The matter that I announced in connection with a question by Senator Douglas on the motion for the adjournment, can now be taken. The Senator gave notice that on the motion for the adjournment of the House this evening he proposed to call attention to the need for the revision of the regulations controlling car parking attendants, and, in particular, to the desirability of authorising attendants to make a charge for their services.
Adjournment Debate—Control of Car Parks.
I will be very brief on this matter because my main object is, not to press the Minister to make any decision or any announcement here, but to ask him to go very carefully into the position of car parking attendants and to see if it would not be advisable to change the regulations in certain respects. I can speak only for Dublin, but I imagine the conditions apply to Cork and possibly other places as well. I consider that car parking attendants fulfil a very useful duty, not simply to the owners of cars, but to the public, and that in preventing theft and interference they probably save the police a good deal of time and trouble.
It seems to me very desirable that we should encourage a reasonably good type of person to act as car parking attendants and, speaking generally, before the disappearance of cars from the roads, we had on the whole, in Dublin at any rate, quite a good and responsible type. I have spoken to some of them and friends of mine have spoken to them. One of the practical difficulties is that you will not maintain a good type unless there is a reasonable chance of a steady livelihood. I understand the position to be that in some parks, the payment of the attendant being purely voluntary, on some days the attendant may get quite a lot of money, possibly even an excessive amount, and at other times there will be five or six cars in respect of which the owners pay him nothing. One attendant said it was not as bad as one might think because these car owners might have already paid attendants in other parks, but that he knew perfectly well that some of them never gave an attendant anything.
I believe it would be a good thing to provide something similar to what I know operates in the United States and, I am told, operates in Belfast, namely, to issue a ticket and make a charge. I do not profess to have enough knowledge in the matter to make a practical suggestion but I would suggest something like this: that a ticket for threepence would be issued by a car-parking attendant which would cover the forenoon or the afternoon, or, alternatively, a ticket for sixpence, which would cover any park within the particular city for a day. One attendant to whom I am indebted for some information believed that if there were some arrangement they would form a union amongst themselves and see that the money was distributed reasonably fairly. He agreed that some people, because of the nature of their business, would want to leave their car for most of the day in one park, and that there were others who might be in five or six different parks in one day, and he did not think that a person should pay five or six times the amount prescribed.
It seemed to me a perfectly reasonable proposal and it is now, when the men undertaking these duties will have a rather lean time until more cars return, that the matter should be considered. I want this job to be regarded, not just as a haphazard one but as a useful profession, which I believe it to be, and I think that can be done if some steps are taken to see that attendants get a decent livelihood.
The only objection I have heard— possibly there are others—is that it may be said that the streets are public, and if you insist on a charge it is not fair to the public who are entitled to park. My answer to that is that it is not a very serious matter because the charge is made, not for the parking, but the protection of the car, and that almost anybody who can afford a car ought to be able to afford to pay the man who looks after it for him during the day. But, should there be anything in the argument, I would say, provide a few free car parks in which there would be no attendants. That would be the answer for anyone who is not prepared to pay a reasonably small charge; he can go to one of the free parks. I think the Minister, if he tries that plan, will find that the free parks will not have anyone in them and that there is no real public objection. I do not want to dogmatise in putting the case as it appears to me to require consideration. My suggestion is that now is the time it should be considered, and that it may become a serious problem if no changes are made.
I am afraid I will have to introduce something that has not been mentioned by Senator Douglas. The picture is not entirely as he painted it. I am a very experienced motorist and perhaps I am in touch with motorists to a greater degree than is Senator Douglas. Quite candidly, this matter of parking in Dublin, both before the emergency and since the return of the cars, developed into something in the nature of blackmail of the unfortunate motorist. I think motorists generally would deprecate anything that would make it obligatory on a man to pay for the parking of his car. Parking has been interpreted by a certain type of attendant as any stop, not necessarily at a park. The unfortunate motorist stopping even for a casual stop, where he would have no service at all from the attendant, finds that the attendant is very much on the spot, with his hand out, when the motorist comes to move his car again.
I do join with Senator Douglas in saying that the majority of motorists would cheerfully buy a daily ticket. They would even buy a weekly ticket. Speaking for myself, I would cheerfully buy a monthly ticket, because there are some splendid men in some of the car parks in the city. But attendants must be reminded that they are not getting a fee, whether daily or weekly, simply for holding out their hand or going to open a door, which is usually locked, when the owner goes to move the car from the park. It is quite a frequent experience to put a car in a park, lock it up, where it needs no attention from anyone, where it is perfectly safe and the only time you see the attendant is when you go to move it. I am not speaking of it on a personal note but I have to speak for that great body of motorists with whom I am in intimate contact and they have expressed themselves to me as resenting the levy which has been made on them in recent years by a certain type of car attendant.
If the Minister is to look into this matter, he should do so with full knowledge of what it implies. If there is to be another charge on the motorist, it should not be an arbitrary charge. It should be a charge for service rendered. Even in cases where a fee has been paid, I have had complaints from motorists. In my own business, I have received cars for repair which were damaged in a park even where a fee was paid to the attendant by the motorist. This question is not as simple as it seems but it is one which should be tackled. It is a pity that local authorities were not prevailed on to provide proper parking facilities. The Liffey Bridge and a few other places might be considered but I shall not trouble to discuss these matters at this late hour. Parking is becoming a tremendous problem. What I want to urge is that the motorist be permitted within the limits of the ordinary law to make reasonable use of the streets without payment of a fee. If, of necessity, he has to incur another tax, it should be to somebody who renders service and not to a person who has rendered no service.
The matter which Senator Douglas has raised is an important one. In spite of certain remarks by Senator Summerfield, I think he is really in agreement with Senator Douglas inasmuch as he thinks that parking attendants, as distinct from persons who want to be paid for opening the door of a car, are indispensable. The police are not able to do the work involved in minding cars in a city such as this. What Senator Douglas suggests is that car parking should be regularised. If it were regularised, the objections which Senator Summerfield has put forward would disappear. The persons appointed as attendants would be of a good type and they would have the prospect of a regular livelihood. They would be responsible, too, because, if the Minister were to make regulations and give them certain rights, he would also impose upon them certain duties. Practically every motorist I know is prepared to pay a daily or weekly fee to a bona fide attendant but not to a person who appoints himself. What is happening is: the more generous people are being imposed upon and others are getting a certain amount of service without paying for it. Possibly, as Senator Summerfield suggests, certain persons are receiving remuneration who are rendering no service. I do not know if the Minister would require legislation to regularise this matter. I think that he has power to make regulations which would systematise car-parking. It would be well to make such regulations before all the cars come back on the roads.
I am the wrong Minister to answer in connection with this matter. The Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána makes the regulations, which are subject to the approval of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. I shall bring the matter to the attention of the Commissioner. Any regulation which the Commissioner makes must be approved by the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, who is the responsible Minister under the Road Traffic Act. The Commissioner merely acts as agent for the Minister for Local Government and Public Health.
It is not quite correct to say that the Minister is the wrong Minister.
I am not responsible under the Road Traffic Act. The Gárda Síochána Commissioner is the person who makes the regulations, subject to the approval of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. I shall bring the matter to the attention of the Commissioner.
The Seanad adjourned at 9.35 p.m. until 3 o'clock on Wednesday, December 12th, 1945.