loophole that legal professionals always feel exists. Each of the Departments involved in the legislation, the Garda and the State's legal advisers will try to ensure legislation is watertight. Fortunately, we have a Constitution but, given the ability of a number of our legal minds, that can create a difficult proposition when implementing legislation such as this.

While all the various legal challenges are dealt with in the courts, people are dying on the roads at a frightening rate. Everybody must accept that motoring offences are serious and if legislation is challenged, the challenge must be dealt with speedily by all involved, including the Garda, the courts and the legal profession. It is scandalous that such challenges can be delayed for two or three years. That is totally unacceptable and cases must not become statute barred. In particular, 500 or 600 out of 1,800 cases were statute barred in recent years and that should not happen. There is total confusion in the minds of the public regarding various offences because of the various defences put forward in court, although everybody should be able to defend himself or herself. Reference has been made to how other countries deal with such offences. The US is cited because of the high standard of its roads but if a person is caught drink driving there, he or she is locked up and there is no messing around for two or three years while he or she seeks out the best lawyer in the state. He or she is prosecuted on the spot.

When considering the positive aspect of road traffic policy in other jurisdictions, we should examine how offenders are treated because we are casual or lenient in that regard. If this was happening in other areas of law enforcement there would be a greater outcry, but it is acceptable where motoring offences are concerned, which also raises questions about everyone's priorities. Everybody will recall the difficulties experienced by the Government three weeks ago and the concern among the public about rushing legislation. However, more than 400 people are dying on our roads but nobody is concerned if somebody challenges the use of the breathalyser, speed cameras and so on. As Deputy McEntee highlighted, an individual convicted of an offence one year was able to drive over his own father the following year. That cannot be accepted in modern society.

Although delays in bringing the Bill before the House are regrettable, it would be better in the long term to ensure the legislation is far reaching and watertight. However, all Members will do their best to ensure good legislation is passed. Tackling road deaths must involve changing the mindset of young people in particular because they have most to learn, and a partnership approach between drivers and the authorities must be adopted if we are to be successful in halting the carnage. That is a two way process and I will refer to a number of examples of partnership later.

People are being killed on roads around the country on a daily basis because they take chances speeding and they lack driving knowledge. Those who drive between Cork and Dublin regularly witness people in the smallest vehicles driving at the highest speeds. They aim the car in one direction and hang on to the steering wheel while hoping for the best, which is tragic. We must get tough on senseless speeding, drunk and reckless driving and ensure conformity to existing provisional licence regulations while they are still in force, and have planned learner driver initiatives implemented. I was glad Gay Byrne stated before the recent bank holiday weekend that he is not concerned about the driver who travels at 3 or 4 mph over the speed limit because we all know what constitutes senseless speeding. The EU may make a stand on driving standards and, hopefully, a positive directive will be introduced on this issue. Tough new deterrents must be considered to ensure a positive change in driving attitudes, which will help educate people that the faster they drive, the greater the possibility of serious injury or even death.

Education of all drivers, not simply learner drivers, is an essential priority. Important factors include changes in the road structure and types of roads, at complicated junctions and roundabouts, in higher vehicle speeds and a greater number of heavy goods vehicles. All must continually educate themselves on the dangers of driving in public. Based on my observations, present driving standards are much poorer than in the past. This may be due to the greater number of vehicles and the greater number of people who have been able to acquire a car. However, those who have been driving for a long time and who realise that danger is continual and imminent must allow for that.

The introduction of driver theory tests and practical learner instruction to the secondary school curricula, possibly in transition or leaving certificate years, might increase awareness among young drivers. Heretofore, had one suggested that students should be taught to drive properly, people would have scoffed. However, it must be accepted that at present, many students drive and bring their cars to school, and they should be taught the correct way, in so far as possible.

At present, it is far too easy to start driving on provisional licences, and many young and inexperienced motorists are not sufficiently well prepared for the potential difficulties which they might experience. The Bill provides for the introduction of a learner permit to replace provisional licences. It is quite possible that the EU will intervene in respect of the provisional licence issue and will prohibit people with such licences from driving unaccompanied, by issuing a directive to that effect.

New regulations may require learner drivers to undergo a course of instruction. The content of such courses of instruction may be regulated, as may the amount which driving instructors charge for such courses. This is welcome, as I have always argued that once something like insurance becomes mandatory, there should be an element of State control on the charges levied. I believe the driver instruction charges should be similarly covered.

The Bill also suggests a period to be specified following the grant of a learner permit during which a learner driver may not apply for a driving test. This is intended to ensure there will be a minimum period in which a learner driver has to undergo instruction before being allowed to apply for a test. This is common sense. I expect that all Members can remember the first time he or she went out on the road, the terror of trying to steer the car and so on. Moreover, that was when traffic levels were only 50% or less of the present levels. As the roads become more crowded, and it becomes more dangerous to drive, it is essential that people are reasonably trained.

As the Minister noted, this Bill represents the sixth major legislative initiative taken in the area of road traffic in the past six years. Penalty points, new speed limits based on metric values and the establishment of the Road Safety Authority have all been introduced. The penalty points system is now being implemented and the public, particularly those who have picked up points, will appreciate their presence fairly shortly. The delay was due to messing about with computers, difficulties with logging on and so forth. However, the amalgamation of the PULSE system with the Garda's new system will mean that people will receive penalty points notices more speedily — no pun intended. In addition, enforcement will take place. In tests conducted four or five years ago, it was found that 50% of the film in fixed speed cameras was clouded. Hopefully, such things will not happen any longer, because they bring everything regarding the control of speeding into disrepute.

However, this Bill, correctly emphasises road safety provisions. Members should deal with this aspect, rather than trying to start an inter-party row about finance or other matters. Although serious concern is expressed in this regard, as I noted in the context of the courts, I do not know whether people follow through sufficiently on that concern. Hopefully, they will do so in the future.

This legislation is aimed at creating the conditions and consciousness that will lead to a significant reduction in the number of fatalities and serious injuries. This must be restated and the public must react to what has been happening in the courts. Although members of the public might be personally affected by a particular case, they must stand up to be counted and to state that they do not accept some of the things that have happened in respect of traffic offences related to bad driving.

Enforcement of the traffic laws and the promotion of driver education are crucial in the effort to cut back on the carnage. At the time when the first road safety strategy was published, it was believed that if the Government could not come up with a planned co-ordination of actions by various bodies, road deaths would reach 550 by 2002. The Minister mentioned that point. While the previous speaker mentioned some figures, the Committee of Public Accounts performed some analysis in so far as it could. Although the committee did not wish to cite a specific figure, a minimum of 100 lives have been saved by the implementation of the penalty points system. The figure was arrived at by considering the number of vehicles on the road at the time of its implementation, as well as the numbers of accidents, fatalities and so on, and working from that basis.

Many people and agencies have many ideas on road safety and open and frank debate with collective analysis will facilitate the development of new and better strategies to replace older initiatives.

I stated that there must be a partnership approach. For many drivers, inconsistency in the implementation of speed limits is the most annoying aspect of this issue. For instance, an example which irritates me weekly is the Naas Road, which now has seven miles of double carriageway on both sides. Most of it is newly constructed and it has four well-lit and well laid out traffic lanes, which are probably of a higher standard than 80% of roads in the rest of the country. However, that seven mile strip has a speed limit of 60 km/h, whereas on 80% of vastly inferior roads there is a limit of 100 km/h. I understand the National Roads Authority imposed the 60 km/h limit. It is, however, life threatening to drive on that road within the speed limit.

Three weeks ago, I had the experience of being passed by the driver of a low-loader, which had a trailer attached, with two traxcavators on board. He drove behind me and became so annoyed that he swerved around me, passed me out and then pulled in sharply in front of me. Perhaps he was teaching me a lesson because I was driving so slowly. It is likely that I was driving seven or eight kilometres per hour over the limit prescribed on the signs. There was nothing in front of me for the next quarter of a mile on a busy Thursday afternoon, because other drivers simply ignored what they regarded as a very unfair limit. It is scandalous and brings matters into disrepute. This is meant to be a partnership and people are entitled to a fair crack of the whip. The retention of that limit on that road for so long amounts to laziness, carelessness or whatever.

Moreover, a new sign has been erected, to the effect that the road is Garda controlled. Hence, one is being threatened with penalty points on an excellent seven miles of dual carriageway, without contra-flows or anything similar. I can travel to New Inn in County Tipperary, where the trees hang over the road and the grass grows to its edge, or to Abbeyleix, which is similar, and can drive legally at 100 km/h. I invite the members of the National Roads Authority to drive this excellent stretch of road on a busy afternoon to ascertain whether they can do so while driving within the limit. If they do, they will take their lives in their hands. Hence, common sense is needed on both sides of this issue.

As the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, pointed out in his opening remarks, the public and political scrutiny of the first road safety strategy gave rise to the identification of many of the policy options identified in the second strategy, which is now in its final year. The current strategy has seen the implementation of the metric system of speed limits, the roll-out of the penalty points system, the introduction of the Garda national traffic corps and the Road Safety Authority. The advent of these organisations will have a positive effect on road safety in the long term.

I must confess that I cannot recall the name of the previous speaker, who is the most recently elected Member. He complained about finance, potholes and the condition of roads. The capital investment programme for the next ten years under Transport 21 is €34.4 billion, which must make a massive improvement. No matter what way one breaks it down, it is an investment of €9.4 million every day for the next ten years. Anyone coming here and suggesting money is not being made available for infrastructural improvements, roads and public transport is being misleading. It does not help in attempting to prevent fatalities.

Transport 21 will connect all regions to each other as well as our main sea ports and airports. In cities, including my city of Cork, it will provide greatly enhanced public transport alternatives to the private car. We have new train carriages on the journey to Dublin which provide us with great comfort at €2 million a throw. We do fairly well.

I wish the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, every success with this critical Bill. Every one of us is involved in road safety. Those of us who drive have particular involvement but even pedestrians are involved as are our families. I commend the Bill to the House.

I wish to share time with Deputy Connaughton.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. As the Minister stated in his speech, it is the sixth Bill to deal with road traffic and infrastructure generally. I wish to pick up on a couple of issues at the outset.

The previous speaker discussed the amount of money to be spent on the roads over the coming years and that it is not the issue. As one who lived a mile and a half from Swann's Cross, where five young people died as a result of a road accident, I highlighted that junction 16 times in writing to the local authority and begged them to take action on it. I thanked the Minister at the time because after the five people were killed we got a roundabout on the junction and, thank God, it is safe now. Think of what could have been done if the money had been provided in time. The designs used by some engineers and the amount of money spent on consultants is unbelievable when one considers the results in places, such as junctions around Carrickmacross and other areas. A major question mark hangs over them.

The previous speaker also discussed speed limits. We spent a number of days in this House discussing the change of speed limits from the imperial to the metric system. However, nothing was done in terms of changing the speed limits on roads. If one drives from Slane to Drogheda, every few miles one sees a sign denoting a speed limit of 100 km/h but one cannot even get around the bends. However, on good stretches of road, one is only allowed drive at 80 km/h. One must ask major questions about the common sense used and how it was done.

I draw further attention to section 19 where the Minister states he has provided for the extension of powers available to the Garda Síochána to detain uninsured vehicles to vehicles registered in states other than Ireland. This is a major and important issue. Many cars with foreign registrations drive about with blacked-out windows. We do not know who is in them, or whether the driver has a licence or insurance. If we are to take control, the Garda must be given the wherewithal to deal with it properly.

This legislation is important. However, while this Government never has a problem introducing legislation, unfortunately its record in providing manpower to deliver its meaning in action is a failure. Many Bills come to mind in that context. One involved a Bill on meat in bonemeal introduced in 1989 but personnel were not put in place to implement it until 1996.

I welcome aspects of the Bill regarding mandatory alcohol testing, review of fines, disqualifications regarding drink driving offences and regulations on the use of mobile phones. However, I am concerned about the new framework for the engagement of private sector interests in the provision and operation of cameras and other technology for the detection of speeding offences. I want to see speeding controlled. However, I am concerned it will be done purely to obtain extra funds for private enterprise.

I accept that as a result of the Government's failure to provide Garda manpower and its failure to release up to 500 gardaí on desk duty, which could be done by civilians, it is possible the simplest solution is to hire the private sector to manage the cameras. I have no doubt that many like me will be concerned about how the private sector scheme will work. It will obviously be profit driven. It may even pick out the easy and most vulnerable places to establish the cameras, and not necessarily places which would lead to the prevention of accidents and saving lives.

The Minister must clarify who will be in charge of these private operators, to what standards and controls they will operate and who will monitor the system to ensure power is not abused. Speeding and drink driving are the main causes of loss of life and accidents on the roads. The best possible deterrent to both of these is the active involvement of the Garda Síochána and the visibility of gardaí at all hours of the night and day in relevant places. It is more important to stop drink driving and fast driven cars than to collect money.

I welcome the fact this Bill also deals with the use of mobile phones. All of us who are constantly on the roadways have been guilty in the past of using these communication items. Nothing is as dangerous as the use of such instruments, particularly through busy traffic and nothing annoys me more than to see drivers of extremely big lorries and buses turning corners or going through traffic lights with mobile phones to their ears. Surely, all individuals in cars, lorries or buses should by now have an overhead system to ensure their hands are free to control such lethal weapons.

This Government has completely failed to deal with unlicensed drivers. The current Minister, like his predecessor, failed to bring in additional driving testers to minimise delay and give young drivers the opportunity to get their full licences and, consequently, cheaper insurance. This failure has cost the youth of our country millions. Years ago, Deputies Naughten and Coveney prepared regulations which would have helped to solve this issue and provide better educated young drivers. The Government smirked at it. However, a small category also exists of older people who, for whatever reason, still do not have a full licence. They must be dealt with in a common sense way and given a degree of leeway to allow them go to the village shop or place of worship.

Initially, the introduction of penalty points reduced the numbers of deaths on our roads for a few months, clearly because of media coverage and Garda visibility. However, without the presence of gardaí neither this nor any other Bill will deliver the goods. It is up to the Government to provide the manpower and resources for the Garda Síochána if this is to be meaningful.

As far as the Road Traffic Bill is concerned, Fine Gael certainly welcomes it. Any right thinking citizen who considers what is involved in this legislation must decide it is for the greater good of the people. I have serious doubts about some aspects of it but this is no reason for us not to want to ensure that legislation of the highest quality is passed. Many arguments will be made and votes called on Committee Stage because certain aspects of the Bill will not stand up legally. I am a member on the Select Committee on Transport and have listened to a range of people over the past 12 months, each with his own speciality. Everybody has a very important objective and we can only hope this Bill and others will be cohesive.

For some strange reason, the Government and many outside this House wonder why the carnage is so great on the roads. If ever there were a cancer in society, it is the manner in which people blatantly abdicate their responsibility when behind the wheel during the day and particularly at night. There are now twice as many cars on the road as there were 20 years ago. Not only is this the case but there is also a substantial increase in their horsepower. People boast about the horsepower of their cars. Irrespective of what anybody might say, our road network has not kept pace with the number of motorists thereon. We are simply running out of space.

In addition to this, alcoholism has become rampant. I do not have to tell colleagues in this House about the level of binge drinking, particularly among groups of youths, all over the country and at all hours of the night. If one wanted to know the cocktail of circumstances that create havoc on the roads, one should consider all the aforementioned factors. They are certainly a recipe for disaster, which is what we have.

We have a culture of admiring those who get away with something. Consider what happens when somebody is let off in court, although I am sure this happens for very good legal reasons. The recent dismissal of drink driving offences in court, for example, serves as oxygen for thousands of people. When they hear about it they get it into their skulls that they, too, can have their cases dismissed. Solicitors and barristers are entitled to exploit loopholes in the law so their clients' cases can be dismissed. However, every time it is broadcast on television that a drink driving case has been dismissed on a technicality, it should be noted that the accused persons were under the influence of alcohol. To this day, a great number of people almost wave the flag and congratulate such people on getting away with their offence. Until this culture changes we will have a serious problem.

The culture can be changed in the same way we changed the smoking culture that existed prior to the smoking ban. As Members well know, people actually turn up their noses in all sorts of public places if they see somebody smoking. We will have to turn up our noses at drink driving. Until we do so to the extent that people will not tolerate the existing culture, we will not make any headway.

I like a number of provisions in this Bill. I have always believed that nobody should have to wait six to ten months for a driving test. When one is learning to drive, the teachers are in a position to impart to one the right sort of knowledge. Many teachers do so but we do not have national standards. I assume this Bill will address this problem and that we will have certain, specific standards.

We introduced a Bill on mobile phones some weeks ago during Private Members' time. The Government said it saw nothing wrong with it but that, because it was initiated by the Opposition, it would await its own Bill. We now have that Bill and it has certain flaws but one does not have to be a rocket scientist to know one cannot possibly have one's mind on the road while at the same time messing around trying to find digits on a mobile phone as one drives down a busy thoroughfare. The day has come on which this practice should be wiped out. I have a hands-free mobile phone and, like most others, I do a great deal of business with it. However, I wonder how safe it is. In any case, it is senseless to drive while using a mobile phone as it affects concentration. I hope that whatever formula of words we include in this Bill will stand up in court and that anybody driving, with a mobile phone in hand while on the road will be regarded as committing an offence. I hope sincerely we will be able to achieve this.

Consider that a garda must "form an opinion" on people intending to drive after tumbling out of public houses and other places late at night before he can make an arrest. One can rest assured that the context in which a garda witnesses people coming out of a public house at midnight is very different to that in which he witnesses people coming out from mass 12 hours later. The garda would certainly be more likely to meet intoxicated people in the former case. There is a constitutional matter involved in this regard but it is simple as far as I am concerned. I have been a pioneer all my life but spend a great deal of time in pubs. If, after this Bill is enacted, a garda sees me coming out of a pub at midnight or 12.30 a.m. and tells me he is going to breathalyse me, I will see nothing wrong with it because I will have nothing to hide. One could not say I would be grossly inconvenienced. If the law were such that somebody emerging from a pub after having consumed eight, ten or 12 pints could be stopped from driving as a result, it would be good law.

I hope when the Bill is enacted it will be interpreted by the judges in the way we interpret it on the floor of this House. As such, the people will accept it and will not regard it as too great an intrusion into their private lives. I would not regard it as such, nor would many others.

I have had a bee in my bonnet all my life about those found guilty of causing death on the road while under the influence of alcohol and therefore not in their full senses. There should be a mandatory jail sentence of a defined length for such people who cause havoc among families.

I look forward to making my contribution tomorrow to the debate on the Road Traffic Bill 2006.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share