JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT debate -
Wednesday, 12 Jan 2011

Road Safety: Discussion

Vice Chairman

The next item on the agenda is a discussion with representatives of the Department of Transport, the National Roads Authority, the Road Safety Authority and the Garda Síochána on policy issues arising from the appearance before the committee on 30 June 2010 of the families of three victims of road accidents. While the committee is naturally very sympathetic to the families of the bereaved, members will be aware that they cannot enter into any investigation or consideration of the individual cases that were presented by the Farren, Gallagher and Keane families last June.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given. They are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a Member of either House, a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I say that to everybody.

I welcome the following: Mr. Dominic Mullaney and Mr. Kieran Baker of the Department of Transport; assistant commissioner John Twomey and superintendent Con O'Donohue of the Garda Síochána; Mr. Fred Barry and Mr. Michael Egan of the National Roads Authority; and Mr. Noel Brett of the Road Safety Authority to today's meeting. I propose that we hear a short presentation from each of the bodies. After all four presentations have concluded, we will have a question and answer session. I ask Mr. Mullaney to address the committee.

Mr. Dominic Mullaney

I thank the Chairman and the members of the committee. I work in the transport investment division of the Department of Transport. I am joined by Mr. Kieran Baker, who works in the interim national transport accident investigation office. The chief executives of the National Roads Authority and the Road Safety Authority are also in attendance, as are two representatives of the Garda Síochána and Mr. Michael Egan. The committee will be aware that road safety is high on the Department's agenda. The Department is committed to working through its agencies to continue to bring about continued improvement in this area. It is aware of the tragic consequences of road collisions in terms of road deaths and serious injuries. It sympathises with those who are trying to cope with the consequences of such collisions.

The Department of Transport has always specified the standards to be met by road authorities when they receive grant assistance for the maintenance and improvement of roads. That was also the case when the former roads section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government was responsible for this area. When the National Roads Authority was formally instituted in 1994, it took responsibility for the management of the national roads programme. Local authorities continued to have statutory responsibility for roads in their functional areas. By direction of the Minister of Transport, road authorities are required to comply with the signage provisions of the traffic signs manual. There has been a concerted effort in recent years to enhance the safety of road users through improved regulatory, warning and information signs and road markings. Provision was made in 2004 for road authorities to impose special speed limits at road works sites by way of managers' orders. When the metrication of speed limits took place in 2005, the default speed limit was lowered by 16 km/h to 80 km/h on approximately 90% of the network.

Chapter 8 of the traffic signs manual, which was first issued in 1996 and specifies the type of signage to be used at road works sites, was revised in 2006 and further updated in 2008. The revised editions make provision for the use of cautionary speed limit signs and orange road markings where it is desirable to provide markings on a road surface that is not the final surface. A document, Guidance for the Control and Management of Traffic at Road Works, was issued in October 2007 and updated in 2010 to give additional guidance in respect of safety at road works, particularly in respect of single carriageway roads. The document is intended to assist the designers of temporary traffic management operations to take appropriate factors into account when carrying out a risk assessment in advance of any construction works.

A number of checks and systems that relate specifically to road safety are in place. Safety audits are carried out on the design of new and realigned roads by independent qualified personnel at various stages in such schemes. The remit of the Health and Safety Authority involves monitoring road works sites. It ensures risk assessments and safety plans have been prepared and verifies that ongoing checking by site personnel is taking place. The Garda forensic collision investigation team investigates all fatal collisions. Where appropriate, files are forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions. A system is in place to ensure that following a fatal collision, a Garda officer and a local authority engineer meet to agree factual information pertaining to the collision. The purpose of such a site meeting is to quickly establish whether road factors may have contributed to the collision and may need to be remedied.

Road authorities also examine accident information from CT68 forms to identify accident clusters and sections of roads that have a higher than average number of accidents. If an engineering solution can be identified, such locations or sections of road may be treated by means of low cost safety measures or other specific measures. Approximately €187 million has been invested in such measures since 1998. It is worth noting that since 2002, the Department has invested €12.5 million in the training of council road workers. It continues to invest in such training. I trust that what I have said gives an outline of the engagement of the Department and its agencies in the area of road safety. I will be happy to answer any questions the Chairman or the members of the committee may have. The agencies will separately set out in more detail their specific roles.

Vice Chairman

I invite the assistant commissioner of the Garda Síochána, Mr. John Twomey, to address the committee.

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

I would like to begin by expressing my deepest sympathies to the families of those who have lost their lives in road collisions, particularly those whose loved ones' deaths form the background to today's discussion. I have submitted a comprehensive report for the information of the committee. I will endeavour to summarise its contents as succinctly as possible. Road safety is a key priority for the Garda and one of its objectives under its current corporate strategy, Effective Roads Policing, which runs from 2010 to 2012. On 10 January last, the Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan, launched the Garda's annual policing plan for 2011. This also includes the goal of effective roads policing.

Since 2005, the Garda Síochána has investigated 281,611 collisions of which 1,632 were fatal and 3,589 resulted in serious injury. Proceedings have been commenced in respect of more than 1 million offences known as key life-saver offences which include driving while intoxicated, speeding, etc. Over the same period, slightly more than 48,000 motorists were prosecuted for dangerous driving, while 132,000 vehicles were under section 41 of the Road Traffic Act 1994. Two civilian analysts are engaged full-time in the analysis of collision data and assisting the formulation of robust, fit-for-purpose enforcement strategies. This information is provided to give some background and offer a high level, strategic view of how the Garda Síochána approaches roads policing.

As with all policing, investigative skills and techniques evolve on an ongoing basis and what is effective today may not be effective tomorrow. To this end, the Garda Síochána constantly evaluates current policies and strategies and examines practices in other jurisdictions in an effort to improve how we deliver on the roads policing function.

Since 2005 and in some cases prior to 2005, a number of developments and changes have taken place in the investigation of road collisions. I propose to summarise the main developments. In 2005, a dedicated traffic corps was established and now has 1,200 members dedicated solely to traffic policing. This is in addition to regular uniformed patrols. An Assistant Commissioner has been appointed to the traffic function and regional traffic superintendents are responsible for the development and implementation of road policing strategies.

Also in 2005, the appointment of forensic collision investigators commenced and 56 such appointments have been made around the country. Forensic collision investigators are trained to a standard of City and Guilds in the forensic examination of collision scenes. The standard of investigation files submitted by the investigators has been commented on favourably by a number of coroners, the Director of Public Prosecutions and members of the Judiciary.

In 2006, family liaison officers were appointed and a policy introduced for formal liaison with families of victims of road traffic collisions, with the single aim of keeping families updated of developments in the investigation and, where applicable, court proceedings. Feedback on the introduction of the policy from various victims' groups has been positive.

In 2007, a formal road collision investigation policy was introduced by the Garda Commissioner, which placed responsibility with each district officer for the investigation of all such collisions. It placed an obligation on the district officer or acting district officer to visit all collision scenes, establish what is known as a structured investigation team and bring together individuals with the required skills in forensic investigation and technical examination. Senior investigating officers are also available throughout the country. Some 150 individuals have been trained in the investigation of serious crimes and are available to the district officer should they be required.

In 2002, the collision prevention programme was introduced. As noted, while this runs separately from investigations, it provides for site visitation between gardaí, the investigating member and the local authority. Recommendations on engineering solutions are also submitted where appropriate.

In 2004, work in conjunction with other agencies identified collision prone zones. These were publicised on the Garda and Road Safety Authority websites to inform members of the public about areas in which clusters of road traffic collisions are taking place. These zones are at the core of our enforcement strategies and we endeavour to focus enforcement efforts in these areas.

Safety cameras were introduced in 2010. The location of speed enforcement zones are also available on the Garda website to inform members of the public of locations in which speed-related collisions have occurred. This has been done following detailed analysis of the locations in question in the past five years. Also in 2010, a review was conducted of form CT68, the statistical form used by the Garda to report on the details of an accident. The review was carried out with our key stakeholders and a number of amendments were recommended to provide additional validation to ensure greater accuracy of the form. An IT solution has been proposed and awaits implementation.

As I have outlined, there have been a number of changes to our practices. Many of the policies and strategies introduced have been influenced by the concerns raised by the families of those who tragically lost their lives on our roads. Furthermore, under the terms of the current corporate strategy, we have what is known as the "lessons learned framework", which has been designed to ensure ongoing assessment of our current practices and the maintenance of the highest standards of road policing. This interaction continues, as does the commitment of the Garda to work with other key stakeholders. I reiterate that the Garda Síochána is committed to providing an efficient and effective roads policing function to the highest possible standard. This commitment will continue into the future.

Mr. Fred Barry

I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to appear before the joint committee. I support the expressions of sympathy made to the families and friends of those who died in the traffic accidents which were discussed by the joint committee in December last.

Three sets of issues appear to emerge from the committee's earlier deliberations. The first relates to the management of road works and includes topics such as signage, speed limits, the appropriateness of certain construction materials for use as a wearing surface and so forth. Considerable progress has been made on these issues in recent years. Temporary speed limits have been legally allowed since the middle of the past decade. The City and County Managers Association, with the support of the National Roads Authority and the Department of Transport, has produced detailed guidance on the traffic management at road works. The NRA has commissioned extensive research on the use of dense bitumen macadam as a temporary wearing course. This research has been circulated to local authorities and the NRA will follow up by issuing clear and specific guidelines on circumstances in which its use is permissible as well as recommended mitigation in circumstances which might otherwise cause concern.

The second set of issues relates to the general condition of our roads. The example of absence of signage at crossroads was raised at the joint committee's meetings before Christmas. A new European Union safety directive on roads infrastructure safety management requires, among other things, the establishment of procedures for undertaking road safety impact assessments and road safety audits and the establishment of road infrastructure safety systems. The directive is applicable in the first instance to a limited number of national primary routes - the TERN routes - but may well be extended to other roads. The roads that have been built or upgraded in recent years will rate well under this regime.

The NRA is chairing the conference of European road directors road safety committee and we have been implementing what is internationally recognised as best practice in this regard. However, many of our national roads do not come close to meeting current design and construction standards. Typical deficiencies include inadequate cross-sections, pavement deficiencies, drainage deficiencies, limited visibility, poor vertical and horizontal alignment, poor sub-grades and so forth.

The NRA analyses accident data, carries out condition surveys and obtains a great deal of valuable input from local authorities and Garda reports to identify the worst hazards. Working with local authorities, we carry out hundreds of modest safety-related improvements every year and upgrade long sections of road as funding permits. All of this ensures that the available moneys are directed at safety improvements. For example, in 2011 we will carry out more than 200 individual minor works schemes, virtually all with significant safety aspects. However, although we are making steady progress, much of the unimproved road network is not up to standard.

The third set of issues relates to institutional arrangements, that is, the question of who is responsible for what. The individual local authorities are the roads authorities. The National Roads Authority has a significant role in relation to national roads, while the Road Safety Authority has particular functions and the National Transport Authority has been given a role in deciding on road improvements in greater Dublin. The Department of Transport has retained certain specific responsibilities such as road classification, which has implications for speed limits and road traffic signs, and has overarching responsibilities on the Government's behalf. The Garda is responsible for road traffic policing and road traffic accident investigations. In addition, coroners sometimes carry out inquests into traffic accident fatalities. While it is for the Oireachtas to decide on the appropriate institutional framework, it is easy to understand the reason there may be confusion as to who is responsible for what.

Mr. Noel Brett

I thank the Chairman and committee for the invitation to appear before it today. I do not propose to read my submission, which has been circulated in advance, into the record. I again offer my condolences to the families on the deaths of their daughters, Ashling, Sinead and Eileen, and Eileen's boyfriend, Trevor. I acknowledge the frustrations these and other families across the country have encountered in their quests for specific answers to specific questions and their search for closure in their individual cases. I also acknowledge their determination to prevent other families from having to endure the trauma that each and every one of them has experienced.

In my submission I have set out the current role and function of the Road Safety Authority. That is important in the context of the minutes of the meeting held by the committee in June. It is important that people understand the limits of the role of the Road Safety Authority currently. I can summarise by saying that the RSA has a range of functions but it does not have a statutory role or competence in road engineering. It has no oversight role over local authorities in their role as roads authorities. Neither does the Road Safety Authority have a statutory function or any powers to investigate individual road traffic collisions.

In terms of the policy issues raised at the previous meeting in June and highlighted by the families, there are a number of contributory causes of collisions which I have set out in my report. Based on the reporting we receive from the Garda Síochána - just under 30,000 forms per annum - we deduce that currently approximately 3% of fatal road traffic collisions in 2009 had road factors as the primary contributory factor. The rate in 2008 was 5%. In terms of fatality numbers, we estimate that in 2009, eight people lost their lives on Irish roads where the main contributory factor was road factors. We conservatively estimate that the corresponding figure for 2008 was 12 fatalities. In the vast majority of cases it is the action or omission of a driver, pedestrian or road user, but according to the Garda investigation, in a percentage of cases road factors are the primary contributory factor.

As a nation we must robustly tackle every single contributory factor. We have been dealing with such issues as getting better train drivers, dealing with drug driving, drink driving and excessive speeding, but we also need to tackle vehicle factors and road factors. There is a need to augment current Garda investigation and to develop independent and robust engineering collision review capability in the country. We can learn lessons from other modes of transport - rail, marine and aviation. The current Garda investigation is embedded in an adversarial fault finding system. As a country we could do more to learn lessons where there are potential systems failures or issues in the system not in terms of apportioning blame, but so as to publish those findings and ensure they are acted on immediately where something can be corrected and in the medium and long term if there are structural issues to be addressed. That is a quick summary of the submission I have made to the committee. I am happy to answer any question on which I can help the committee.

Vice Chairman

I thank all the witnesses for their opening addresses.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I thank everybody who has taken the time to be present. There were a number of presentations. From what the Chair said at the outset, we are somewhat limited in terms of how much detail we can go into in individual tragedies which is somewhat unfortunate because in order to learn lessons from them, we must ask difficult questions about how those cases were handled.

Deputy Frank Fahey took the Chair.

Deputy Simon Coveney

It is clear that having spoken to the families concerned, they are not happy. For various reasons which I am not allowed to go into on the handling of the cases, they do not have closure in terms of the facts of what happened. I refer to the cases in Donegal in 2001 and in Kerry in 2006. I would like to ask a number of questions in terms of the follow-up lessons learned. First, I wish to ask the assistant commissioner about the preservation of a scene following a serious accident. I presume it is standard practice to immediately cordon off the scene and not to allow any interference with the site in terms of other traffic travelling on the road. Will he give the committee an outline of how a serious or fatal accident is managed on a step-by-step basis from when the Garda arrives? It is important that we know that now. I accept there has been significant progress in terms of procedure, guidelines, practice and training in the past five to six years. It is no harm to put that on the record.

My second question is to the representatives of the Department of Transport about the enforcement of the guidelines they put in place around whether roads can be opened during road works and the responsibility of local authorities on the clearance of loose chippings when road works are completed and traffic is allowed back on them, especially rural roads. I can understand the guidelines being rigidly enforced on primary routes because it is much easier to do that in terms of resource management. I would like to hear from the Department about its level of follow-up investigation and enforcement following accidents that take place on stretches of road that are being upgraded or on which work is taking place at the time. That is a particular issue in regard to the Donegal tragedy. I want to know that we have learned lessons from that. Likewise, much work has been done by local authorities on signage. My own local authority in Cork has done a significant amount of work in that regard. For people who may be still struggling with the consequences of a tragedy on the road and where signage may have been a contributory factor, it is important that investigations are thorough, truthful and that nothing is concealed in terms of final reports to try to bring closure to difficult tragedies.

The Garda accident investigation unit has been referred to as the structured investigation team. I would like to ask all witnesses whether it is appropriate that it is the Garda Síochána that is putting together the final report on fatal road accidents when it is obvious that the handling of the scene is very much part of Garda responsibility. In some ways, even though obviously the Garda is not part of the accident itself, the actual investigation and cordoning off of the accident is very much its responsibility. I wonder whether we should be looking for an independent body to write a final report on the likely cause of the accident and how the accident scene was managed and handled by the Garda after that in the same way as we have an independent marine accident investigation unit. Is it considered that such a structure is necessary or that the current structures are working effectively? I am a little frustrated that I cannot ask more pointed questions on the accident concerned. I know the families are anxious that we do so. I am, however, conscious of the Chairman's instructions at the start of the meeting.

Let me consider the accuracy of information on accidents in reports and court case statistics. The Road Safety Authority compiles information on the number of fatalities on Irish roads, which number I am glad to see is reducing. Everybody deserves credit for this trend. Is there a facility whereby the record can be corrected in respect of the cause or description of an accident? There needs to be a facility such that families who believe there is an inaccuracy in the statistics on the deaths of their loved ones can contact the Road Safety Authority to have the statistics and record changed. It is difficult to obtain closure if one feels the death of a son or daughter has been reported inaccurately in statistical terms. Inaccuracy gives rise to sensitivities.

It is a shame that there is no representative of local authorities present. Are the Department and National Roads Authority satisfied we are providing sufficient funds to local authorities to provide the necessary training and resources, both infrastructural and human, to upgrade dangerous sections of roads highlighted in various reports produced following accidents?

My final question is for the Assistant Commissioner. Is it standard practice to have Garda representation at a coroner's hearing following the death of somebody as a result of a road traffic accident such that a garda could describe the scene and likely cause of that accident?

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

The first question asked was on the preservation of the scene. In 2007, the then Commissioner issued a very detailed policy on the investigation of road collisions. I refer to the 45-page document that outlines the investigative procedures that must be followed. There are very strict guidelines on the preservation of the scene and they set out clearly the role and functions of the investigators and what must be done. The document also sets out that the superintendent or acting superintendent who has responsibility for the investigation into a collision must attend at the scene and identify the area he feels should be cordoned off for preservation. He must provide personnel in that regard.

The forensic collision investigator must attend at the scene immediately after a collision has taken place. He provides a forensic scientific examination of the scene. With regard to the preservation of the scene, there are very clear guidelines on the required practices. The district officer, who has considerable experience in the investigation of crimes, attends at the scene and has a senior investigating officer available to him to advise him. The structured investigation team would include all members, up to ten members of the Garda. They provide advice and pursue the investigation to its conclusion. Ours is the agency tasked with the enforcement of the criminal investigation. The purpose of our investigation is to consider the criminal aspects at the scene of an accident.

With regard to the question on coroners, we have representatives at the coroner's investigation and, under the Coroners Act, we conduct investigations for the coroner. That is the way the Act is structured.

I have endeavoured to outline the developments in Garda practices over recent years. With regard to current practices, I am certainly satisfied that the standard of investigation has improved considerably over recent years. In our interaction with the Judiciary and various other interested bodies, feedback has been quite positive. There is, of course, room for improvement and we are continuously endeavouring to improve and learn from our experience of accidents in respect of which our approach could have been better. We are trying to improve practices on a daily basis.

Mr. Dominic Mullaney

I was asked what happens following fatal collisions. In this regard, the Assistant Commissioner mentioned the forensic collision investigation team. In addition to the work of the team, the local engineer and local Garda officer meet to fill out an LA16 form, the purpose of which is to try to establish whether there are factors pertaining to a scene that can or need to be corrected. This has been a development in the past few years.

I assure the Deputy that information on the location of an accident scene should be good. Councils are now issued with hand-held GPS devices so the co-ordinates can be automatically recorded, such that there would be no question of logging the location inaccurately. This happens for all fatal collisions. The council tries to establish whether there are loose chippings or a sign missing. This would be essential information and it need to be established and acted upon. The Road Safety Authority and the National Roads Authority are continuing to work with local authorities to improve the speed at which investigations occur such that they can be carried out as quickly and comprehensively as possible.

With regard to the enforcement of guidelines, even before a scheme begins, a temporary traffic management plan must be prepared under health and safety legislation. Somebody is appointed as project supervisor for the design process. Once it starts, a project supervisor is appointed for the construction stage. It is important to remember that, since 2005 and on foot of subsequent legislation, there must always be a suitably skilled holder of a CSCS card on site when traffic operations are being managed or moved. That is an important development. The HSA can choose to inspect a site.

I was asked whether funds are sufficient. There are sufficient funds for safety works. Safety is not being compromised for lack of safety works but there are many major schemes that could be carried out if there were more moneys available. They, in turn, would have safety benefits. Such projects would be competing with public transport projects. It does not directly prevent works of a low-cost nature being carried out very effectively.

Mr. Noel Brett

The Road Safety Authority was asked whether it would correct its published statistics if it became aware of an error or a required change. The answer is that it absolutely would. The most recent road collision statistics that we withdrew in order to publish the correct ones concerned a case in which a family discovered an error in the documentation given to us in respect of an accident in 2006. This highlights the difficulties families face in gaining access to good information. To negotiate with the various organisations and systems and obtain information is particularly difficult. For collisions that happen now, the appointment of a Garda liaison officer in each case is a great step forward. That clearly was not the case in other instances previously discussed at this committee. It is now normal practice and it should make things easier.

Deputy Coveney asked about the role of the Garda and whether there needs to be another agency. From my perspective and that of the Road Safety Authority, the Garda Síochána forensic collision investigation is operating to a very high standard, using technology, equipment and computer modelling that is up there with the best in Europe. There is a big difference between scene management and preservation, and the forensic collision investigation. We are performing well in that investigation, but it is a criminal adversarial investigation. We could do more in lesson learning. I would like to see the engineering input much earlier in the investigation and for it to be independent. The cases should be reviewed and published, so that we would have good information on current trends, rather than trying to find fault, which is for the courts. To learn lessons, that information needs to be published.

The length of time taken before we can come out and say what caused a collision is a frustration for this committee, for the RSA and for the Garda as well. We have to wait for the coroner's court, for criminal cases and so on. There have been instances in the past where people have made a proclamation, such as that awful case in Quigley's Point in Donegal where five people were killed in 2005. Subsequently, it turned out that they were completely innocent and were doing all the right things, and that fault lay with the other driver. I would like to see the cases reviewed in clusters and the findings published. There are major deterrents from that and there are major lessons to be learned. We could borrow lessons from other modes of transport.

Deputy Joe Costello

I thank the delegates for coming along today and I extend my sympathy to the Farren, Gallagher and Keane families on the tragedies they experienced in the lives of their loved ones. What has been described is very serious. Mr. Brett stated that approximately 29,500 collisions take place annually and that one million offences have taken place over the past five years in the context of road accidents, fatalities and serious injuries. There is much grieving as a result of what has happened.

A great deal of progress has been made in recent years and the Road Safety Authority has done much good work, as have the Garda Síochána, the NRA, the Department and other bodies. There has been a greater focus in recent years, and that is to be welcomed. Nevertheless, the report presented by Mr. Barry of the NRA is a devastating critique of our unimproved national roads. It refers to the absence of signage on crossroads and how the roads do not even come close in their design and construction to what is required. It also states that there is confusion on who is responsible for what. This is fairly hard-hitting stuff. In recent times we have had some fine motorways and dual carriageways courtesy of the NRA, but we have not kept pace with national roads and non-primary roads. As a result, there are serious safety problems and these are outlined in the NRA contribution. That area needs to be addressed.

Mr. Mullaney pointed out that the local authorities have statutory responsibility for these roads. The signage, minor works and maintenance would largely be a function of the local authorities. Are local authorities responsible for virtually all of the non-primary roads? There might be some general supervision from the National Transport Authority and the Department of Transport, but the statutory responsibility rests with the local authorities. From that point of view, we need to have local authorities before us. We certainly need to have local authority representatives explain how they see their duty in maintaining those unimproved roads. Many people would have said that the tragedies which occurred in their lives have been due to a lack of signage, or the manner in which roadworks were conducted, where the proper procedures were not put in place. The Department of Transport states that there is now a guidance manual for roadworks which was produced in recent years. To what extent has that been circulated and observed by the local authorities? Has it been circulated to the Garda? Is it true that gardaí will still leave the scene of an accident without preserving it, as seems to have happened in the 2001 Donegal case? Is it possible that gardaí would be so lax that they would leave the scene of a tragedy and not preserve the scene of the accident? We heard it before during the McBrearty cases. What sort of guidelines are there so that gardaí can take every precaution to preserve the scene of an accident?

How effective is the guidance manual for roadworks in ensuring that signs are put in place? It is not good enough for us to hear that there were signs lying in the grass margin or in overgrown shrubbery and were not visible. How are local authorities monitored in conducting their business? One will come across roadworks from time to time when driving across rural Ireland. Who monitors those roadworks? Is there an independent monitor or is it left to the local authorities?

When an accident occurs, the Garda Síochána conducts the forensic collision investigation. That is very worthwhile and it is a new development since 2005 or 2006, but is it just a Garda investigation of the forensics of the case? Is there need for a more independent investigation of the totality of what has happened? How will that be done? The Garda forensic investigation can be very legalistic and can be very narrow in the accumulation of the information that is there, but is that sufficient? Should we be going beyond that and have an independent investigation, especially when there is a fatality? Tragedies of this nature, in which lives have been lost, have ruined the lives of many people. We need to look further at these areas.

How effective is the family liaison officer scheme? Has it been a success? Does the Garda liaise with all relevant families after accidents occur? What form does that liaison take? Does it merely involve a garda turning up, expressing his or her sympathy and saying that he or she is available? Is the Garda the proper body from which to source liaison officers to deal with families on a long-term basis? I would like some information on how the scheme is working in practice throughout the country. What kind of training is given to Garda liaison officers to help them to do their work?

I acknowledge the great work done in certain areas. There is no doubt that many of the accidents and collisions on our roads are caused by poor driver behaviour. Any deficiencies in our infrastructure should be dealt with by the responsible statutory authorities. We do not have a plan or a programme to improve existing deficiencies. The NRA said it has conducted 200 minor works to deal with safety issues. I am not sure exactly how it phrased its statement. I think it referred to road works done in the past 12 months. According to the NRA statement, "in 2011 we will carry out more than 200 individual minor works schemes, virtually all with significant safety aspects". Can Mr. Barry give me an idea of the number of locations that might need to be addressed? Is this the tip of the iceberg? Will this year's efforts make significant inroads into the overall number of works that need to be done?

I refer to the documentation compiled after a road accident. The coroner produces a report after his or her inquest. A forensic report is prepared by the Garda Síochána. I am not quite clear about the final report made available to the RSA. I understand it compiles its statistics from such accident reports. To what extent are those who are directly affected by accidents, including the families of the deceased, consulted about the details of these final reports? If the report includes information that is typographically or statistically incorrect, is there any mechanism whereby it can be corrected? We need to provide for a means of double checking the final report, which will be drawn on in the future as the definitive record, to ensure it is absolutely accurate.

Mr. Noel Brett

The Deputy asked two specific questions about the RSA. He asked first about the data we are given. We receive a CT68 form, which is completed by the investigating garda. There is a great deal of detail on the form. As the Assistant Commissioner said earlier, provision is being made for an upgrade of that form so that we can receive it electronically. At present, we receive 29,500 paper copies each year. The quality of these forms has increased dramatically over the past two or three years. A great deal of training on how they should be filled in has been provided. In the past, the expertise was not available to ensure they were filled in properly. The quality of the forms is much better than it was. We receive the CT68 form. In the last quarter of 2010, the Garda Commissioner gave the RSA permission to access three years of entire Garda collision files, including the documentation and findings of coroners, court documentation and toxicology reports, and so on. In partnership with the Garda Síochána, we have engaged a team of academic researchers to go through those files for us. We hope and expect to have a much greater depth of knowledge and data about what has been happening. With regard to high level macro data-----

Deputy Joe Costello

Were the families affected by such accidents consulted before the final version of each file was published?

Mr. Noel Brett

I do not know. The input of the families into those forms would have happened as part of the investigation. Families may be represented at formal events like sittings of the coroner's court. If they wish to challenge evidence at that court, they may do so. They can also be heard at the criminal and civil courts, if appropriate. That is where it would be done. The RSA would not go back to the families to reopen those files. We would take them as a product from the Garda. We hope that the joint analysis of the files will give us much more detail. As the Assistant Commissioner said, the forensic collision investigations that are now taking place following fatal and serious collisions are facilitating the growth of a significant body of information that would not have been previously available. The Garda Commissioner has given us access to the reports of those investigations as part of an academic study that is under way. I hope to return to this committee, along with representatives of the Garda, later in 2011 to discuss these detailed reports.

Deputy Joe Costello

Would it not be desirable for the immediate family of a person who has died in a road collision to have an opportunity to check the draft information in the relevant file before it is finally put to bed and preserved? I am not saying it is the responsibility of the RSA. In general, would it not be a good practice?

Mr. Noel Brett

It is important for all of us, across all agencies, to improve our engagement with families and others who have been devastated by road collisions. The Assistant Commissioner can explain the role of the liaison officer in that context. We have to be much more open and accessible. The era of charging people fees to access documentation must end. It is much better to involve families throughout the process, rather than contacting them when it is all over and trying to trawl back through it. I would prefer if families were more involved at coroner level, court level and investigation level. The Garda is working with a voluntary group that has previously been in attendance at this forum, PARC, to prepare leaflets for families that have lost people following road collisions. These booklets should help them to understand and navigate the various courts and coroners. It is important that they can access appropriate support and guidance after the event. It can happen to any one of us that in a split second, we get a knock on the door and are catapulted into a situation of this kind, which we do not know how to navigate. Those of us in the system would find it hard to navigate such a situation. It is important that families are properly supported, given access to information and helped to navigate these situations. It is more important that they are involved at every single step of the process and dealt with in an honest and up-front manner, rather than waiting until it is all over before coming back to try to reopen it.

Mr. Fred Barry

Deputy Costello referred to the implementation of guidelines and standards when road works are under way. Problems do not usually arise with larger schemes because dedicated site teams supervise such works. It does not matter whether the work is managed directly by the NRA, as would be the case in a PPP scheme, or managed by the local authority, which would be more usual. As there would be a permanent presence on site in either case, standards would reasonably be met. It is more questionable whether guidelines and standards are always met in cases of smaller schemes. The responsibility in such cases lies with local authorities. The NRA does not police them. If more is to be done in that regard, I recommend that primary consideration should be given to whether the local authorities need more resources or training to be able to fulfil this function. That would be preferable to bringing in the NRA or anybody else as a policing agency. I ask the committee to consider that.

The Deputy also asked about the condition of roads. While newer roads are in very good shape, as I have said, many older roads were never properly designed in the first place. Everybody in this room will be familiar with national roads throughout the country that are not of a sufficient standard. I am speaking about national secondary roads, in particular, but also about some national primary roads.

Deputy Costello mentioned the schemes in which we are involved. Every year, we pursue between 200 and 300 small local schemes. That can involve improving junction alignments, fixing pavements that are collapsing or developing traffic calming schemes. Such works make specific spots safer. We tackle identified accident clusters in co-operation with local authorities. There are significant deficiencies on long sections of many roads, especially national secondary roads. The only way to deal with this on a long-term basis is to improve full sections rather than piecemeal spots along the road. The issue is one of funding and the National Roads Authority and the local authorities do their best with the available funding. There is competition for funding and if more funding were available, more roads would be done. I am not suggesting that roads that are not so busy need upgrading to motorway standard or even dual carriageway standard, but all roads need good lines of sight and reasonable alignment to be safe. Roads need a reasonable surface so that the friction is good, even in wet conditions; proper drainage so that no ponds of water form on the roads and adequate lining and signing to guide road users. We are making improvements but we would prefer to make more.

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

On the question of preservation of the scene of an accident, the 2007 traffic investigation collision policy sets out very clear guidelines to follow. It is very clear on the importance and the urgency of the preservation of the scene. It sets out procedures on how to identify the scene and how to secure it. The senior investigating officer, the district officer will visit the scene in the immediate aftermath of the collision. Similarly the forensic collision investigators will attend in the immediate aftermath of any fatal or serious injury to deal with those issues.

When the Garda attend at the scene in the immediate aftermath of a collision, it is to preserve it in view of the further investigation to established if a crime has occurred. Separately under the collision prevention programme and subsequent to the initial investigation, the Garda in conjunction with the officials from the local authority will visit to see if there are other options that could be introduced to prevent further such accidents. The final report of the Garda is prepared to be submitted to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions so that a decision may be taken on whether to initiate criminal prosecutions. Following the review on the CT 68, a number of areas requiring improvements were identified and agreed with the various stakeholders. It is currently with the IT staff for technical solution. That should remove any opportunity for human error.

On the issue of access to statements, following the conclusion of proceedings, there is a process available to the public to make an application for copies of statements to be provided to them, and that operates. The service of the family liaison officer was introduced in 2006. The Garda community relations section, which deals with victims organisations and support groups, has conducted an analysis and review of the family liaison programme, and the outcome has been very positive. These gardaí have undergone a specific training course on family liaison and are specifically assigned to a particular case. The senior investigating officer must comply with a formal process in conducting the investigation from start to finish, the primary aim of which is to communicate with the family and help them through the process and to advise them of the details of the investigation as it progresses. The feedback on this process since its introduction in 2006 has been very positive. In addition we meet PARC road safety group and provide it with information to help it support people in the aftermath of these tragic incidents.

Chairman

A number of members must leave, so I propose to allow members to come back in at the end.

Deputy Joe McHugh

I welcome the delegation. The overwhelming message is that considerable progress has been made in recent years. It must be acknowledged that considerable progress has been made in road safety as a result of policies such as the 2007 road investigation policy, in addition to the 2007 policy on the preservation of the scene, the 2010 to 2112 effective roads policing and the 2010 speed enforcement zones. Too many people have died on our roads. The families of those who have died pay the ultimate price to make our roads safer. That is a given and everybody can acknowledge that.

Mr. Barry from the National Roads Authority referred to the responsibility of the Oireachtas for legislation. There is a role for legislators to ensure that certain decisions are made, but it is more important to ensure that there is responsibility and culpability and that a mechanism is in place to establish this. Mr. Noel Brett from the Road Safety Authority stated that the RSA does not have that engineering competence or statutory functions. A number of agencies have made presentations today. However, the absence of a representative from the local authorities, which have a function in road safety, is worth noting. We have a plethora of agencies, but none with overall responsibility for road accidents.

Prior to 2006 the checks and balances that are in place now were not in place. That is the reason the three families who are present cannot get closure on the loss of their loved ones. The sad point is that checks have been put in place because they and every family that lost a loved one on the roads in recent years paid the ultimate price.

How do we facilitate closure for the families of those who lost a loved one prior to 2006 and have received ambiguous reports? They may have attended the inquest but this did not bring closure. What can we do for the people who have made the roads safer for our sons and daughters? Do we not owe it to them to discover their needs? We owe them a big debt. They have lost their loved ones and the question is how do we enable them to get closure? I know this is a very open question that can be side-stepped to an extent.

Deputy Jimmy Deenihan

I am not a member of this committee and I thank the Chairman for allowing me to contribute. I knew Eileen Keane and Trevor Chute well and I am very aware of the turmoil and disruption this tragic accident has visited on their families. They have never come to terms with it and probably never will, unless they can experience some form of closure. I acknowledge the efforts of the chairman in trying to open a pathway of hope to achieve closure. It is an advantage of the committee system in the House that such investigations can be performed. I know time is running out for this Dáil, but I suggest that if the work of the committee on the three tragedies affecting the Keane, Farren and Gallagher families is to continue, it should invite members of the local authorities involved to appear before the committee, because this is very much a local authority issue. We cannot be specific on any case, but signage is certainly important, and in the case of Eileen Keane and Trevor Chute it was critical. Proper signs should be placed before all junctions between minor and major roads, and there should be some overseeing authority to ensure that local authorities establish proper signage in such places. If that had been done, one of these cases-----

Chairman

The Deputy should not go into details on the cases.

Deputy Jimmy Deenihan

Fair enough. Overall, however, one message we must convey is that proper signage is critical. That is why it is important to invite members of the local authorities to appear before the committee.

We all know what human tragedy is. It struck the Harte family this week, and our hearts go out to them. The Keane, Farren and Gallagher families have suffered considerably since the tragedies, and there is an obligation on us to do anything we can to help them achieve closure.

Deputy Martin Ferris

I offer my condolences to Richard and Kay Keane, the Gallagher family and the Farren family on their tragic losses.

There are a number of conflicting aspects to this. One of the families, whom I know, lost their loved one and her boyfriend on 22 April 2006 and there was no contact from any family liaison officer. I would like an explanation for this.

What concerns me greatly is the report on the accident, which indicated that the driver of the car, Trevor Chute, drove through a stop or yield sign, and that this was a contributing factor in the demise of Eileen and himself. I know the area and drive there on a weekly basis. At that point there was no yield sign or stop sign, yet that appeared in the report.

Chairman

I am advised by the clerk that it is not permissible to discuss the details of the events. The committee does not have the power to investigate particular cases; we can only talk about policy.

Deputy Martin Ferris

With respect, what I am trying to do is to outline a factual issue. What I am trying to ascertain-----

Chairman

We have had this problem before. I am advised by the clerk about what is permissible for the committee and what is not. I have clear advice in writing that we cannot investigate individual cases, but we can talk in general terms about issues that have caused difficulty.

Deputy Martin Ferris

Fine. In circumstances in which a report is inaccurate and the inaccuracy dates back to 2006 or before, what recourse do families have to obtain justice? With regard to the family liaison officer, there is also an issue of access under the Freedom of Information Act, which was also denied to a family in one case. How can they ascertain the facts and obtain justice? What is the sanction for authorities that have failed families in such circumstances with tragic outcomes?

There is an issue with the management of traffic and road works. Mr. Mullaney stated that a guidance document was published in October 2007. I commend much of what he said about safety audits, health and safety monitoring of road works, risk assessments and safety plans, forensic collision investigation by the Garda team, and the meeting of Garda officers and local authority engineers to agree on factual information on collisions. I accept these developments, but how do they apply to dates before these measures were established? Is there any avenue for families who lost loved ones before this time to have their cases investigated as they would be under the current system?

Mr. Mullaney mentioned in his submission that there is co-operation between the gardaí and local authority engineers in investigating traffic accidents, often fatal ones. For the life of me I cannot understand how the local authority engineer could investigate collisions. If there were deficiencies in a road - whether of signage or of the road itself - which contributed to a fatality or a serious accident, that person would effectively investigate his own inadequacies, which does not make sense.

What we need is a transparent approach so that grieving families can achieve closure on what they have had to endure for many years because of the failure of local authorities, investigating bodies and all authorities associated with the loss of their loved ones. It would be helpful to have an independent investigation of the outstanding cases that occurred before 2007. Unless we do this in a transparent manner, and unless families see that the authorities and those of us who have the responsibility of representing our constituents and the general public are ensuring that justice is done, they will not have closure.

Deputy Shane McEntee

It is nice to meet all the relevant bodies I have dealt with as spokesperson on road safety over the past five years. I read the figures at Christmas which showed that the number of road deaths in 2010 was down to the low 200s. This is due to the work and commitment of the various bodies in recent years, including the setting up of the Road Safety Authority and the work of the Garda, the Department of Transport and the NRA. The setting up of the Garda investigation unit to attend accident scenes is a particular advantage, because we can learn from such scenes. The Garda representatives said that they investigate criminal matters. Does that cover everything? For example, does it cover cases in which a person involved in a collision was drinking, speeding or talking on the phone? Does it take road conditions and signage into account? Are there people at the scene who can investigate these issues at the time of the accident? This is crucial if we are to make progress.

The reason I say this is something that happened in my own constituency in the past nine months. The N52 contains a stretch of road, no more than 150 yards, on which, every time it rained, people used to skid off the road and plough into a man's wall and house. We got the local gardaí involved and they put up speed traps; this did not work. The local authorities put up signage; this did not work either. We contacted the NRA through our road safety officer, and it reacted immediately, because the problem was not going to go away. There was one serious accident where a lady could have been killed. The NRA took over the stretch of road where all the signs were up and had it tested. That stretch of road has now been replaced and there has not be any skidding since. I believe there was a fault with the road. In the interest of transparency I ask Mr. Fred Barry to furnish the documentation to show that every avenue was explored, the Garda, the Department and so on, but it now transpires there was a fault with the road. This is very hard for the people in the Visitors Gallery. When I left my position that was the one area I considered was a failure. Since 2005 and 2006 when the Garda investigation unit was set up, it has dealt with the drink driving limits and so on. The Garda Síochána and the Road Safety Authority are to be praised for doing the hard tasks and ensuring that we all complied with the things to which none of us like having to conform.

Prior to 2005, I dealt with the Kentstown bus crash and the families and got to know them. I worked with them, day and night, until we got closure; I know the difference that makes to the families. The truth was hard to take - there was the faulty bus, Meath County Council, and Bus Éireann. For the families present the pain will never go away. I agree with Deputy Joe McHugh that the answer is in this room given that the organisations present worked very hard together as a group. I am aware from these families that while they want to know the truth they also want to stop other accidents occurring. We dealt with PARC which has been fantastic and is seeking to keep the campaign going. They were established in Donegal at a different time and have pushed us all forward. They were the pioneers prior to 2005.

I propose that one person from each of the organisations present come together with these families, on behalf of everybody - I know every case cannot be opened - and listen to their story. We will never get the full truth about some incidents, but PARC would not be here except for the fact that people are not happy. Speakers referred to learning and we learned a good deal about the N52. Speed or drink driving was not the cause of the accidents but the condition of the road. The organisations have the resources and are anxious to move the issue forward. Five years ago Ireland ranked 17th in the league in respect of road safety. Our aim was to get to number one and we are very close to it. Would the organisations present see fit to appoint one person from each of the Department of Transport, the National Roads Authority, the local authority, the Road Safety Authority and the Garda Síochána to work with people? There are some things that are not right and the Irish people will not be fooled any more as they are all educated. The truth has to come out. I ask this in recognition of all those who have died in road accidents prior to 2006.

Chairman

We have a proposal.

Deputy Tom Hayes

Like other speakers I acknowledge and compliment all involved in road safety. It is encouraging to see all the relevant bodies present. As Deputy McEntee said the reduction in the number of fatalities is heartening. I understand the Chairman does not allow us to get into specific cases.

Chairman

I am only explaining the rules as I get them.

Deputy Tom Hayes

While I am new to the committee I understand the reason we are here today is that the families involved are going through desperate situations since losing a member of their families. I have only listened to them in the past few months. Their concern is very real. In all my time in public office I have not come across such a strong case for answers. If we are to help bring some relief to these people I second Deputy McEntee's proposal that a group be set up. These people are genuine, they are heart-broken and need some help. If they walk out of this room today with some belief, we will have achieved a good deal. I ask the organisations appearing before the committee to put their expertise and knowledge at the disposal of these people. They are entitled to an answer. I do not want to hear repeated the story I heard from one individual. If we do as proposed we will give them hope and, at least, they can live normal lives. I second Deputy McEntee's proposal because the present position is unfair. I acknowledge the work being done but there is a very specific case to be dealt with.

Chairman

Deputy Coveney has one question. However, I will hear Deputy Ring and then Deputy Coveney.

Deputy Michael Ring

I thank the Chairman for allowing me to speak. While I am not a member of the committee, I am here because some constituents are present who are seeking closure. While I have been a strong advocate of the Road Safety Authority, under Mr. Noel Brett, and the Garda Síochána, both of which do a difficult job, both have failed because the State always protects the State. These families are crying out for the truth. If there was wrongdoing and if mistakes were made, they want to know.

I will give a simple example that illustrates where problems lie. I was travelling to Dublin the other night and the Garda Síochána asked drivers to pull in. I have listened to Mr. Noel Brett on radio in respect of the speed cameras. I saw potholes, larger than craters, all over the place. Nobody protects the client who is on the road. Why do the organisations present not take cases against local authorities for leaving some of these roads in such terrible condition? I was travelling the other night on roads where white lines were not replaced after roadworks. During the snow people found it difficult to travel. Families have suffered and have lost loved ones. I offer them my sympathy. An accident is one thing; where two cars collide is another issue. When accidents occur where there is not proper signage and where people have not done their job somebody has to pay. We cannot expect people to obey the drink driving laws, speed limits, tax and insurance requirements and maintain their vehicles in a proper and fit condition while the local authorities and the State get away with leaving the roads in bad condition. The Garda should issue a warning to the relevant local authority to have roads repaired immediately. Roads are in a dangerous condition. The National Roads Authority advises people to be safe and to present their vehicles for the NCT. They obey the law, yet the State, which has the responsibility for the condition of the roads, does not obey the law.

I support my colleagues in respect of their request. Whatever can be done must be done to get closure for the families who have found themselves in this situation. I ask the State to be open and honest, to set up an inquiry and do whatever is necessary to give these families closure in respect of the loved ones they have lost.

I am sorry I was not present earlier. I had intended to speak on the National Roads Authority but I will leave that for another day because this issue is too important to interfere with it.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I wish to put a specific question to the assistant commissioner. Arising from the presentation given by the Department of Transport, I am trying to understand the relationship between a garda at the scene of an accident and a subsequent meeting that is held, which is standard, with a local authority engineer, to establish whether the road or the road condition may have been a contributory factor to the fatal accident. Many families - some of them are with us today - are convinced, with good reason, that the condition of the road was the major contributory factor to the fatalities involved. How many prosecutions have been taken by the Garda in respect of local authority responsibility for not meeting guidelines, negligence, issues such as signage and not completing work properly? Sometimes there is a contractor working on behalf of local authorities, but it is still a local authority responsibility. I know that the assistant commissioner's job is in respect of a criminal investigation following an accident, but there must also be some follow up for civil investigations to determine the legal responsibility of engineers in local authorities. Due to mistakes, negligence, or lack of funding, road conditions have been a major contributor to accidents. That is my concern, and we need an answer on it.

Deputy Joe Costello

When a forensic collision investigation or any other investigation takes place, is there an obligation on those questioned by gardaí to help them with their inquiries and to answer all questions? Can anybody who might be the subject of a Garda investigation refuse to co-operate with the gardaí? This seems to have been the case in at least one instance. What is the situation from a Garda point of view for these investigations? Are gardaí entitled to compel anybody they regard as a relevant witness to co-operate and answer the questions asked?

Chairman

We will start with Mr. Mullaney.

Mr. Dominic Mullaney

If the committee wishes to put the question as to whether some meeting can take place, we in the Department of Transport will see what we can do. It is dependent on other Departments, such as the Department of Justice and Law Reform, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, as well as local authorities. We could not say right now that we can arrange such a meeting, but we could consider it and see if it is possible. It will depend on whether the CT68 form can be given out and whether it is available. Some of the accidents go back a bit, so it will depend on how much is available as well. If the committee wishes to pursue this, I suggest that it write to us about it. I am sure the other parties here can give their own initial response.

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

Several questions were asked and I will address them as best I can. The family liaison was introduced on 21 July 2006, after which people were trained, and it has run since then.

A review has been conducted of the CT68 forms to ensure greater accuracy. This has been done by means of a different validation process. We work with families of road accident fatalities on an ongoing basis, as we deal with families who are victims of serious crimes. We always try to assist where we possibly can.

The investigation and the forensic collision investigation include every element of the process. The criminal investigation will be separate under the collision prevention programme. When we secure the scene in the immediate aftermath of an accident, nobody is allowed access to the site except the Garda investigators. The visit with the local authorities will not take place until we are finished and the forensic and technical examination is done. We gather all that evidence and we present it to the Director of Public Prosecutions. We are the investigators and he is the arbitrator. He will decide on what the evidence tells him.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Is it not correct to say then that there is a meeting between the Garda Síochána and a local authority engineer to agree factual information pertaining to such collisions?

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

It is correct to say that, but it is subsequent to the criminal investigation. We have two separate processes. In the immediate aftermath, we conduct a criminal investigation, where we secure and preserve the scene. Nobody is allowed access to that scene, except the Garda investigators. We then photograph the scene and carry out a technical, forensic and scientific examination. We look at the road surface and things like that. We gather all that evidence and submit it to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who looks at it from a criminal perspective. The burden of proof differs in criminal law from the burden of proof in a civil case. We deal with criminal rather than civil issues, and the burden of proof for criminal cases is beyond all reasonable doubt, whereas for civil cases the burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities. Different thresholds have to be satisfied. The Director of Public Prosecutions ultimately makes the decision on the issues in respect of the investigation.

We are concerned with the protection of the scene and the preservation of evidence, and this relates to any criminal prosecution that may subsequently be taken. Subsequent to that we visit the local authority and deal with the crime prevention programme.

We have no power to compel a witness. The only way we can get people is to use what is called the power of arrest. If we feel that a power of arrest exists, then people will be arrested, brought into custody and questioned in accordance with the legislation. We have no power to compel a witness who may be of assistance to us, but if there is a criminal issue and a power of arrest exists, then we may be able to bring the person in under that process.

Chairman

What about the proposal made by Deputy McEntee?

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

I have indicated that we have met all the families and we have no difficulty in meeting them again to help them in whatever way we can.

Mr. Noel Brett

Several Deputies raised issues to which I would like to respond. If families are to meet anybody, then it is important that they meet the person who has the answer for them. I am conscious that we do not have any local authority representatives present today, even though 29 local authorities act as road authorities around the country. It is essential that families meet the person who can answer their question. While these three families here today have pioneered the way to highlight this, there are other families who have equally distressing stories and who are equally frustrated. It is important that each agency be accessible, open and accountable, and have somebody at a senior level who would sit down and talk to families and explain the remit of that agency. I have met each of these three families and several other families and I am more than happy to meet them again at any time. However, it is important that we do not waste their time and that they get to meet the people who hold the answer. They should not be put into another forum merely to tell their stories once again. I am happy to meet anybody, but given the number of agencies involved it would be more fruitful for families to identify those agencies to which they want to talk. Obviously, families are best able to make these decisions for themselves. The various agencies should be very open and explicit about their roles. They should make senior officials available to talk to families. I do not mean to presume to tell families what they want, but I perceive that such an approach would be more productive for them. It is better than bringing them to meet large groups of people and asking them to tell their stories again, given that the specific answer in each case depends on where the collision happened and on the issues. I can say, from the point of view of the Road Safety Authority, that I have met members of each of the families on several occasions and would be more than happy to do so again, in any forum the families might choose. I am conscious that I do not hold the answers to many of the questions they want answered.

Chairman

I suppose that is part of the problem. Who holds the answers?

Mr. Noel Brett

It depends on the individual case. A number of Deputies have alluded to the fact that in the context of roads, each local authority is the local roads authority in its catchment area. If the issue relates to road design, engineering or signage, it falls under the remit of the local authority. That is the agency that can answer the question. It is important that there be openness and honesty. Nobody's son or daughter can be brought back, but if the relatives of the deceased are treated honestly, at least they will be able to get closure. The investigations we have are adversarial. They are criminal investigations. That is why I made the point in my earlier submission that we need to review cases and publish our findings from a lesson-learning point of view, as opposed to an adversarial point of view, or in addition to that where appropriate. That needs to happen. We need independent engineering investigations of collisions to augment the criminal investigations. It is awful to expect a local authority engineer to go back and investigate a piece of work he or she may have designed or supervised a decade or more previously. That does not make sense. We can learn lessons from other modes of transport. We should try to do so, particularly at a time when road deaths are decreasing significantly and have the potential to decrease further. I would rather see that happen.

I would like to strike a note of caution about the CT68 form. It sets out the initial view of the investigating garda - it does not constitute the entire collision investigation file. It would be wrong if families felt they could get all the answers by reading CT68 forms. They have to be involved in investigations, prosecutions and coroners' proceedings, and so on.

On Deputy Ring's question about who ultimately polices the local authority to ensure potholes are filled, earlier in the meeting, we went through who is responsible for what. We were asked to set out the agency to which the local authority is accountable. My agency has no competence or statutory power. I cannot direct a county manager one way or the other. I do not have any enforcement powers or competence in relation to road engineering.

Chairman

The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government declined to send a representative to this meeting, unfortunately, on the basis that it was not responsible for this issue.

Mr. Fred Barry

If the Department organises a meeting with the families, we will be happy to attend. I echo what has been said - if the meeting is to be a fruitful one, the relevant local authorities have to be represented. That suggestion goes beyond the families immediately involved in the cases in question. If meetings take place involving other families, we will be quite happy to go along and do what we can.

We have the technical capability to participate in engineering inspections after accidents take place, but we do not have any such role. I am not passing the buck when I say it is a matter for the Oireachtas to tell the various agencies represented at this meeting what each of them should do. If the Oireachtas decides that the NRA should have the role I have mentioned, we will assume that role. In the meantime, the local authorities have that role.

Deputy Simon Coveney

We can ask whether it is appropriate to establish a new investigating body to work alongside the Garda in establishing whether a collision was caused by a design or management fault, for example in relation to signage or road surfacing. This possibility was mentioned by Mr. Brett. The alternative is to ask engineers to investigate their own departments, or contractors they hired. I do not think that would produce good results.

Mr. Fred Barry

Instinctively, I would be slightly reluctant to see another agency being established. If one looks at this side of the room, it will be clear that many agencies are already involved in this arena one way or another. The local authorities, which are not represented here today, are also involved. It is ultimately a matter for the Oireachtas. If the Garda, which undertakes these investigations at present, needs engineering support, it should be possible to provide for a more formal or more structured arrangement whereby the force could call on the NRA, or any other agency deemed appropriate, to provide such support. That might be the way to do it, rather than looking for a separate agency to get involved independently of the Garda investigation.

Deputy Shane McEntee

I will respond to something Mr. Brett said. I find it amazing. I must be very naive. I thought the Garda investigation unit enjoyed the support of road engineers in undertaking its work. I think the job is only being half done. It is a crucial aspect of this structure. The Garda does its investigation. Then it brings in the local authority. That will definitely cause a problem down the road. It has to change. I would like the Garda to do its investigation. It should then bring in people if there is a problem with the road. We do not need to hide this any more. The Garda should have the authority to apply to the National Roads Authority or the Road Safety Authority. Many of the best engineers are at home drawing the dole. Both of the authorities employ many people and may be seeking a new avenue to go down. They should assist the Garda by providing professional people. That would take the pressure off the local authorities.

I do not agree with Mr. Brett's suggestion that these people should go back to the local authorities. They have been to the local authorities. All of the power is in this room. All of the people we look up to are on this side or the other side of the room. I ask the committee to write to the Department of Transport with a view to getting each group to appoint one person to sit down with the families. I know the groups have heard the stories before. We need a ruthless body to establish the truth, regardless of what it is, and move from there. That would help all the families.

Deputy Martin Ferris

It does not make sense to me that in the case of a serious accident or fatality, the local authority in question is asked to adjudicate on its own road structure or network. It is not in the interest of transparency. It sends out the wrong message. We need to develop an alternative mechanism in such a circumstance. Perhaps somebody from another local authority could come in and work with the Garda on the case. Maybe something like that might be a way around it. I do not think an engineer from the local authority in question should investigate the collision. That does not make sense.

The Assistant Commissioner mentioned that the liaison officer system came to a head in July 2006. A number of those who have brought this issue to a head are concerned about collisions that took place years before that date. Liaison officers are not available to provide closure to them. They cannot ascertain the facts. The supposed facts presented as part of their respective cases were determined by the authorities at that point. We now know from the information they have managed to gather since that many of these facts were not facts. How do we go about addressing that? I do not think we can do so by meeting individual agencies. We need an inquiry. Its structure or composition does not matter. That is the only way we will get to the bottom of it. That is the only way these people will find closure, regardless of the outcome of the inquiry. If this happened to me, that is the way I would look at it. The point I am making is that it is neither transparent nor right that a local authority is allowed to investigate itself after a fatality or serious accident has taken place.

Deputy Joe Costello

It seems that two issues are at the nub of this matter. We need a more transparent process of investigation. It is the business of the Garda to conduct the criminal investigation. After that, we need to ensure there is transparency. Certain people who have a conflict of interest should not be part and parcel of the investigation. Mr. Barry said the NRA has "the technical capability" to be part of these investigations. Should this not be explored by the Garda and the NRA? A transparent mechanism should be put in place to supersede the forensic collision investigation that takes place at present and ensure there is no conflict of interest with local authority personnel or anyone else.

Then there is the question of closure. Will the Department of Transport take responsibility for doing what has been suggested here - that is, ensure that some person in authority in each of the relevant agencies, including the local authority as well as the agencies represented here, liaises with the families who suffered tragedies before 2006, perhaps in a forum established for the purpose?

Chairman

The delegates can see the concern of members, which was made clear to us by the families concerned and other families, that there is not a sufficient mechanism to give answers and provide closure.

I have one more question with regard to something that was raised by the Assistant Commissioner. It seems to me that things have improved considerably. My experience in the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, in setting up the Marine Casualty Investigation Board, was that there was no proper mechanism of investigation prior to that. If the Assistant Commissioner is satisfied that the situation has improved considerably - although we have been approached by those involved in more recent cases, which I will not go into now - could we have his agreement that some examination will be made of the specific cases that have continued to cause difficulties for families? There are more than the three represented here, although we respect these families.

Perhaps this is a matter for the Department of Transport. Who would co-ordinate that? Nobody is looking for too much. Deputy McEntee, who has put an enormous amount of work into this, has made a proposal. We know there are difficulties, and Mr. Brett made it clear that much effort has gone into finding a solution. The committee is anxious that there be one last attempt to give some degree of confidence and closure to the families involved. That is what we are seeking.

Assistant Commissioner Mr. John Twomey

I wish to clarify one point with regard to examination at the scene of a collision. Our forensic collision units are equipped with what we call a turnkey SkidMan accelerometer. This determines the friction coefficient, which is basically the grip, between the vehicle and the road surface. They do a technical examination of the road surface and the results will lead them to certain conclusions. There is a certain tolerance in the results, and where that tolerance is exceeded, we have, on several occasions, brought in external engineers to do a more detailed technical engineering examination for us. Put simply, the friction test is a test of the grip under different circumstances. We will try to re-enact the weather conditions at the time of the accident and do a friction coefficient test. Where the results of this are outside a certain tolerance, we will engage external engineers to support us. That issue has been dealt with.

Deputy McEntee mentioned the families. We have met the families and are more than willing to continue that engagement and assist in whatever way we can.

Chairman

Part of the problem seems to be that the families are still not happy with the answers they have received. I do not want to go into individual cases, but it is the desire of the committee that we come to a conclusion today that some last attempt be made to address the outstanding issues.

Deputy Shane McEntee

Could I finish with a proposal? All the bodies appear to be agreeable that somebody should be appointed to carry out this function. In six months' time we should have appointed somebody to liaise with the families and the relevant local authorities, which should be obliged to participate, and he or she should come back here with a report. It should not cost a penny. That person should come back and say "yes, there was a problem with such-and-such, and the authorities have learned from that". They are addressing it, but there needs to be an acknowledgement that there was a problem.

Nobody wants anybody to be hanged or to go to jail, because that will never bring those children back, but the families want acknowledgement by the State that the cases have been seen in a different light. We have seen this with the people in Derry and others who have been wrongly imprisoned. This is the same type of case. We can never say we cannot go back. The truth is the truth. I ask that we all work together. We must appoint somebody with the time and interest to deal with these people. As the Chairman said, there may be a few more, but these families have pioneered the issue. They do not have to go through everything. I know many people who were hurt when the truth came out - that their son was over the limit, or whatever - but at least they got the truth.

Chairman

I suggest that the Department of Transport take the lead in talking to the other agencies. We have heard before what the problems are in terms of collisions and so on. To reflect on what has been said here, I ask the Department of Transport and the Road Safety Authority to consider the issue with all the agencies involved, including the local authorities, and see whether there could be some examination - I do not want to call it an investigation - of the outstanding issues that are causing difficulty. It strikes me - I ask the delegates to correct me if I am wrong - that there have been problems historically, but that these have led to a much better system of investigation and identification.

I have an interest in a particular case, which I will not go into, and the Garda has made every effort to respond appropriately to what was an inadequate system. It appears that lessons have been learned. If the outstanding historical cases can be addressed, these families can feel that at least they are being listened to. That was one of the criticisms of this committee - that we were not listening and not prepared to try to do something. Perhaps we could agree that the Department of Transport should co-ordinate such an exercise and then inform the committee of what it can do to address the outstanding issues. The delegates heard the details of the issues involved at the last meeting. If this could be addressed, it would be a step forward.

Deputy Martin Ferris

I am not a member of the committee, but I would like to make a point. Where there are inaccuracies in the actual report based on the investigation, that must be dealt with. There are factual inaccuracies. This has been proven in one case that I am aware of, although I do not know about the other cases. Where there are factual inaccuracies, that must be investigated.

Chairman

That is something on which we all agree.

Deputy Simon Coveney

It is important for the families who are listening to realise that we are not trying to prescribe a hand-holding exercise. It is not a matter of listening to people's stories and trying to console them. A substantial amount of work has been done by these families in gathering factual information and they have shown that there were inconsistencies in reporting. There has been a civil action in the High Court in respect of one of the cases. If we are agreeing to do this, it must be understood that such an examination is likely to expose inconsistencies and things that should not have happened around the management of sites and subsequent reporting and investigations, including non co-operation by certain people with certain investigations. This is a difficult area. I do not want us just to try to achieve some consensus that makes people feel good. If we are to do this for families it needs to be done properly.

Chairman

We have asked-----

Deputy Simon Coveney

Perhaps we can hear from the Department of Transport on what it is willing to do.

Mr. Dominic Mullaney

Perhaps we could get some guidance. The committee may wish to speak to the families and try to get some guidance on what they want from the process. That would put us in a better position to ascertain whether we can address the issues. We can certainly respond then to-----

Chairman

The committee is limited in what it can do. Perhaps the Department and the Road Safety Authority would meet the families concerned and establish the outstanding issues that are a cause for concern. I am aware, following a briefing from Mr. Noel Brett of the Road Safety Authority that he has looked at the issues quite comprehensively. I suggest they come back to the committee, having considered the issue. As Deputy Coveney said, this is a complex and difficult area and we are not seeking an outcome that we know is difficult is achieve. As one last effort, if the issue can be looked at again that is as much as we can hope for. Any individual members of the committee who wish to feed into the exercise can do so.

Deputy Joe Costello

That is probably the best approach. If the Department of Transport met the families it would get an idea of the issues that need to be addressed and it could then see what can be done to address them. If necessary, it should come back to the committee and discuss it.

Mr. Dominic Mullaney

We will do that.

Chairman

I thank the organisations for appearing before the committee and for their contributions.

The joint committee adjourned at 6.05 p.m. until 3.45 p.m. on Wednesday, 26 January 2011.