Deputy Mattie McGrath was in control.
Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed)
Bill recommitted in respect of amendment No. 22.
Amendment No. 22 was moved by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport on 13 June 2018:
In page 4, between lines 23 and 24, to insert the following:
"Amendment of section 41 of Road Traffic Act 1994
3. Section 41 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 is amended in subsection (1)(a)—
(a) in subparagraph (ii), by the deletion of "or",
(b) in subparagraph (iii), by the substitution of "permit, or" for "permit,", and
(c) by the insertion of the following subparagraph after subparagraph (iii):
"(iv) is, in the opinion of a member of the Garda Síochána, the holder of a learner permit and is, in the opinion of that member, not driving in accordance with clause (iv) of Regulation 17(6)(b) of the Road Traffic (Licensing of Drivers) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 537 of 2006).".".
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 22:
In the fifth line of subparagraph (iv), proposed to be inserted by section 3(c), after “No. 537 of 2006).” to insert “Provided that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not apply in circumstances where a driving test date has not been supplied to an applicant within a period of six weeks from the date of their application.".
- (Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice)
Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach Gníomhach. I do not think I was in control; the Chair was. I was certainly in possession.
The Deputy was in control of speaking time.
Always with the permission of the Chair.
I am again glad to be able to return to the Bill, and specifically to amendment No. 22. I again appeal to the good offices of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, to take this opportunity to withdraw the remarks he made about us in the Rural Independent Group and the personalised attack he made on me in front of my daughter. I have asked him a number of times but I will give him the opportunity again. He seems to have lost his voice when it comes to answering any of the questions we ask in the Chamber, and we have asked him many questions. Indeed questions are arising by the day and the Minister does not seem to be able to answer them.
I want to specifically address the issue of learner drivers and the criminalisation of a cohort of young people, the vast majority of whom are good people. There is an old adage - mol an óige agus tiocfaidh sí. I was contacted by a young boy of 18 earlier. He did his driver's test and unfortunately failed. He has a job that requires him to travel from my own village to Dungarvan. He now cannot travel because his mother is unable to drive him. It is a single-parent family and she cannot accompany him. He bought the car, he has the insurance, he did his lessons and his tuition and he was hopeful. It is a nerve-wracking engagement for a young person. I do not know why he failed but he failed. He cannot reapply for a month. That is a basic example of denial of human rights. If he could reapply this evening and get that test within a week or ten days that could be accepted, but he cannot reapply for a month. He could then be waiting for as long as five months in Tipperary. If he then attempts to drive unaccompanied on the road to satisfy the employer who gave him the job on a farm in Dungarvan in Deputy Mary Butler's constituency, this legislation would make him a criminal despite the fact that he has insurance. It would also criminalise his mother. The Minister might answer this. If it is this man's own car and he owns it, can the parent be criminalised, fined and given penalty points as well? That is what the Minister is doing and that is discrimination. We will call that young chap John because, to quote the old Irish Press report, that is what he likes to be called. Is é sin a ainm. Would this happen if he got a job in Dublin?
He might not get a job milking cows in Dublin but, whatever job he gets, he can get the DART, Luas, bus or taxi. He could cycle, using the very successful rent-a-bike scheme, or use many other forms of transport. Why should a man in Tipperary be criminalised for doing the very same thing as someone in Dublin, namely, having the noble goal of seeking work, finishing his education or bettering himself in some way? Why should he be stigmatised as a criminal for having the noble aspiration of finishing his education, getting a job, doing a training course in agriculture or doing driving lessons to pass his test? He is victimised and criminalised. That is how I see it. If the Minister does not listen here, some of the young buachaillí or cailíní will challenge this because it is downright naked, basic discrimination against young boys and girls from rural areas. One cannot say otherwise. That is what it is. We are receiving complaints on why we are debating this Bill. This is a part of the Bill that the Minister recommitted to include in this legislation.
I met Mr. Clancy from Fermoy or north-east Cork recently and I totally sympathised with him and thanked him for engaging with me on the tragic loss of his wife and daughter. It is so sad but a sad case and desperate, hard cases make bad laws. They do not make good laws. It is the greater good that we have to try to serve here. We do not want to see anyone driving recklessly. We do not want to see anyone trying to commit crimes. As I said, we sympathise completely with the family in question and any other in the same situation. It is so sad. We can never walk in their shoes but we have to be balanced about our assessment and understanding of legislation and our attempts to debate with the Minister and his officials on this.
The shutters are down, however, and they will not be lifted. There is no engagement, at committee level, here or elsewhere, including privately. We have to be realists as rural Independent Deputies. The Acting Chairman is a rural Deputy. Every rural Deputy knows the difficulties, including the lack of rural transport services, the state of rural roads and the punitive cost imposed on families trying to pass their national car tests and keep their cars taxed, insured and on the roads. The costs are punitive enough without criminalising families for what is outside their control. They are unable to work under this legislation. They will be unable to keep within this legislation. If they do, they will be unable to finish their education and enter employment.
At present there is nearly full employment. There is a huge shortage of staff in the catering industry and in the hospitality sector. Chefs cannot be got. There is already a crisis among farm contractors. We have heard this from Farm Contractors Ireland and all the agriculture bodies. They have referred to the lack of apprenticeships and to how badly apprenticeship schemes are needed across the board, especially in the industries I have mentioned. I refer to fishing, farming, contracting, the construction industry and the hospitality sector. One can put on all the apprenticeship courses one likes but how will the places be filled?
LIT Tipperary has campuses in Thurles and Clonmel. They are working together, with imagination, to try to offer imaginative apprenticeship schemes to meet the needs and allow young people achieve their full potential in rural and urban areas. In one fell swoop, the Minister is saying we will allow people participate but that we will not allow them on the road, or allow them to participate unless they live in a city or well-serviced town. There are not many towns where one can get transport to go to college in Waterford, Tipperary, Limerick or Cork. They do not have bus or train services, nor the DART, Luas and all the other services, such as the bicycle scheme in Dublin.
The Minister visited Tiobraid Árann theas last Friday in a kind of scurry or flurry. He told me I would not be welcome to meet him on Wednesday night even though I was invited by the transport company. I thank the company for that. The Minister went to Kerry and announced so-called funding to put on bus services for people who wanted to socialise or have a social evening in certain places. As I said at the start, the amount of money, €490,000, would not administer a half decent scheme in two or three counties. We have Ring a Link servicing Tipperary, Kilkenny and Carlow. I am a founding member. It has a top-class booking system. It is state-of-the-art. I asked the Minister to visit the headquarters in Kilkenny. He might. I would appreciate it if he did. I did not hear any mention of any effort to provide transport by way of helping the families or anybody I am talking about so the young people can go to college to finish their education or take up apprenticeships. There was no mention whatsoever of that. How can the Minister just pick out one part of the Bill and say we will make an effort, feeble as it might be, to try to help the people in rural Ireland to socialise, visit their friends or visit the next town, albeit on a restricted basis? Funding received for any service has to be welcomed, but how can one discriminate? The Minister picked Tipperary and Kerry, for reasons unknown-----
On a point of order, this amendment, in the name of Deputy Fitzmaurice, deals with the length of time people wait for a driving test. I understood we were supposed to talk about the amendment. I do not hear the waiting times specifically referred to. Are we on the amendment to which I refer?
While I appreciate Deputy Catherine Murphy's point of order, I have heard Deputy Mattie McGrath refer to those issues as he spoke. He has the floor so he is entitled to continue.
Under Standing Order 68, I move that the question on amendment No. 22 be now put based on the fact that we have endlessly discussed the substance of this amendment and every other one since 24 April. We are celebrating the two-month anniversary of discussing this. We have spent something like 14 or 15 hours doing so. This legislation is being treated like no other legislation. Between 24 April and now, an additional 28 people died on our roads. These are horrendous tragedies. If they happened in any other area of our lives, there would be a major investigation and this House would come to a standstill. I move that amendment No. 22 be now put.
I appreciate Deputy Broughan's point but I have to point out to him that, under the rules of the House, I, as Acting Chairman, cannot actually put that proposal. It is in the lap of the Ceann Comhairle or Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I am not putting that question and do not have the power to do so as I sit in the Chair.
I ask that the Ceann Comhairle or Leas-Cheann Comhairle be sent for.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is due back at 8.30 p.m. I suggest that we take the suggestion on board at that stage. Is that agreed?
In Standing Orders relative to Public Business of this House, the position on a Member proposing a closure seems quite clear. I am proposing the closure of this part of the debate. There is another amendment, amendment No. 29, in respect of which all of these issues will come up again and all Deputies will have an opportunity to speak again. Given that we have endlessly discussed the issues under amendment No. 22, I propose that amendment No. 22 be now put, after which we will proceed with the business and treat this House and our constituents with respect.
They expect us to do business while there are other Bills which are important to this country-----
They are important for Dublin.
What about rural Ireland?
-----that we should have dealt with.
Will the Deputy please resume his seat?
It is time to bring this circus to an end.
The Deputy is only concerned about Dublin.
He is looking after his own constituency.
Will the Deputies not interrupt? If they want this debate to continue, they will stay silent. If not, I will suspend the House and all Members will lose out.
I must point out that the question can only be put if the Ceann Comhairle, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle or, in the case of a standing select or special committee, the Chairman, is in the chair. I am here and do not fulfil any of those positions. A rota has been provided as to who does the Chair. As a way out of this, I have suggested that as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is back in the chair at 8.30 p.m. the Deputy consider holding on until then. He can then put it to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle when he comes in here. I have to go by the rules.
But-----
I am not allowing any further discussion. With all due respect, Deputy, these are the rules and there is nothing I can do about them.
The rules state that a Chair of a committee of this House can in actual fact allow a closure debate to take place.
I am not the Chair of any committee.
We are debating Report Stage which is effectively a committee.
I am on this rota until 8.30 p.m. I want to accommodate people. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be back at 8.30 p.m. The Ceann Comhairle is not available. If the Deputy wishes to proceed at that stage to take it up with him, I am willing to let that happen. Is that agreed?
There is nothing I can do in the circumstances. Proceed Deputy Mattie McGrath.
I apologise for any inconvenience caused to the Acting Chairman. I appreciate his ruling. I am rather perturbed as a rural Deputy about this. It is not all about Dublin. Everything is about Dublin and to hell with the rest of the country. I am surprised to hear that coming from Deputy Broughan.
Will the Deputy address the issue and not make any personal comments? I clarified the issue on the point of order. Will the Deputy proceed to address the issue?
I will not allow us to be called a circus or circus clowns or be told to look in the mirror as those Members opposite cannot do so themselves. I represent a cohort of people who want to be able to live in the country, finish their education there and to have some modicum of rural life. They do not want to be isolated or sitting, as the former Tánaiste, Deputy Burton, said looking at iPhones. They want to get out there into the jobs market and finish their education like the people in Dublin. I do not stop the people in Dublin or other cities having it. Let them do what they do. We are entitled. Fair play is fine play with me. That is all I am looking for and no more. I want them to be allowed sit the driving tests.
Some argue I am not dealing with the matter. However, what if one cannot get a test? Take John, who I had mentioned earlier, who failed his test today. He cannot reapply for a month. Cen fáth? Why can he not reapply immediately online and get it in a reasonable time? I am a small businessman, as are Teachtaí Michael Healy-Rae and Michael Collins. If we could not do a job today and told the customer it would be a month later, we would not be long in business. This is a monopoly and it is ridiculous. The Minister is interested in sorting it out. I heard yesterday some eminent gentlemen from the Road Safety Authority, RSA, say on the radio that, if this Bill is passed, it would employ 160 new testers. Why can it not employ them beforehand? Why do we have to wait until the Bill is passed? How many more carrots are going to be dangled in front of us?
I know what that is. I have figures from a parliamentary question I got from the Minister not so long ago. It stated the Department had recruited fewer than 20 and only half have been put in place. This has gone on over 18 months. What is the reason for the delay? Someone suggested to me that the trade unions are holding it up. What is going on? I asked that question but the Minister will not answer any question. I do not expect the Minister to be infallible and to know everything. However, he should know what is going on in his Department. It is chaos, bedlam and anarchy in his Department.
For any Deputy to stand up here to suggest that I or my colleagues were responsible for the 28 deaths on the roads in recent times is abhorrent and unbelievable. In future, the Minister should check those issues and not be hung up on two issues which are totally discriminatory against rural Ireland and rural dwellers. The Minister sat in Government formation talks with me for 60 days two years ago. We talked about rural-proofing legislation. The Minister did not know about it but his colleagues, such as Deputy Fitzmaurice, did. What do we get here? Legislation which is anti-rural, anti-young people and anti-elderly. This is naked and basic anti-young men and women. It prevents them achieving their full potential while criminalising them and their parents.
Will the Minister tell me why John cannot get a test in the next five or six days so he can try a second time? He can get some more tuition and lessons which will cost him a considerable amount of money. That is the business the testers are in. I salute them because it is needed. We had no lessons when I did my test and neither did the Minister. How many thousands of people got driving licences over the counter when we could not cope with testing? I think the Minister was in the Seanad at the time. I was not but it was during Ger Connolly's time as Minister of State with responsibility for licences a long time ago. The Minister is here long enough to know that. These people got their licences back then, no problem. However, young people do everything right, get lessons and their parents to show them how to drive, go to simulator tracks, get a car, get their insurance and try to get on the road but they fail their tests. They cannot even reapply for one month. In certain counties, the length of time they have to wait varies. However, it is up to five months in Tipperary. For six months, these young people will have to sit at home, watch television, doss around, lose a job or a place in college or eat cake as Marie Antoinette said. That is the Minister's attitude.
That is total discrimination against my people and the people of rural Ireland who I am paid here to represent. This is bad law and it should not be passed. It is unworkable. We then have the RSA presiding over that. The Minister was railing against the quangos and the quango queens but he appoints two more members to the authority without any accountability. I give the Minister credit for standing down the whole codology about linking the licence to the PPS number and the public services card. After €1.8 million was wasted, he pulled the plug on it. I commend him for that. Who has been reprimanded? Who has been disciplined?
I asked all Departments about the number of staff who have been disciplined or sacked. The only reply I got was from the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection, Deputy Regina Doherty. She informed me 13 people had been dismissed from her Department for a failure to act in the public good over a certain period. Has anyone in the RSA or the Department been disciplined or held to account for these failures? No, the Minister goes on dancing their merry tune, bringing in more silly legislation on top of what he already has, to placate them and make them justify their existence. We cannot get a test in Tipperary; one cannot reapply for a month. If one is disbarred from applying for a month, one should not be made a criminal.
I know people who have done their driving test ten times. The more times they do it, the worse it gets because it becomes a fear factor.
These young people in question, as well as some elderly people, are returned emigrants. If people are out of the country for four years, their licence lapses. They must do a theory test, driving lessons and apply for the test. I like to see foreign direct investment. We have 5,000 jobs in the greater Clonmel and Tipperary area. When these multinational people come here, do we insult them by insisting they do their theory tests to drive in Ireland? I wonder. I have never come across this. It is like other legislation with sweeteners. Is a blind eye turned to those industrialists who want to come here because we need them? Is it like the passports for sale scandal we had in the past? I wonder where the fairness in that is.
What have our people done to the Minister? What about Irish people? What has the Minister and his RSA advisers got against them? It is a kind of vendetta against them that they want to make criminals of them when they want to educate themselves, fulfil their employment dreams and when they want to facilitate the growing economy. People are needed to work as we are short of workers. What have they ever done to the Minister? I do not know.
It is a personal vendetta. The Minister just has a personal issue with these people as well as the ordinary folk in rural Ireland, who have little or no transport or any way of getting anywhere.
Then there are the huge issues of mental health. What impact is this having on the mental health of our young people? All kinds of courses are made available now, and all kinds of social workers and supports are put into educational facilities, workplaces, schools and sporting areas - rightly so. We must all be very conscious of mental health issues. What kind of a body blow is this to young John, who must give up his job and park the car he bought and in respect of which he has paid insurance? What kind of an impact will this have on his mental health? Let us think about that.
We are here passing legislation relating to mental health, wearing the green ribbon and raising issues of mental health. However, what kind of impact will this have on young men and women, or indeed older men and women who come back to Ireland, having spent perhaps 40 years abroad in the United States or elsewhere, and who are put through a theory test and a driving test, when they have driven in America and far busier places than Erin go bragh? Is anyone taking any cognisance of the impact this is having on these people and on hard-pressed families, parents and guardians? Does anyone have any understanding of, empathy for or interest in how this is affecting the parent who wants to get his or her kids motivated, get them out there, active and engaged, and get them on the road? If they are not on the road, they are condemned to waste time sitting in front of a computer - as if they have broadband. Many of them do not. They will mope around and their mental health will suffer directly because of actions the Minister is taking here. He dresses this up in flowery language, telling us it is for road safety and this and that.
The Minister will not back up his statistics. Deputy Kevin O'Keeffe is as láthair but has asked me to raise with the Minister a parliamentary question he has refused to answer about repeat offenders in respect of road traffic accidents. The Minister will not allow the question to be answered by his Department. I have the question here in my file and the reply from the Minister. Deputy O'Keeffe is unavailable - he will be in later - but he has asked me to find out from the Minister tonight why he will not put his money where his mouth is and tell us the reasons for this. The Minister refers to driving incidents. He has predicted on data from my county alone that the number of breathalyser tests carried out was exaggerated by 330%. I am straying a little now. I ask the Minister these questions in the context of the question he refuses to answer.
These are young people for whom I will die if I have to. They are entitled to a modicum of living standards, just as anyone in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Port Láirge nó aon bhaile eile is. Why are they going to be discriminated against? They will be discriminated against. They will be told that if they fail the test, they cannot reapply for a month. The first thing the Minister should do is allow them, the minute they leave the test centre, or even before they leave it, to reapply for another date. We should keep the spirit, the enthusiasm and the interest in being a good driver, qualified and law-abiding alive in them. Mol an óige agus tiocfaidh sí. I am after saying that a few times. Praise the young and they will come along with us. However, to insult and denigrate them, like the Minister is doing, is disgusting, as far as I am concerned. His lack of engagement, empathy and any interest in helping them out, keeping them interested and active or getting them into the workforce is pathetic.
The Minister refuses and refuses and refuses to answer. As I said, I called on him before to explain the genesis of this legislation. He can say he has met the Clancy family and many others - I have no doubt but that he has and I appreciate that - but we were here earlier tonight talking about the Bail (Amendment) Bill. The Minister should talk to Deputy Jim O'Callaghan. We talked about repeat offenders. We saw Lucia O'Farrell here recently, thankfully. We saw the countless repeat offences that the driver of that car had. He was stopped at a checkpoint before killing Shane O'Farrell. Why does the Minister not redouble with the Minister for Justice and Equality the traffic corps to what it was? It is a help and an asset in areas where there is crime. The Minister should get the traffic corps-----
On a point of order, we are on a specific amendment. We are going back over a whole lot of other things that have already been discussed. At this point, this is really only about talking down the clock. This is a pure filibuster.
Acting Chairman, I indicated earlier.
We should keep to the amendment, and the Acting Chairman should insist that debate is focused on the amendment, which it is not at present. Anyone listening to this is being taken on a tour of the legislation.
With all due respect, I will chair the proceedings-----
Please do.
-----and I will not be lectured by Deputy Murphy. I am governed by the rules that are before me. I assist the Chair. I am neither the Ceann Comhairle nor the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I have no right to interfere with what is being said. I accept that at times Deputy McGrath might be straying a little. I have already called on him to try to stick to the amendment, and I ask him again to do so. However, with all due respect to the point of view of Deputies Murphy and Broughan, I am going by the rules to the effect that for any amendments being dealt with on recommittal, standard Committee Stage rules apply, that is, there are no time limits to contributions and no limit on the number of contributions per Member. If Members have issues with the way we do business, they should go back to the Business Committee and reconstruct the rules in a different way. However, as we proceed this evening, unless someone is totally out of order, I cannot interfere with the existing process. I am sorry I cannot because I can see the point Deputy Murphy makes.
Acting Chairman-----
I think that is a misreading-----
It is not.
Respectfully, may I say-----
I ask the Deputy to resume her seat. I have answered the question. I call Deputy Healy Rae on a very brief point of order.
As the Acting Chairman knows, I have been indicating for a while, and I thank him for his indulgence. I appreciate his ruling on this. The last time I checked, we live in a democracy. Members should study the rules and the procedures of this convened meeting of Dáil Éireann. Deputy McGrath has the floor. He is continuously being interrupted by someone who has a different viewpoint, which is fine, but to do so continuously after the Chair makes his ruling is unfair and disruptive. It is trying to put the Deputy off what he is trying to do, which is to make a valuable point, which he is elected to do. On behalf of the people not only of Tipperary, but around the country, each one of us has things to say. We want to speak to amendment No. 22, and we are entitled to do so. For people to come in here and try in an organised, coup d'état way to shut down democracy is wrong.
I thank the Deputy.
I really believe it is wrong. People came in here tonight with one aim in mind, and that was to shut down this debate.
We have the Deputy's point.
That is wrong and should not be allowed.
In fairness to Deputy Catherine Murphy, from what I can recall, she made two interventions, which were totally within the rules. I let her in on a point of order and I thought her point of order was correct. It is not correct to say there have been constant interruptions.
I will resume the debate. I ask Deputy McGrath to stick to the amendment as much as he can and perhaps come to a conclusion if he can, even though it is his right to continue speaking.
I thank the Acting Chairman and I appreciate his vindicating my rights. I resent being told I was acting the clown or whatever else.
As I said, for the record I have statistics here that the Minister confirmed of the number of people waiting to be scheduled for driving tests. I have said this is "deeply alarming and a further indication of the disarray that is afflicting the learner driver system". Through the Chair, I beg the Minister that this is where he should focus his intention. He should deal with the alarming figures I am going to quote and allow these people to get their tests. If there is another problem out there that is not broken, he should not fix it. He should fix the problem first. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. This is deeply disturbing.
The RSA has confirmed to me by parliamentary reply that nationally a total of 44,746 applications are waiting to be scheduled for tests. These are the Minister's Department's figures. They have no idea when they will get a date. This is why I say the Minister should look at and deal with this first. He has been in the job for two years. The people in the RSA have criticised us. This is what they should be dealing with. Then they should deal with other issues systematically and incrementally along the way and try to have us all going in the one direction. These figures go to the heart of what I and others have been saying for some time now, that there is chronic backlog afflicting this sector, which in turn is creating serious knock-on consequences. That is where I am coming from.
That is where the problems lie.
Going back to the employment market, we cannot get people. We all know as business people we cannot get people because they cannot get their licences. That would not be tolerated anywhere else. They would be glad to get people back to work and they are needed now more than ever because we do not have people to do the work. The Taoiseach tells us we have full employment. We have negative situations in our county because we cannot get the staff because they cannot get their licences even though they are paying the money on training - I am sorry to be repetitive - to get the lessons and doing their best to get it but they cannot get the test. The figures go to the heart of what I and others have been saying.
It is deeply alarming to me that the figure of 44,746 does not include those who have already been scheduled for an upcoming test. Does the Minister understand? It does not include the large cohort, I imagine, who have already been scheduled for a test and given a test date. I do not have the numbers for that. They have been scheduled for an upcoming test. So the figure of almost 45,000 merely reflects those waiting to be given a test date. There could be another 45,000 or 145,000: I do not know and the Minister will not tell us. Has he asked his departmental officials? Has he asked the RSA? I know there are problems with getting information back and forth between the Garda and the RSA with one of them blaming the other and they cannot get accurate details to answer parliamentary questions which is ridiculous in a democracy. They should be a public service and not self-serving. They should tell the people the facts and not cloak it and mask it, trying to demonise young people.
The RSA advised that part of this is due to the number of driver tester retirements in the past 12 months. However, hey presto, this week, either yesterday or the day before, I heard an RSA spokesperson say that once this law is passed - live horse and you will get grass - it will magically employ, I think, 160 extra testers. I could be wrong on the figure. The reply to the parliamentary question stated that part of it was due to the number of driver tester retirements in the past 12 months. However, it does not specify how many testers have opted out of the system and why. That is a very important question. Have they taken early retirement? Have they just got fed up with the system? Have any of them been dismissed or reprimanded? The Department will not answer that question either. That is very important.
I am putting facts before the Minister. They are the gospel as far as the RSA is concerned. They are the Minister's words in a reply to a parliamentary question, which I have a right to ask. The next thing some Deputies might try to stop rural Deputies having parliamentary questions. They might have covered too much discrimination against rural areas. That is what it is, dogged discrimination against rural areas.
The RSA has also advised that it has taken on 23 new testers since 2016. This comes from the reply to a recent parliamentary question. It could announce this week - dangle the carrot before us - that if we pass this Bill, it will appoint 160 new testers. The reply stated that 23 testers had been recruited, but only six of those were due to have commenced by the end of 2017. What is going on in the RSA and the testing? Based on a parliamentary question submitted in late 2017 it had recruited 23 since 2016 but only six of the 23 will have commenced operating by this year. This is simply not good enough given the scale of the challenge. The Minister will not answer those questions either or ask officials to come in who answer to him.
We are being told the RSA will employ 160 of them - I could be wrong; it could be 140 or 150 of them - if the law is passed. However, under existing legislation and the existing massive waiting lists I have told the Minister about - I have requoted his figures back to him - he has told us the RSA has only recruited 23 testers since 2016 but only six of those had commenced operation by this year. What are the other 17 doing? I have no disrespect or animosity towards any of them. They applied for the job. I hope there was a rigorous process and they got the job. Why are they not at work? People are being driven to distraction, and driven into mental illness, unemployment and lack of engagement in our society and we have 17 driver testers, according to the Minister's figures, idle, ina suí gach lá in áit éigin, doing nothing. As they say, the devil finds work for idle hands. Why is that being done to those people? They applied for the job, got the job and they are not being allowed to work and not being put at work.
There is something rotten in the RSA and in the Department with this kind of scandal going on. I suspect they are getting paid. Why should they not be paid if they are hired? However, the Minister is not allowing them to work even though he has all those figures indicating that 44,747 people are awaiting a date for a driving test and that figure does not include those who have scheduled tests.
Why do people in Tipperary have to wait a month to reapply when with 17 testers recruited since 2016, níl aon obair acu? They have a job but they have no work. This is a scandal that the Minister wrote about and railed about for decades in the Sunday Independent when he was writing about jobs for the boys, quangos and lack of accountability. That rings fairly hollow now. Does the Minister ever go back and look at some of the articles he wrote? Seventeen testers have been recruited but not allowed to work.
I ask this question again. Is there a trade union issue? I asked that because I had been told in a nod-and-wink way that there was. I do not know whether there is and I will not apportion blame. There is some reason, which is rotten, that 17 people are getting paid with no work in spite of the fact that people are crying out to do their tests, crying out to get into the employment market and crying out to have social interactions and be able to fulfil their lives to some extent. The Minister will not answer that question either. I would like the Minister to write it down that 23 new testers were hired since 2016. Based on the figures I have, quoted by the Minister, only six of them will have commenced operating by this year. That is a scandal when we consider the number of people waiting for tests. John in Tipperary today failed his test and must wait a month before he can even reapply.
The Minister has dangled the carrot in front of us - several carrots have been dangled - that if we pass the Bill, the RSA will recruit 150 of them. When will they be put to work? Will it be in 2040, given that it could only gainfully employ six of the 23 they took on trying to make some dent on the waiting lists? If the Minister is worth a candle at all he should answer those questions before he penalises and discriminates further against the young men and women of rural Ireland and urban Ireland. Most of the problems are in rural areas because people in urban areas have other forms of transport available to them which we do not have in rural Ireland. Ba chóir don Aire an cheist sin a fhreagairt. Before we go another minute he should be answering, but he has not answered any questions.
With all the amendments all the way along questions have been put to the Minister by several Deputies, not only from our side of the House, but also from the other side of the House, and he has not answered one. He did not answer Deputy O'Keeffe's question. He has not backed up his claim that repeat offenders are causing all the accidents. That is a fine thing to say: it is nice and dandy. It is a nice bit of a quote and will get traction in the media. However, he is demonising innocent people if it is not true. If he does not prove it to be true, it must be false. We are not in a court of law here, but we are in an elected Parliament and we are getting this diatribe and lack of answers and lack of accountability.
In my county, Tipperary, 1,700 people are waiting for driving tests to be scheduled. That does not include John, who did the test today, and the many others who have tests scheduled. These are 1,700 people waiting to be scheduled for driving tests. This demonstrates the enormity of the problem at a local level. Does the Minister understand the 1,700 people? I know he can count. Those 1,700 people are waiting for driving tests to be scheduled in Tiobraid Árann. We can assume that 300 or 400 of those are young drivers who want to get on the road, want to play their part and want to be law abiding. They will be criminalised if the Minister passes this legislation. The objective is to make the roads safer, but this is criminalising young people. It is naked and basic criminalisation and is demonising the people of Tipperary. I will not stand for that.
The Minister came down to Cashel for a photo opportunity last week with his sop for the rural transport.
What about the young people? What about the people who are waiting and who have no choice but to wait? They will not even schedule them for a test. What about those people? It is time the Minister started being accountable. It is time he started putting into action some of the words he wrote Sunday after Sunday. Even during the holidays, when he was in France, he would write articles about how he would run the country and the world if he had a chance at power. He is making a damn bad job of it. He cannot run his Department. He cannot control the RSA. He cannot support the traffic corps or the Garda Síochána with his colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan, and allow them to be out policing the roads and the uninsured drivers who are reckless, do not care, do not want a test, have no licence and are out there driving and causing mayhem and destruction. That is where the Minister should focus his energy.
The quiet, ordinary people of rural Ireland are a soft touch. They are the people who will not come up here and march on the Dáil about water charges. They pay their way. They dig their wells and pay their water charges. They pay tax to educate their children and support their communities. There is fundraising every day of the week. There is fundraising when someone is sick or hurt in an accident, such as a young boy in Clogheen who was hurt on a mountain bike recently. I attended a coffee morning last week that raised €4,000 in a small community. That is the generosity of spirit of the people the Minister is trying to blackguard. It is downright naked blackguarding. The Minister is looking up at the sky and anywhere except looking at me in the face to answer the questions I have asked him. He has not answered even one question. I have never seen such contempt for Members of the House by any Minister and I am here almost 11 years thanks to the good people of Tipperary. I might not be here much longer but that is their decision. While I am here I will try to hold the Minister to account because he is not accountable to anyone. Just because he is holding the Government together it cannot do anything with him only throw sops every now and then. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan, went to Stepaside last week to have a look at the Garda station to see if there were many inhabitants in it.
Is the Deputy addressing the amendment?
I might need to read it out to the Deputy to remind him of it.
I have it here. I am just saying-----
The Deputy is discussing the position with regard to learner driver permits. He should stick to that.
The Acting Chairman knows what I am discussing. I have given the facts and figures. The Minister will not answer any questions. Would I be completely out of order in asking the Acting Chairman to give some of my time to the Minister to answer my questions?
I will chair proceedings. There is a list of speakers.
I would be willing to do that if I thought I would get an answer from the Minister.
If the Minister puts his name on the list, I presume it would be in order. There is a list and I am not deviating from it.
I would not expect that.
While I have no right to ask the Deputy to stop, he should try for the sake of everybody else to bring his - I will not say "few words" because he has been on a long and winding road - contribution to a conclusion to allow other people to speak.
I respect the Acting Chairman's request but we have a lot of long and winding roads in Tipperary and the Minister did not go to see them last week. He just stuck to the motorway. I do not want to be challenging but I have people in Tipperary to represent. It is my duty.
I appreciate that.
It is my duty as a Teachta Dála, a messenger of the people, to represent them-----
I accept that.
-----when I see legislation like this that is incomprehensible and uncharacteristic of the House. In spite of our pleas for engagement and for amendments to be accepted on Committee Stage, not only does the Minister delay but he recommits items. This is one of them. That is why we are still here ag cáint faoin mBille seo. It is not my decision or the Acting Chairman's.
In Tipperary there are 1,700 people waiting to be scheduled for driving tests. That is only one county. Multiply that figure by 26. They are the people who are waiting to be scheduled. They are not the people who have been scheduled and are in the system and being worked along. With so many testers we can assume there are probably at least 100 a week being tested. I cannot get the figures. What we are seeing here is that people simply cannot get a test within a reasonable period of time. That is my issue. They cannot get the test within a reasonable period of time. They have done their best. They have procured a vehicle and insurance at great expense and have procured driving instructors. I salute them. They are necessary, very good and professional. They also have serious issues with the RSA, which will not listen. It is cluasa dúnta. People cannot even get a date for a test. This is creating massive levels of frustration and uncertainty throughout the country and my county. It must be addressed with all the other demands.
We can talk here ad infinitum and we still cannot get any questions answered. This legislation will be forced through. If the Government had the numbers it would guillotine it. The Minister does not even listen. He does not take account of the fact there have been 23 testers recruited and only six of them are at work. Cá bhfuil an 17 eile? Cad atá siad ag déanamh gach lá? Where are they? I am entitled to ask those questions and entitled to expect an answer and to be proven wrong if I am wrong. The figures I am quoting are directly from a reply to a parliamentary question supplied to me by the Minister's Department. It is my duty to insist we be told where these testers are. It is also my duty to question the statement from the RSA or its agents this week which said they would recruit 150 or 160 new driving testers when the Bill is passed. Live horse and you will get grass. Dúirt bean liom go ndúirt bean léi go raibh fear i dTiobraid Árann a bhfuil póca ina léine aige. The people are too educated for this now. They will not buy this kind of claptrap and unaccountability. They will not and have not bought it. It is not acceptable.
The Minister will not answer any of the questions he has been asked. There is one very serious one, which totally debunks any impression he might like to give that he is interested in road safety. I will not say the Minister is not interested in road safety - I hope he is because I am - but he is not interested in sorting this out and having a level playing field, especially for young people or older learner drivers. He will not give them a chance to fulfil their lives so they are not moping around, sad and despondent because they cannot get a test. They have the lessons done and everything else. The Minister will not answer those questions. I am sorry I am being repetitive.
I will mention customer service in the NDLS again which is being delivered to motorists across the country, including young drivers. It was foisted on us in Clonmel, on young people and learner drivers as well. They could not find the place. They could not get a time or a date. They could not get good or bad from it. In Arklow there is a portakabin and no ticket service like in the tax office. Rows took place there. It was foisted on us by the RSA with no proper consultation, imagination or checks and balances on how it would bed down. I do not know how the Minister managed to keep a straight face when he indicated to me this was done to provide a more efficient and cost-effective service.
It is the same as the driving tests. I am not commenting on the tests themselves but the whole system of getting a test. How can the Minister quote that kind of diatribe that it is a more efficient and cost-effective service? The reality is that three different companies were hired in to do what county council officials in the tax office did for decades. They complied with the statutory instrument all those years ago when the then Minister announced people could buy a driver's licence over the counter because they could not deal with it. Maybe the Minister should suggest some kind of an amnesty. Would that be beyond his imagination or that of his Department? Is there any imagination in there about how we could deal constructively with people who are waiting to do their tests? We want them to be able to get on the road and to be legally on the road. Maybe before using a mallet and a sledgehammer to crack a nut, the Minister will go back to the drawing board and use some bit of imagination to see how he will allow the 1,700 people in Tipperary to get a driving test. How will he allow those young people, some of whom have just finished their leaving certificate exams and want to go on to do third level courses, or older people who have done courses get their tests?
We know the trouble. Deputy Healy-Rae knows they were brought to Turas Nua. Turas Uafásach I call it. People are being driven here and there. Maybe the Minister will allow the people in Turas Nua to get driving instruction free of charge or be assisted to get it from agencies. The Abbey school in Tipperary town has a driving track. It is lucky enough to have the space. It hires in a good tester, Joe Quinn from Tipperary town, and he gives them lessons as part of the transition year project. That is where we should be going with education. We should have the test totally reformed. We should take testing out of this chaotic system where 23 testers have been hired but only six are working. I do not know if it is because there are union issues. Deputy Ross was the reforming Minister who was going to cut away the fat cats and the snouts from the troughs. God knows what books he wrote.
I bought some of them but I am sorry I did. They were a good read at the time and we expected things to be done but we know now whose snout is in the trough and we know whose ears are blocked to listening.
The Deputy should speak to the amendment please.
I am. I am asking that this be on the syllabus of the young people in transition year and maybe even before that, in third year. The Minister should sit down with the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, and in the way special needs assistants are taken on special assistants should be taken on to encourage these young people to read and study the rules of the road and to understand the dangers of a mechanically propelled vehicle.
People from the Road Safety Authority was in Clonmel recently to give an emergency services seminar. It had a fine big road show and that was good. There was a simulator car to show everyone, including young girls and boys, the impact of an accident and of a car overturning. The Minister needs to get them trained to drive. Rural drivers have some advantage over city drivers because many of them live on farms or have access to land where they can drive off road. In cities they cannot. Those people should be allowed to learn. They want to learn. There are no more imaginative young people than in our country. Let them learn in school. That might make school more interesting for some people, especially those doing the applied leaving certificate. That is not too academic. The Minister should get them tested and give them a prescriptive education not in a tutorial but where they could be brought along by the excellent teachers in our schools delivering those transition year programmes and have the simulators and the programme to understand the vehicle and its dangers, and to understand to respect the vehicle, the road users and themselves, when they get on the road. That would be another imaginative way, and a compassionate way, of looking at the issue and it would make the transition year programmes much more interesting. Some of them are very good, some not as good. We have groups coming in here every day of the week from different counties. They should be allowed to be enthused about this and to understand driving, whether it be a motorbike, a tractor or a gluaistáin - if the Minister does not know what a gluaistáin is, it is a car - and other vehicles as well. That would be meaningful, productive and enlightening to all of us and would prove that the RSA and the Department and the two or three other quangos attached to it were interested, imaginative and were not a closed book or a closed shop that did not want to listen to, or engage with, the ordinary people, the 1,700 in Tipperary waiting for a date, multiplied by those in all the other counties. It would show that they are interested in the real issues of road safety, not television promotions and advertisements. They might get around to answering parliamentary questions we have put down, like those Deputy Kevin O'Keeffe has put down and many others who cannot get answers. That would be one way to do it, a carrot and stick, mol an óige agus tiocfaidh siad. Train them when they are young. That is necessary because the roads now are much more dangerous and faster.
I heard the Nissan Leaf, an electric car, advertised as going from 0 to 60 km or 70 km in ten seconds. The silence of that car is such that we will not even hear it coming. That is technology and I welcome it but I got a spin in one and I know what it is like, I was a passenger. We have to look at all the new technology. Deputy O'Keeffe was in Germany looking at a driverless car. He spoke about it and asked a few questions about it as well. Maybe we are going to go that road.
We need to keep pace and not have the old system of waiting to do the test, failing it and not being able to apply again for a month, and waiting again. The Taoiseach, when he was Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, could have given the whole national driver licence service, NDLS, to the post offices. They are all over the place. They are closing down and being bought out and forced out. Where stands the Minister in that area? He needs to be a bit imaginative. He should use the staff. I want to thank the local authority staff who dealt with the licences for young and old for decades in each county and did a good job. It was unceremoniously taken away from them. It was going to be better, faster, smarter and more efficient. Tens of millions of euro later we end up with three companies trying to issue the licence now. It is bedding in a bit now but we had disorganised and unprecedented chaos in the meantime.
Then there was the issue of the Government wanting to attach the personal public service number, PPSN, and national identity card to the driving licence. It spent €180 million on that before pulling the plug on it. Fair dues to the Minister. I salute him for doing that. The plug had to be pulled after spending €180 million. One would think we were talking about confetti or chaff.
On a point of order-----
What is the point of order now?
The Acting Chairman asked that there would be some degree of brevity. It is an hour since he did so. This is the third time Deputy Mattie McGrath has spoken on this amendment. He has spoken for an hour. He is filibustering and does not really want the Minister to answer the questions. He will keep on talking. The way the Parliament is being abused is very unfair. I was accused of being party to a coup d'état. In fact, the abuse is on the other side here. It is really unfair that this should be allowed to continue. Deputy McGrath should bring his contribution to a close because he is being repetitive-----
Allow the Deputy to speak without interruption.
-----and is talking down the clock.
I appreciate Deputy Catherine Murphy's case. I understand where she is coming from. Deputy McGrath has been speaking for a considerable period. I have to go by the rules. The Business Committee makes up the rules. If the Deputy has difficulties with this procedure she should get it sorted out. I cannot do anything more about it this evening. I have no right to overrule him on it. I did ask Deputy McGrath to consider the other people who want to speak.
I ask him to bring his long oration to a conclusion to allow other Members in. Deputy McGrath is being asked by the Chair to consider that. I ask him to have some respect for the Chair and maybe bring to a conclusion his contribution.
I respect the Chair but I am not going to take a lecture from an Teachta Murphy and her crowd.
The Deputy should just stick to the-----
I am not going to take a lecture from a city slicker who has moved down to Kildare and now wants to tell us that what I am talking about is rubbish or whatever else.
That is an insult.
I have not insulted anyone here.
Can the Deputy stop-----
I have not insulted anyone here.
The Deputy insulted her.
He insulted her.
If I allow a Deputy in on a point of order-----
Yes, but she is not coming in to insult me.
The Deputy should just allow me to finish. If I allow a Deputy in on a point of order, and I think Deputies Broughan and Murphy have a genuine point, I will allow them in. I do not think that Deputy Murphy referred to the Deputy in any derogatory sense.
She did of course.
I do not think she did and I am ruling that she did not, so would the Deputy please continue and bring his contribution to a conclusion?
She did of course. She said I was deliberately saying to people that the Minister would not answer the question today. She said that I had no interest in hearing answers from the Minister. I ask for that to be withdrawn. I have interests.
I will not withdraw it. That is exactly what the Deputy is doing.
I have asked him. Will the Chair allow me to speak without interruption?
The Deputy should address his final remarks through the Chair, please.
Through the Chair, yes. I am not going to be dictated to by Deputy Murphy. I know her political history and where she came from in politics. I am not going to be dictated to by that. Those days are long gone, dictatorship. I know where she came from. I asked the Minister and I beg him and I have begged him.
Hold on, I object to being talked about in that way.
Deputy Murphy should resume her seat.
I have begged the Minister.
Deputy Murphy should resume her seat. I will allow her speak in a moment.
I have begged him, I have written to him-----
The Deputy should stick to-----
I am sticking to it.
The Deputy is not.
I am saying I just-----
I do not want the Deputy to make any personal reference to any Member of the House.
They can make it about me. I am saying I want the answers. Deputy Murphy said on the record that I did not want the answers. Of course I want the answers. I am pleading with the Minister. I asked the Acting Chairman and he told me he would be on the list and that if I wanted I could give him some of my time. I will do it any time if he would answer any question. In all the debates we have had here he has not answered one single question. Of course I want him to answer the questions. If people want to suggest I have some other ulterior motive it is downright insulting.
I am representing the people of Tipperary and the figures I gave are for the waiting list in Tipperary, and only in Tipperary, my own county. The RSA recruited 23 and put only six of them to gainful employment and it announced this week it will have another 150 if the Bill passes. Why can they not be put in place first to show empathy and bring down those lists and allow the people get to work?
A man came into my office recently who had been working in Australia. Many of our people went out to work in Australia and played a huge part in the construction industry there. He wants to come back and to set up a business here. He must do a theory test, a driver test and lessons here, even though he drove here for about ten years before he went to Australia.
He went out there at 25, 26 or 27. He has driven all kinds of cars out there on road and off road in the Outback and every place else. We are encouraging them to come back. The Health Service Executive, HSE, is out there in countries like that trying to get nurses back to South Tipperary General Hospital in Clonmel. If their licence has lapsed, they then face the insult of going through a theory test again. Is that fair?
On a point of order.
I call Deputy Broughan.
It is now 8.30 p.m. and the Acting Chair indicated earlier that he would now consult the Ceann Comhairle or the Leas-Cheann Comhairle about my proposal to move for closure of the debate under Standing Order 68. I ask the Acting Chair to do that.
I am not the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. When he comes in, Deputy Broughan can take that up with him because he-----
The Acting Chair did say that he would-----
I said when the Leas-Cheann Comhairle came in and I said that he would be in at 8.30 p.m.
In the interest of-----
He will be in at 8.30 p.m. so I am going to move ahead.
I thank the Acting Chair and I will not-----
I ask Deputy Mattie McGrath to bring his words to a conclusion please.
I will.
The final few words. I call Deputy Ó Snodaigh.
I am not trying to curtail debate but I find it strange that the request for Standing Order 68 has been made. Since the Acting Chair is not in a position to adjudicate on that, I suggest that continuing with the debate, while that order is hanging over it, would be wrong. It would be a denial of the rights of the Deputy who raised the issue of the Standing Order - in this case that is Deputy Broughan. I suggest that the Acting Chair should seek advice on whether debate can continue. Standing Order 68 does not set out any timeframe but it suggests that the Ceann Comhairle and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle are the only ones who can make a decision. Since the request has been made, I think we should suspend while awaiting the decision on this matter from the Ceann Comhairle or the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. It is not clear from the Standing Order whether they have to come into the Chamber to make that decision but I presume that is the intention.
I thank Deputy Ó Snodaigh for his observation. Again, I do not feel that I should stop the debate but I will point out that no Member may claim to move that "The Question be now put" unless the Ceann Comhairle or the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, or in the case of a standing, select or special committee, the Chairman, is in the Chair. I have no power. I will repeat what I said earlier. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is due into the House about now and he can deal with this issue and I am sure that he will. I am sorry but my hands are tied. I ask Deputy Mattie McGrath, again, to please finalise his comments so that we can move on. Deputies Catherine Murphy and Broughan have been here from the very start.
I will and I thank the Acting Chair for his forbearance. Mar fhocal scoir, I want to reiterate that I have asked numerous questions and other colleagues - such as Deputy Kevin O'Keeffe - have had numerous parliamentary questions as well. We offered our time across the floor here to get answers from the Minister, Deputy Ross. He cannot just go into a bunker and refuse. I had many other issues about deaths at sea, where the Minister is responsible as well. I refer to a family in Tipperary that lost two lives. Every year, 138 people die - young people in the main - by drowning in the seas, rivers and lakes and other areas as well. I will leave those for another day.
I want to get the Minister to pony up here, be a man, have the debate, answer some of the questions and tell us where we are wrong and why it was folly. I am sure he is not totally anti-rural Ireland and totally anti-young people. He has children and grandchildren, so he should not be. I refer to the evidence I see before me. This is a sow's breakfast of a dinner - the Attorney General described the other Bill as a dog's dinner - and I could call it worse, a boar's breakfast. It is terrible. The Minister will not listen or answer any questions. I ask him to please freagair an ceist. I thank the Acting Chair for his forbearance and I defer to the next speaker.
Deputy Mattie McGrath should thank me for my forbearance.
I did thank the Acting Chair.
Deputy Broughan is the next speaker. He made a contribution earlier but the floor is his if he wishes to make a further contribution. To inform Members, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is on his way to take over the Chair.
I spoke on this last week and said what I wanted to say.
He is more than welcome to make a contribution like other Deputies.
I thank the Acting Chair.
I call Deputy Catherine Murphy, who is next on the list.
I will be brief. On Deputy Fitzmaurice's suggested amendment, there is merit in the points he made about the length of waiting times for driving tests. We all wish that driving tests were available in as short a time as possible. I cannot support the Deputy's amendment, even though I think a valid point is being made. It has to be dealt with separately.
To take it to its logical conclusion, if this amendment was made it would mean that the protection intended by this section of the legislation would only apply for six weeks. That flies in the face of what is intended. The inquest into the deaths of Ms Geraldine Clancy and Ms Louise Clancy is where some of this amendment has come from - it is not exclusively from the Road Safety Authority. It was a recommendation directly from that inquest. I want to refer to a couple of other things before I finish. I am not a fan of guillotines. I was not a fan of them in the last Dáil and we do not have them now because we have a Business Committee.
There is also a responsibility on us as parliamentarians to not abuse the situation. We saw much repetition not addressing the issues in this Bill and that has been counterproductive. What we have got to keep front and centre is that this is a road safety initiative. The rights of young people must be taken into consideration in respect of the length of time they are waiting on the driving test list but Ms Louise Clancy was also a young person. She cannot speak for herself. I refer also to other families who had somebody killed in this scenario. I would like to hear the Minister answering the questions. The debate will keep going around in circles and unfortunately Standing Order 68, as has been called for by Deputy Broughan, terminates the debate. It does exactly the opposite of what has been stated is the desired outcome that the answers will be facilitated. That is the point that I was making. I will also address this "city slicker" thing that I heard this evening. I have lived in Kildare since 1978 and I am not a recent import to the area. I resent that kind of personalised remark. There is no place for it.
On a point of order, under Standing Order 68, I moved about 45 minutes ago that the question on this amendment be put and that we would have closure. As the Leas-Cheann Comhairle knows, I think he was here, we are going into something like our 15th or 16th hour. It is one of the longest debates ever - even counting Finance Bills, etc. We have had endless discussion of this amendment, all around the houses effectively, and we are due to have a repetition of this with the last major amendment to the Bill. I ask, under Standing Order 68, that the question be put.
I am familiar with Standing Order 68. When Deputy Catherine Murphy proposed this the last time, perhaps inadvertently, I immediately put it. On reflection, I think I was wrong because I believe the Minister has to be given an opportunity. It would close down debate. This is not all one sided debate. The Minister will have to be given an opportunity and if I accept this - and I may later Deputy Broughan - and guillotine it now, I am not going to take responsibility for that. It is at my discretion. I will be asking those who have offered to speak, to speak to the motion.
Unfortunately we are in a situation where this Bill has been recommitted. All of the Members present understand what recommittal means. We are not on Report Stage now but rather Committee Stage, and one can speak as often as one likes and as long as one likes, providing, of course, one focuses on the amendment. We are now discussing the amendment tabled by Deputy Fitzmaurice. Allow me to draw my breath and see how things develop from here. The Members who are listed to speak are Deputies Danny Healy-Rae, Michael Healy-Rae, Michael Fitzmaurice and Michael Collins. I will give those Members an opportunity to speak. I will not stifle them, but I am asking that they take a limited amount of time. If they do not, I will revert back to the proposal suggested by Deputy Broughan.
I wish to raise a point of order.
What is the point of order?
I am prepared to speak now in response.
The Minister might be prepared to speak, but-----
I am prepared to speak if the Leas-Cheann Comhairle agrees to it. I am prepared to answer the questions which have been posed.
If the Deputies give way the Minister is entitled to speak.
The Members wishing to speak have to be given the opportunity to speak. I am asking those Deputies to act reasonably and not to speak indefinitely, as they have done so far.
On a point of order, with due respect to the Minister, how can he speak now when I have questions to put to him?
I am prepared to speak now to answer the questions which have already been asked.
(Interruptions).
If I may make a recommendation, if the Deputies are allowed to speak and want answers to their questions, the questions should be posed. It is not necessary to deliver a full Second Stage speech. Will the Deputies agree to pose any questions they might have? I will then call on the Minister to answer the questions asked prior to this and any questions arising now.
I can come back afterwards on the other questions.
The Minister is suggesting that he will now answer the questions that were asked, and if there are further questions he will answer them at a later stage.
That is a matter for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
It is not up to me. I cannot offer that proposal to Members if the Minister might not answer questions at a later stage. We have to make progress. Deputy Danny Healy-Rae is the next speaker and I ask him to remember to pose questions. I remind him that the amendment we are discussing reads: "Provided that the provisions of this subparagraph shall not apply in circumstances where a driving test date has not been supplied to an applicant within a period of six weeks from the date of their application." I ask the Deputy to focus on that.
When the Minister spoke at the beginning of the debate on this particular amendment he said that a young, unaccompanied driver, when stopped on the side of the road, will be taken out of his or her car and left there while the car is taken away. As I understand it, on a cold winter evening this young boy or girl will have to walk home. If that person is leaving a place such as Kenmare and travelling home to Lauragh and is stopped on the side of the road, with no taxi, Luas, DART or bus service available, does the Minister believe that it is right that that person will have to walk home? Is it right that a person leaving the village of Sneem who is apprehended after leaving the dance hall or stopped-----
We understand the principle of the question now. The question is what happens to a person left at the side of the road in the circumstances outlined, whether it is in Sneem or Dungloe or elsewhere. We will look for an answer to that question. The Deputy may ask his next question.
If a person is coming out of Kilorglin and is stopped and taken out of his or her car, how is that person going to get to Glencar, Cromane, Glenbeigh or Beaufort?
The Deputy has asked the same question twice.
It is as I have said since this debate began. The Minister does not understand the places I am talking about. Each place is different. Each place is remote, and other places are more remote. I am entitled to point out, on the floor of the Dáil, and I will abide by the direction of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that each place is different. I represent each of those places. I represent those poor young fellows who are starting out in life. If one leaves Castleisland and wants to get home to Knocknagoshel or Brosna-----
The same legislation will apply regardless of where one is leaving from or travelling to.
It is a different kind of a road. I am talking about a national primary route. It is practically a motorway, and if a person is stopped on the side of that road that person's life will be in grave danger. A young person making his or her way home in the dark may not make it. It is a similar story for someone leaving Listowel for Knockanure, Tarbert or Ballylongford. If one looks at the national primary route and national secondary route in Killarney-----
The Deputy is asking a question he has already asked. The Minister has noted his question and will answer it.
Will the Minister answer this question?
I am sure he will; he is anxious to answer.
The Minister was invited to Kerry last week by Local Link Kerry. I was invited to attend as well. The Minister did not invite me. When I looked for details about how the Minister was travelling and what travel arrangements had been made I was told to contact the office of Deputy Brendan Griffin. I was also stalled there. I received no information from him. At the start of this debate Deputy Griffin was posing hard questions, but somebody made him a Minister of State and he is now lining up behind the Minister. It is very unfair that these young people are going to be criminalised and that their cars are going to be towed away and that they will be left at the side of the road. It will criminalise parents, good hard-working people, but the Minister does not understand. I ask him to spend three or four weeks in Kerry, because that is what it would take. The Fine Gael Deputies supporting the Minister understand the situation but do not mind because they want the Minister to continue supporting their party. It appears to me that many Sinn Féin Deputies are supporting the Minister on this matter. They should also know what rural Ireland is about and how people have to try to manage and improvise, and they should know the difficulties that people in rural places go through to travel from their homes and return to their homes.
This amendment concerns circumstances where a driving test has not been supplied to an applicant within a period of six weeks. I can summarise the questions the Deputy is asking. Will parents be criminalised? Why was the Deputy not invited to Kerry by the Minister? Those are the questions. I do not know whether the Minister can answer them or not. They are simple questions. They do not have to be expanded upon. I am sure the Deputy has more questions to ask that he wants the Minister to answer.
I have more questions to ask.
The Deputy should make sure they are relevant questions.
They are relevant to this amendment. Instead of suggesting that these people be put off the road and kept from driving, why was a curfew not imposed on them, from early morning until evening so that they could get to work, apprenticeships, colleges or to their work experience placements? Why did we not think of the box-clever system, where a little black box can be fitted to a car which can monitor the amount of kilometres a person has driven and the speed at which the car was driven?
The thing was out of sight and had complete control and knowledge of the system. It would have to be handed in to be monitored, but if somebody was monitoring, he or she could have checked if the driver had blackguarded or done anything wrong in the course of driving. That system is available and many insurance companies use it.
The black box to which the Deputy is referring is not part of the amendment which is very clear. It reads "the provisions of this subparagraph shall not apply in circumstances where a driving test date has not been supplied to an applicant within a period of six weeks from the date of their application”. That is really what we are talking about.
Yes, but I believe-----
The Deputy has moved no amendment concerning the black box.
Every youngster deserves one chance. If he or she blots his or her copybook, I would accept it, but they are not being given a chance. The Minister does not understand what it is like to live in a remote place. If he was asked to live in a place like Glenmore, Lauragh or the Black Valley for three or four weeks and did not have a car, he would understand how hard it was and what it was like to try to manage in such places. Gardaí have enough to do as it is without having to monitor this new law. There are drugs to be monitored, with thieves and robbers, as well as anti-social behaviour. Does the Minister know that if he succeeds in pushing or ramming this Bill through, it will hurt many elderly people who took up driving when their partners died? I refer to those who had to start to learn to drive and took the 12 lessons. It could be a woman in her 60s who took 12 driving lessons. They are perfectly good drivers and can drive well in rural places, from Kenmare to Lauragh, Sneem to Caherdaniel and Gneeveguilla to Rathmore. However, when they have to go into a city to take the driving test, they lose confidence and start to shake and shiver. Many of them are finding it very hard to pass the test. Does the Minister realise he is going to hurt this group of people?
I was in a supermarket in Killarney very early last Sunday morning. A girl who has been working there for a few months asked me when the Minister's Bill would be passed, or whether it had already been passed. I said it had not yet been passed. She said that when it was, it would be the end of her because her mother was working, that her father was dead and that she would have no one to bring her to the supermarket to work.
I will interrupt the Deputy. We had an informal agreement that we would focus on questions. At this stage he has asked several questions. Numerous questions have been asked by Deputies since the resumption of the debate on amendment No. 22. I am going to give the Minister an opportunity to deal with those questions. I will then allow a round of strictly questions and the Minister to deal with them.
May I ask the remainder of my questions?
If they are questions-----
May I ask the remainder of my questions?
I have noted the last one about the lady working in the shop asking when the Bill would be passed. I am taking note of them and will make sure the Minister answers them.
Yes, but can I ask the remainder of my questions afterwards?
Of course, but they have to be questions. I give the Deputy my word. I have no choice. Perhaps when the Minister answers, he might deal with the many questions the Deputy has asked and some that have yet to be asked. I call the Minister to deal with questions that have been asked . This is not the end of questions.
Perhaps I might deal with the questions that came up the other night when a lot of questions were asked. I will then deal with Deputy Healy-Rae's questions.
First, I thank Deputies who have made thoughtful contributions to the debate on this amendment. I have already explained why I cannot accept Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice's proposed change to amendment No. 22, but I acknowledge the concerns which led him to propose it which were echoed by Deputy Catherine Murphy a few minutes ago. In responding to Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice I also explained what was being done to reduce waiting times for driving tests. I am happy to be able to provide an update on those measures and confirm that my Department and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform have approved the hiring on a phased basis of an additional 67 driving testers. This will appreciably increase the capacity to reduce waiting times for tests. I accept what Deputies Michael Fitzmaurice and Catherine Murphy and others have said about the waiting times. They are far too long, but that does not mean that the amendment I am suggesting is wrong. It is about saving lives. The Road Safety Authority is taking measures to address the issue. It may not be happening at a satisfactory speed, but to allow people who are not qualified on the road is not the solution. The solution is to enable them to become qualified more quickly.
On the test result, Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice suggested it was just a piece of paper, that the person was just as good a driver two days before the test as he or she was two days afterwards. I am sure that is true. Moreover, if a person is a bad driver two days before the driving test, he or she remains a bad driver two days after he or she fails it. The point is we cannot know until after a person takes the driving test. Would Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice get on a aeroplane if he was told that the pilot was not qualified but would take the test in two days? Would he go undergo surgery if he was told the surgeon was not qualified but would be soon? We cannot take this risk with people's lives, which is why we require a learner driver to be accompanied by a qualified driver.
Deputy Michael Healy-Rae said I was making an assumption that an accident involving an unaccompanied driver would not have happened if he or she had been accompanied by a qualified driver. I am not making assumptions. The tragic fact is that of 24 learner drivers killed on the roads during 2016 and 2017, 20 had been unaccompanied. That is proof, if anyone needs it, that unaccompanied learner drivers are a danger to themselves, to say nothing about being a danger to other road users.
Deputy Thomas P. Broughan made a good suggestion. I am happy to be able to tell him that the RSA is working to that end. Action 8 in the mid-term evaluation of the road safety strategy requires it to, "Develop a business case to support the inclusion of compulsory road safety education in the curriculum for secondary schools". It is working towards this goal, which has a target completion date of the fourth quarter of 2018. The RSA is developing the business case. It will assess whether there is international evidence to support the measure and, if there is such, whether it demonstrates effectiveness in changing attitudes and behaviours towards road safety. The RSA will prepare and present the business case to the Department of Education and Skills for its consideration.
The RSA has two road safety programmes available for teachers to be delivered in secondary schools. The Streetwise resource is aimed at those in junior cycle, while "Your road to safety" is targeted at transition year students. The RSA is updating the transition year programme which it will launch in September in the new virtual learning environment. In addition, it offers a three-year road safety course, Road Safety Matters, which is available for implementation. To complement these teacher-led resources, the RSA's national road safety education service staff visit secondary schools to deliver road safety education to students. It also has an interactive mobile education unit with a roll-over simulator, the Shuttle, targeted at secondary schools during the academic year.
Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked me to use my power to ensure local authorities cut hedges. I appreciate the Deputy's faith in ministerial powers but I am afraid I do not actually have the power to tell local authorities what to do. Perhaps if the hedges in Kerry need trimming he might know someone with influence in Kerry County Council.
Deputy Broughan, whose support for the Bill and the amendment are very much appreciated, raised the issue of consolidation of the Road Traffic Acts and I agree with him. This legislation goes back to 1961. It has been amended numerous times and is in need of consolidation. However, this does not infer that the legislation is in some way faulty or that cases are being lost due to the absence of consolidation. The difficulty is that it is not simply a matter of restating all of the road traffic legislation currently in force in one Bill. We would need to examine each aspect of the Road Traffic Acts to see whether it is in need of updating. If we did not do so, we would soon find ourselves amending our consolidated Act in a whole host of ways and we would very quickly be back where we started with annual Bills to update the legislation.
A fair estimate, and I agree there is a need for this, would be that to do the project properly would take three years. Deputy Broughan suggested the Law Reform Commission, LRC, could take on the project. That is certainly a possibility. I point out that the LRC undertakes projects either on the basis of multi-annual programmes, which must be approved by the Government, or at the request of the Attorney General. As the LRC is currently engaged in a work programme, the most obvious route to asking it to consider consolidation of the Road Traffic Acts would be through a request of the Attorney General. If this route were to be considered it would probably mean shelving other work planned or under way at the LRC.
Deputy Catherine Murphy probably restricted her contribution in the interests of facilitating the early passage of the Bill. I hope her wishes will be adhered to. Her point was that we must separate two issues here, one being the shortage of driver testers and the other being the issue of learner drivers on the road unaccompanied, to which I am determined to put an end.
What I propose in amendment No. 22 is a logical step to improving enforcement of the law against unaccompanied learner drivers. I know this would cause hardship, but unaccompanied learner drivers are breaking the law and are a danger if they are driving unqualified. We have to put an end to the scourge of road deaths. The Deputies in the corner will be aware that, very sadly, the number of road deaths has increased this year. It is up by two compared with this day last year. I am sure the Deputies share our enthusiasm, energy and determination to keep the number of road deaths down, and we are absolutely determined to get the figure down. If this involves hardship for some people, such as learners who drive unaccompanied or those who have had too much to drink, I am sorry but it is a price they will have to pay to save other people's lives. What I propose in amendment No. 22 is this logical step to improving enforcement of the law against these people. It would allow gardaí to detain a vehicle driven by an unaccompanied learner driver, as they can already detain a vehicle where there is no tax, insurance or national car test certificate, or where they have reason to believe the driver is too young to have even a learner permit or is disqualified. It will provide a very valuable tool to gardaí in dealing with unaccompanied learner drivers. The very fact it has aroused such passionate opposition from some is a testament to what a significant deterrent it may be.
I want to respond to Deputy Danny Healy-Rae's questions. His first question was about people being left by the side of the road in County Kerry. Gardaí already detain vehicles with no NCT, tax or insurance. They do not abandon people by the roadside in those cases and they will not do so in this case. He said people should get one chance. I could be sympathetic with this in certain cases, but I could not possibly be sympathetic with it in the case of people being in charge of a lethal weapon which they are not qualified to drive. We cannot give people one chance to cause collisions or fatal accidents when they are not qualified to drive. What we do is give them a driving test. This amendment tackles the problem. It addresses the problem and put a finger on it. I do not for one moment dispute that. Deputy Fitzmaurice is right, but he is absolutely wrong about the solution. His suggestion would not be solution. If we were to do what he proposes, there would almost certainly be more and not fewer road deaths, and I do not think anybody disputes that.
Deputy Danny Healy-Rae also asked whether gardaí do not have enough to do without addressing this. He is right; gardaí are overextended and enforcement is a problem. We have put our finger on this problem time and again. We need more gardaí, but they are coming. This problem is being addressed. We also need good laws. The solution to difficulties with enforcing all of our laws is to provide more gardaí and not for one moment to allow bad laws to continue to exist. To answer the Deputy's question as to when the Bill will be passed, I hope it will be passed very soon and I appeal to him and everybody else to facilitate its passage because it will save lives.
I have one more question.
Hold on. I ask the Deputy to take his seat. He will have an opportunity to ask questions. While this may not be in compliance with Standing Orders, for good sense to prevail, I ask Deputies who have questions to put their questions in a period of three minutes. Everybody is intelligent and it will not be necessary for Deputies to expand on their questions. Is that informal agreement accepted?
On a point of order, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle knows I bow 100% to his experience, and he is the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and in possession of the Chair, but is it correct to confine speakers to three minutes? I am not questioning the wisdom of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for one minute, but if speakers cannot confine themselves to three minutes, Standing Orders of the House allow Deputies to make a contribution, which, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle said, should be to the point. Can we agree to that approach because if the Leas-Cheann Comhairle sticks with three minutes and Deputies cannot confine their remarks to three minutes, it will be very unfair? Some people are quick at making a point-----
I note the Deputy's point.
-----and more people are not.
I can do as I proposed to avoid repetition, and I will be fairly sharp if I find there is repetition. The amendment is in the name of Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice. I ask him to comply with the informal rules.
I have a few questions. The Minister spoke about bringing in new driver testers on a phased basis. Will he give us the details of that phased basis? Will he consider not bringing in the legislation until he has enough testers to give youngsters the opportunity to take a test within six weeks? Will the Department consider what I proposed with regard to intensive courses people could take in Mondello Park and places such as that? This would give them a higher level if the State is not able to provide the test. I have a fear about the law coming in. I appreciate what Deputy Catherine Murphy said earlier. I want to make it clear this would not be done to try to get someone driving without a licence quicker, but the problem is the State is failing. I want to keep the pressure on the State to supply what it has to supply when the ordinary citizen has to do the test. Will the Minister consider working with the Minister for Education and Skills to make sure every youngster has one class per week on a simulator system from first year onwards? It could be done on a computer. A youngster could be taught how to drive properly at a young age. Classes could be made more intensive during transition year. Will the Minister also consider the proposal I made two years ago to install limiters in the vehicles of learner drivers to reduce speed, give them cheaper insurance and perhaps save lives?
Shall I reply now?
It might not be a bad idea. I will limit the Minister's speaking time as well.
There are no circumstances in which I would consider not bringing in the legislation currently. After so long and such forensic examination of the legislation, and after this House has quite clearly expressed what it wishes, it would be extraordinary not to introduce the legislation at this stage. It is quite clear to me and everybody else in this House that whereas the Deputy and others supporting this amendment have very legitimate views that I do not contest for a moment and which are sincere, the wish of the vast majority of this House - we are in a democracy - is that the Bill should be seen through quickly. There may be scope for taking some of the measures suggested by the Deputy but we should not delay the legislation when it is quite clear the majority of the House on Second Stage wanted to see it through. It has been delayed by parliamentary tactics but I will not give way to them under any circumstances whatever.
I know Deputy Fitzmaurice in particular is very sincere about some of the views and he is often very constructive with his contributions. I am prepared to put his views on an intensive course for testing in Mondello to the Road Safety Authority, RSA.
It could be there or in similar facilities.
It could be somewhere like it. I am quite prepared to put that to the RSA and see what it says about it. I am not qualified to say if it would be a workable proposition. I am as anxious as the Deputy about the testing, the difficulties that young people have in getting tests and the fact it affects their employment. I will certainly ask the Minister for Education and Skills and the RSA about the practicalities of a simulator test of that sort. If the numbers are as large as we say, my guess is there are not enough available simulators to do that. I say genuinely to Deputy Fitzmaurice that any suggestions he has that will get young people off this hook he says they will be on as a result of the driving test issue - I do not doubt that - he should bring them on and I will pass them to the RSA. It is not a problem at all but do not ask me to drop the Bill.
The Deputy also mentioned a limiter on speed but speed is only one of the main contributors to road deaths and collisions. Alcohol, mobile phones and not using safety belts are other factors. The limiter might be a deterrent to some extent but it would not cure the problem we have of unqualified drivers. They are unqualified not just because they may not be in control of their speed but for all sorts of different reasons. They need more than to go slowly to be qualified to drive. I thank the Deputy for all the suggestions and I will certainly refer them to the RSA. I am sorry but I will not delay the Bill.
I asked about the phased introduction for driving testers. What is the number?
I will get the figures for the Deputy if he wants them.
The agreement is for questions that take a maximum of three minutes to be asked, Deputy Collins.
It is a bit unfair as I have not spoken very long on this matter at all.
Do not look at the Chair or anybody else. You should have a word with your colleagues.
I understand but with the recommittal of a Bill, I understood the speaking arrangements were changed and there would be no time restriction.
There is no restriction but the problem is we have repetition.
I have not yet had the opportunity to be repetitious.
Go on.
I have questions on a number of matters and I have sought the answers since before Christmas. I have not got answers to some of them, although I accept the Minister has addressed others.
With respect to waiting times for driving tests, the worst wait in Ireland is in Cork, which is 17.4 weeks. How can the Minister consider in any way, shape or form that this part of the Bill was rural-proofed? It is misleading the Dáil. There are young people in County Cork waiting 17.4 weeks for a test, which is an outrageous length. Why has the Minister not tackled that matter, which would be part of the process of rural-proofing the Bill? He should tackle this before the Bill becomes law and he has failed to do it so far. Will the Minister tell us why he has not tackled this? The question is in his lap as the people of Cork are waiting for a driving test for 17.4 weeks.
Has the Government started to educate younger people through the school system? It is very important and the matter has been raised by others. We must start at the roots and get to young people. It would be an absolute joy for them to learn how to drive. There are places like the Bantry Driving Academy, which is a fabulous place where young people can learn to drive. Have there been efforts to ensure such learning can occur?
I asked the next question at a very early stage. The Minister said he is delighted certain people have been appointed to the board of the RSA, which is an important point. How were they appointed and what input does the Minister have in the process? The Minister said those people should be on the board but there are others who have lost people in road traffic accidents who perhaps should be appointed to the board of the RSA as well. They would have input into the conditions of our roads, which are appalling in most cases, falling trees and other factors that lead to loss of life.
The next issue might move slightly away from the amendment. There are Irish people who have returned from America who despite having a full licence there must do a theory test and learn how to drive in Ireland. Has the Minister addressed this and the matter of young people abroad who are now coming home? Licences which were valid in places like Australia are not considered valid here.
This Bill will have a very damaging effect in rural Ireland but how has the Minister addressed this for young people? With the drink-driving aspect of the Bill, the Minister at least made a poor attempt to set up a rural transport service. There are young people who will not be able to go to work in the morning or come home in the evening, which are basic journeys. How has the Minister addressed this when he "rural-proofed" the Bill? If he has a solution, it would be proof that the Minister is making an effort. People living in rural areas have little or no bus service so does the Minister intend to set up bus services to take young people to work or college in the morning and bring them home in the evening? Will the Minister answer that question?
Is it the Minister's intention with this Bill to jail parents who allow young people to drive cars unaccompanied by qualified drivers? I am trying to go through my questions as fast as I can. The Minister addressed the speed limiter a while ago but why has he not gone down that road with young people? Perhaps there could be an overnight curfew for them. It might ease in this process rather than land these people in a difficult position, basically putting young people off the road, making life much more difficult. This will affect people in rural Ireland as well as urban areas.
Does the Minister accept the lack of funding for roads has been a cause of death? I have mentioned roads west of Ross Carbery, in Sparrograda and Ballydehob: there is a list a mile long with roads that are in an appalling condition. Does the Minister accept that falling trees have been a cause of death and what has he done to alleviate the problem? These are just some questions and I would greatly appreciate him answering them. Will he ask the councils for a realistic estimate of costs to put the roads right, as the condition of our roads are leading to most road deaths? Nobody is speaking about that, least of all the Minister, and they should be doing so. The Minister has said it is the business of local authorities to cut road verges etc. I accept that they are in charge to a point, but the Minister must provide the funding.
There is no point in the Minister sarcastically saying to us it is a matter for the local authority and that he is washing his hands of it. We are talking about all the billions being spent by Transport Infrastructure Ireland.
There are ten or 11 questions there.
Has the Minister set aside the provision for roads like those in west Cork? The millions required by Transport Infrastructure Ireland would lead to saving lives.
The Minister has ten or 11 questions. Will you respond briefly, Minister?
I will address all the questions the Deputy asked. Deputy Collins said the situation in Cork is worse than anywhere in the country with a waiting time of 17.4 weeks. It is not. There are worse, although I hate to tell Deputy Collins that. I am unsure where Deputy Collins got his figures from but there are worse figures. They are bad. A waiting period of 17.4 weeks is bad. Deputy Collins is correct about that, but there are worse figures. Wexford has worse figures. Donegal has worse figures. I regret that, but the average wait is somewhere around 17 weeks.
I have gone into considerable detail about what the Road Safety Authority is doing in my replies on this stage and on the previous stage as well. The effort is being made to accelerate this. The problem is being addressed aggressively by the RSA in the ways I have already spelt out. Deputy Collins should not say that nothing is being done. Enough is not being done. We want to bring the waiting time down well into single figures. That would be adequate. I accept the problem, but we are addressing it and the RSA is addressing it. We acknowledge the problem but, as I have said previously, the driver testing problem should not be mixed up with allowing people to go on the roads. We do not solve the problem by allowing people to break the law.
Reference was made to the issue of young people and education. I have already addressed that. There are already road safety programmes in schools. They are run and promoted by the RSA. That is being addressed. I answered that question some minutes ago.
How are directors appointed? I will explain how they are appointed. It is a new system that leaves me with virtually no discretion whatsoever, and deliberately so. In his Second Stage speech, the Deputy implied that I had done something. The idea is that I cannot make political decisions in appointing people to semi-state bodies. What happened in this case was that we searched for people who had experience of road accidents, who were representatives of road victims or who had authority and credibility to speak about road tragedies and road safety because they had suffered. The Deputy should not come back to me and say that I am lying if I am wrong, but I believe we got 60 applications when the process was advertised. The figure is around that anyway - if it is 61 or 62, Deputies should not nail me to the cross on it. The applications came in. They went through a process of being selected by panel. It was all done by the Public Appointments Service and not by me. Then, those who fulfilled the criteria were selected for interview and they were interviewed. Four names came up to me and I selected the top two, as I have done in every case. I did not interfere in any way. That is how it was done. There were interviews, which is rather revolutionary and radical in the appointment of people to state bodies. All I did was select the top two who were appointed as a result of the interview.
Deputy Collins addressed the issue of the rural Local Link. I think this will work. The welcome I got in Kerry for it was staggering. I am grateful for the fact that both Deputies Healy-Rae greeted me and welcomed me to Kerry last Friday. The spontaneous welcome I got from people there for the link buses was reassuring. I know that people have said the funding is only €450,000, but that is a great deal of money by any standards.
This is being done as a pilot scheme. It is my intention to pursue this if it works, and it looks to me as if it will work. There is considerable pent-up demand because of the issue all the Deputies have identified. There is rural and social isolation. There is a problem in rural Ireland with this. We must identify exactly where it is and how it can be resolved. To denigrate a scheme that is in place to help to address this problem, albeit in a preliminary way, is probably unhelpful. It is my intention, if I remain Minister, that this scheme will be expanded. It will be tailored and changed. That is why it is a pilot scheme. We are going to attack rural isolation with this as a beginning. I appeal to Deputies to give it a chance. It is a good idea. There is pent-up demand. There is no doubt whatsoever about that. What I saw when I travelled on one of those buses on Friday was hope for the future. People from Kerry said to me that it is a good scheme. These people are probably great supporters of the Healy-Rae brothers and that is not incompatible.
Deputy Collins asked whether I would send parents to jail. No, the fine is only €1,000. There is no intention of jailing anyone. We are not looking for parents. That is not fair; it is being emotional. We intend to stop people lending their cars to unaccompanied drivers. What we intend to do is to ensure that unaccompanied drivers who are driving without permits are stopped from doing so - that is all.
The Deputy asked about trees. That is a local authority matter. I can understand what the Deputy is saying but it is a local authority matter.
It is not.
They are the answers whether you like them or not, Deputy. We have the last two unless someone else wants to raise a question. Deputy Danny Healy-Rae has indicated. You have questions, Deputy, but I am going to limit you to three minutes.
I simply wanted to know that.
Ask the questions, Deputy. Do you want to come in?
I did not speak on this amendment yet.
We have agreed. We cannot keep changing it.
To be fair, I did not speak.
You may not have spoken, but you have an opportunity to ask questions, Deputy. This is your second round and you are getting three minutes. Focus on the questions. Please do not expand.
Does the Minister realise that 22 to 24 weeks is the norm to wait for a driving test in Kerry, including in Killarney and Tralee?
That is the first question.
What is the Minister going to do about that?
What are we to do about the young person who turned up for his test in the middle of the day two weeks ago and the tester refused to do the test because one of the tail-lights was not working? What are we to do with that same young fellow who, from that date, cannot apply for a retest until one month passes? What kind of rule is that? What are we going to do about those situations?
Why do we not have enough testers? Is there trouble with the unions? Are we being held over a barrel such that we cannot employ more testers? Surely there are people who are qualified and who could do the testing? Why can we not hire them? It is not fair to be holding up these people in this way.
Reference was made to the Local Link. The Minister announced eight routes in Kerry. One of them was agreed before the Minister ever dreamt up the idea. Route number 3 runs from Castlegregory to Cloghane. A car came on Tuesdays once a month for ten months. How is that going to help people who cannot get from A to B? Will the Minister expand the rural Local Link so that we can help young drivers who are waiting for their tests? That is an issue that I support and want addressed as well. We barely have enough school buses to take the children to school. Routes are being cut. Where fewer than ten children travel, the route is squashed. It is simply a way of getting out and saving money. Where is the Minister getting the money? Is it from the Leprechaun? Bus Éireann does not seem to have the money for the school run.
Where will this money come from?
It is not too late for him to do more assessments of what he is doing. I ask him to return to his plan and to live in a rural place in Kerry for at least a week without a car to see how he would manage. He might have his thumb up on the road with nothing passing. Maybe some fellow might know him but he would not stop for him because of what the Minister is trying to do to us. What he is proposing to do is not rural proofed in any way.
Thank you.
I want the Minister to explain to me how he can honestly say that what he is proposing to do is fair to rural people.
I ask the Minister to be as brief as he can.
On rural proofing, this Bill will be of more benefit to rural lives than to urban lives.
More people die on the roads in rural Ireland than in urban Ireland. It is many more and that is a fact. That is not why we are doing this but one consequence is that it will save more rural lives.
I do not know where the Deputy got the figure of 22 weeks, maybe he is correct, but the figures I have for Kerry are different. The Deputy says it is 22 weeks. The figure I have for Tralee and Killarney is a 14 week wait. That is not acceptable but it is not as high.
That was on 6 February.
It is not as high as the Deputy says. I have given the figures for the current average waiting time or the two driver test centres in the county. I do not know where the Deputy is getting his figures but I am sure they are coming from a good source.
I will answer the question on Rural Link, although I am not sure that it is relevant. The intention is to expand Rural Link and that the entire social life of people in Kerry, whose social life is not as full as people in Dublin due to a lack of public transport, is improved. The Deputy should not knock a good, well-intended scheme. Let us adjust it. I am happy for the Deputy to tell me in a less public forum and in a constructive way how it should be improved. That is why it is a pilot. We will review it after six months and we are even getting an interim report after three months to see how it is working and how we can better address it.
Okay.
On a point of order-----
I-----
The Deputy should wait a minute. There are other Members in this House.
The Deputies seem to have fulfilled the requirements of Standing Order 8 in that we have had a widespread debate. People have come back, we have had questions and have heard extensively from the Minister. Therefore, I ask that the question be put.
I have not had a chance yet.
I draw Members' attention to this. We have had over 13 hours and 20 minutes of a debate on the Road Traffic Bill. We have had three hours and some additional minutes on amendment No. 22 and an amendment to that amendment. We have agreed an informal agreement. I say to the other two Members that I will take Deputy Tommy Broughan's proposal in a few minutes. The Deputy will hold on. Everyone has had a fair share. The Deputies should not presume anything. I will call Deputies Michael Healy-Rae, Danny Healy-Rae and Mattie McGrath. After that, if Deputy Broughan puts the question again, I will immediately put it to the House.
I did not get an answer to the question.
I am only in the Chair. Perhaps if the Minister inadvertently overlooked that response, he can take 30 seconds later.
Why do they have to wait a month to retake their test?
The Minister will answer that later.
What was the question again?
Why does a young fellow-----
Okay, I will tell the Minister what I believe the Deputy is asking, although that should not be my job. If a person applies for a test and it is not taken due to some defect in the car or he or she failed the test, he or she has to wait a further four weeks before he or she may reapply. The Minister might deal with that.
Or if he fails it.
Of course, it is the same thing.
He has to wait a month.
We know what the Deputy is saying. I call Deputy Michael Healy-Rae to please put his few questions and then I will put the motion.
I am sorry but I am at a loss to follow this. It is very unfair because I have not spoken on this yet.
The Deputy has.
I have been looking forward to the opportunity to do so.
The whole idea of the three minutes-----
Let us be clear. My memory is not so bad. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae made four contributions-----
No, not on this.
On 24 April, 25 April, 2 May and 13 June.
Yes, I have on other amendments but not on this amendment.
We have an agreement. If we do not abide by that agreement I will put the-----
I questioned it at the time and asked where the three minutes comes from because some people cannot ask the number of questions they have in three minutes. I cannot see why I should be curtailed or stopped-----
I should not say this but I was in the European Parliament and I had to say as much in two minutes and that was all the time I got.
It is very unfair to confine somebody to three minutes if they are unable to do so.
The clock has started.
Maybe some people can do that but I cannot. If I am unable to, does that mean that I am being denied-----
It is a subjective view.
Am I being denied the right to put my questions?
The Deputy should put his questions.
Let me start and we will see how we get on.
On a point of clarification, many people have given statistics but so far I do not think anyone has got them right in respect of the waiting times in County Kerry. According to the Road Safety Authority the longest waiting time for a driver test recorded in the Tralee centre is 27 weeks while in Killarney it is 26 weeks. I am fairly sure that I can stand up for our local radio station, Radio Kerry. The Minister can look up its website, www.radiokerry.ie, and see that that is where I got those statistics. Those statistics would not be there unless they were factual and verifiable. The Minister said that extra driver testers will be appointed and that he is allowing for 67 extra testers to be put in place. How many new testers does he propose to give us in County Kerry to deal with the figures that I have outlined? I deal daily with the young people who the Minister is hurting with what he is proposing. They are telling me that it is extremely unfair to get their full licence in order that they can get on in life, they are being told that they must wait. If the Minister and those supporting him get their way, they will tie those people down at home, stopping them from working and from furthering their education. However, the Minister has not said what he will put in place for them.
The one thing that those people deserve to hear tonight is precisely what the Minister will do for the people in County Kerry in relation to more funding, support and testers. He should have that done before bringing in this legislation. What Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice said to the Minister earlier was very fair. If it is what he is proposing, he should do it before railroading the legislation through. It is very poorly thought out.
The Deputy is not asking a question.
I am.
Time is up.
I took my eye off the ball.
It is a question. I did not realise that there are other people in the Chair. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is the boss, he is in the Chair.
Hear, hear.
The Deputy will know that in a minute.
I will, and I will keep asking my questions because I have very important ones. I have been here since the very beginning and I have not missed one minute of this debate since it started. I have been here diligently for every minute. I have questions written out and points to make-----
Go on and make them.
-----and this is one of them, namely, what is the Minister proposing for Kerry and why has he not done it? The way he has gone about things is like putting the cart before the horse.
That is one clear question. The Minister stated-----
It took three and a half minutes to pose that question. It did, in fairness.
I am coming in now. The Minister stated earlier on that his amendment is about saving lives. He quoted, very sadly because it is very unfair and wrong for us to talk about a death without acknowledging the fact-----
The Deputy needs to pose the question.
-----that it is so hurtful to any------
I am going to move on.
I will pose it if I am let.
If the Deputy is not going to ask a question I have to move on.
If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle keeps doing this I cannot ask my question.
A preamble is not necessary.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is a politician. If any one of us could aspire to be in politics as long as he has been we would be fairly good. It is very difficult to formulate and put forward a question if one is continuously interrupted. If I am left alone I will be fine but if I am continuously stopped I will not be.
Surely it is now time to move on.
I am making my point. Deputy Broughan is not in the Chair. If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle tells me to shut up-----
I propose the closure of this debate.
Hold on. Hold on just one second. I will be quite honourable. Everyone agreed to the informal arrangement. Deputy Healy-Rae has gone on for five minutes now and he has asked-----
I am trying to ask the second question.
Hold on now. The Deputy has asked one question, how many of the 67 to be appointed are from Kerry. That took five minutes.
Half of the five minutes was spent trying to stand up for myself and get my point across. Can I keep going?
If the Deputy does not conclude now I am accepting the proposal.
I have questions on the rural link.
I am going to-----
If I can just continue on the rural link-----
I have been fair. If I accept this proposal the Minister will not have an opportunity to answer the Deputy's questions.
On the rural link-----
I move: "That the question on amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 22 be now put."
----last week when the Minister came to Kerry-----
I think we are almost there.
No, but-----
I do not have to accept Deputy Broughan's proposal. I think we are almost there. I ask for Deputy Healy-Rae's co-operation and if I do not get it I am putting the question.
I am trying to ask the question.
The Deputy is not doing so, however.
How can I when the Leas-Cheann Comhairle keeps interrupting me?
Let us move on. I am going to put the question.
Last week-----
No, I am putting the question.
I had questions.
I am not accepting it any longer. The Deputies are not co-operating with the Chair. Deputy Healy-Rae will resume his seat. The Deputies are not co-operating with the Chair.
Can I ask the question?
No. I have been more than fair since I came into the Chair this evening.
Hear, hear.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is not allowing us-----
I am accepting-----
On a point of order-----
No. Deputy McGrath's colleagues are interrupting. Deputy Healy Rae has taken six minutes. I was giving the Minister an opportunity to answer him but that is not going to happen. It is not going to happen.
I had asked questions earlier.
The Deputy may have.
I got no answers to questions I put to the Minister directly.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Broughan has put the question.
This is totally unfair. I did not get the chance.
It may well be. There are ways of dealing with that.
I put questions to the Minister last week and again this week.
I am putting the question: "That the question on amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 22 be now put."
We have questions.
The Deputies had their chances.
No, we did not.
Question put: "That the question on amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 22 be now put."
Deputies
Vótáil.
Will the Deputies claiming a division please rise?
Deputies Michael Collins, Michael Fitzmaurice, Danny Healy-Rae, Michael Healy-Rae and Mattie McGrath rose.
As fewer than ten Members have risen I declare the question carried. In accordance with Standing Order 72 the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Dáil.
Question declared carried.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle-----
Deputies, please. We are trying to make progress. Most people in here are quite serious about this-----
-----so let us be serious.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I must now deal with amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 22 in the name of Deputy Fitzmaurice.
Amendment to amendment put.
Deputies
Vótáil.
Will the Deputies claiming a division please rise?
Deputies Michael Collins, Michael Fitzmaurice, Danny Healy-Rae, Michael Healy-Rae and Mattie McGrath rose.
As fewer than ten Members have risen I declare the amendment lost. In accordance with Standing Orders, the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Dáil.
Amendment to amendment declared lost.
Amendment No. 22 put.
Deputies
Vótáil.
Will the Deputies claiming a division, please, rise?
Deputies Michael Fitzmaurice, Danny Healy-Rae, Michael Healy-Rae and Mattie McGrath rose.
As fewer than ten Members have risen, I declare the amendment carried. In accordance with Standing Orders, the names of the Deputies dissenting - all four - will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Dáil.
Amendment declared carried.
Bill reported with amendment.
Amendments Nos. 23 to 27, inclusive, have been ruled out of order.
Amendments Nos. 23 to 27, inclusive, not moved.
I move amendment No. 28:
In page 4, to delete lines 24 to 27.
Amendment put.
Deputies
Vótáil.
Will the Deputies claiming a division, please, rise?
Deputies Michael Fitzmaurice, Danny Healy-Rae, Michael Healy-Rae and Mattie McGrath rose.
As fewer than ten Members have risen, I declare the amendment carried. In accordance with Standing Orders, the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Dáil.
Amendment declared carried.
Recommittal is necessary in respect of amendment No. 29 as it relates to the motion to instruct committee.
I move:
That the Bill be recommitted in respect of amendment No. 29.
Is that agreed?
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, may I speak?
Hold on. I will not fall foul of this procedure. Let us be very clear about it. Thankfully, it is almost 10.15 p.m. I asked the Minister to move recommittal of the amendment and he has done so. Is that agreed? I will not force the Deputies.
We will not vote on it once there is a clear understanding that the amendment has been recommitted and we can-----
We can speak to the-----
Sure.
Question put and declared carried.
Bill recommitted in respect of amendment No. 29.
I move amendment No. 29:
In page 4, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following:
“Amendment of Road Traffic Act 1961
4. The Road Traffic Act 1961 is amended—
(a) by the insertion of the following section after section 35:
“Offences by owner of mechanically propelled vehicle driven by another person
35A. (1) An owner of a mechanically propelled vehicle shall be guilty of an offence where a person, not being that owner, drives the vehicle in a public place at a time that the person—
(a) is not the holder of a driving licence or learner permit for the category of vehicle concerned, or
(b) is the holder of a learner permit for a vehicle of a category specified in clause (iv) of Regulation 17(6)(b) of the Road Traffic (Licensing of Drivers) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 537 of 2006) and is not driving the vehicle in accordance with that clause.
(2) It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the owner of a mechanically propelled vehicle to show—
(a) that the vehicle was used or taken possession of without his or her consent,
(b) in the case of proceedings for an offence under paragraph (a) of subsection (1), that prior to the driving of the vehicle in a public place he or she took all reasonable steps to satisfy himself or herself that the person held a driving licence or learner permit, as the case may be, or
(c) in the case of proceedings for an offence under paragraph (b) of subsection (1), that he or she took all reasonable steps to satisfy himself or herself that the person would be driving in accordance with clause (iv) of Regulation 17(6)(b) of the Road Traffic (Licensing of Drivers) Regulations 2006.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a class D fine.”,
and
(b) in subsection (1A) (inserted by section 30 of the Road Traffic Act 2016) of section 78A by the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (g):
“(g) the number given at item 4d. and described as “Driver number” on the driving licence in scheduled form D.402 under Regulation 10 of the Road Traffic (Licensing of Drivers) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 537 of 2006) or the number given at item 4d. and described as “Driver number” on the learner permit in scheduled form D.202 under Regulation 17 of those Regulations.”.”.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, on a point of order.
Hold on. Just a wee bit of clarity.
What is happening is outrageous.
On a point of order, earlier tonight, there was a situation I certainly could not agree to and I-----
The Deputy is talking down the clock.
That is not a point of order.
That is not a point of order.
We were confined to three minutes.
That is an informal agreement that the Deputies-----
I thought there was no such thing as an informal agreement in the Houses of the Oireachtas.
The Deputy agreed to it.
I am sorry. I did not. I said at the time that I did not agree with it.
Hold on.
Throw him out.
It would be too bad if we had to suspend the House at this late hour. I ask Deputies-----
On a point of order-----
On a point of order, I want clarification-----
The Deputy knows the rule. If the Chair is on his feet-----
There is no room for a Kerryman and a Donegal man at the one time.
(Interruptions).
Sit down.
Throw him out.
Let me be very clear.
May I have clarification?
No, you cannot.
Throw him out.
May I have clarification?
Let me be very clear. I will tell the Deputy exactly what happened.
(Interruptions).
On a point of order-----
The House is adjourned until 10.30 a.m. tomorrow. I am very disappointed with the attitude of some.
Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 28 June 2018.