Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1961

Vol. 54 No. 10

Road Traffic Bill, 1960—Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Professor Hayes

I regret that, owing to a miscalculation, I did not hear the Minister's speech but I had the advantage of seeing it since. We had this matter discussed twice in the last Seanad—in 1955 and 1956. It is not a political matter. We are all at one in desiring that the roads should be made safer and that the law should be improved, if that will be of any advantage. We differ merely on matters of detail and occasionally on matters of principle, such as the imposition of fines on the spot.

My first reaction to this measure, like my first reaction to every other measure like it, is that there is no use in enacting an enormous amount of legislation about traffic when the rules we already have are not enforced. I know that the Minister in his speech this afternoon said he has an assurance that this legislation will be enforced. It is a very large Bill with 127 sections. They make a considerable addition to the law as we have it but if it cannot be enforced, then it is no use because law that is not enforced is bad for the morale of the public.

Your last case is worse than the first if you multiply the provisions of the law and at the same time, make no provision for adequate enforcement. One of the difficulties of the whole question of traffic is that you never know under which thimble the pea is. We have the Minister for Local Government, the Minister for Justice and the Minister for Industry and Commerce. One is never quite sure who is responsible for what.

In Dublin, the position is that when police are in charge of traffic, they are wholly admirable. However, the police not concerned with traffic appear to be, of set purpose, neutral about traffic, as the old D.M.P. were about Irish Volunteers. As far as I see in Dublin, if Gárdaí are not on traffic duty as pointsmen, when they are wholly admirable, they do not bother about traffic at all. There may be reasons for that but I do not know what they are.

There are two things which can be done about this matter. One is education and the dissemination of information and the other is punishment. Education is by no means as simple as people think. There is certainly a hard core of road users, motorists, cyclists and pedestrians, whom nobody can educate and therefore they must be punished. The punishment is punishment of a minority but I think there is no doubt that it should be drastic and if possible, swift.

The whole process of reporting somebody for a breach of a traffic law and having to wait until the case comes up in court—and they have to go there and give evidence; a Guard has to attend, they must spend a day in the district court—seems too slow a method. Here is a matter of principle. Our legal friends tell us: "You must have trial; you cannot have summary punishment" and so on. It is a desperate situation. Every couple of days, three people are killed on the roads. Unless we have some swift, drastic measures for an intractable minority, we shall not get any further in our desire to improve the position.

Another point in regard to punishment and reporting is that we hardly ever see a case of a prosecution in court unless an accident has taken place. Anybody who uses the roads here as a pedestrian or a motorist knows that people constantly disobey the rules. It seems to me, and always has seemed to me, that the punishment should be either a jail sentence or loss of licence. When you say that motorists should lose their licences, you are confronted with the problem of what you are to do with cyclists without lights. The cyclists without lights are not the exception but the rule, certainly in the city of Dublin. Driving home from here to Rathmines or Rathfarnham, or driving north, the great majority of cyclists one meets have no lights. I do not know what we can do about them. What you would like to do is to take away the bicycles. Of course, they are not licensed and you cannot do anything about them at all.

As far as the regulations are concerned, they should be clear, they should be uniform and they should be enforced. I do not know what steps the Minister proposes to take. There is a booklet in which it is set out that you should give way to traffic on your right but nobody does. I do not know whether the Minister, in consultation with the Minister for Justice, can take any steps to see that is done. A short distance from my house, I meet Kimmage Road on my left with traffic coming from it. The buses are much bigger than my car and I yield to them. Once in a while, you will meet a bus driver who gives way but in the majority of cases, particularly private motorists, they come from your left at a fast speed. People coming up and desiring to go on to a minor road want to pass out in front of you, going on your right. I do not know if the Minister has any method by which he can see that these rules are enforced. I do not mind whether the rule is to give way to traffic on your left or on your right but whichever it is, it should be enforced.

Similarly, is there any way of discovering what is a major road and what is a minor road? Is it really possible at law to say what is a major or a minor road and have people on major roads any particular rights? Apparently that is a matter of grave doubtat present. With regard to pedestrians, they have no rights at all unless they are lively, nimble and young, and I am not lively, nimble or young. I am very familiar with two places where there are traffic lights, at Terenure where I live, and the junction of Leeson Street and Earlsfort Terrace. I used to find it easy to cross at Earlsfort Terrace but in recent years it is difficult to cross there. If pedestrians coming up by St. Vincent's Hospital want to cross to Earlsfort Terrace, they proceed to cross when the lights are green but the motorists, in the main, are coming up past the hospital, proceeding towards Leeson Street and they charge the pedestrians right away. I do not know what happens then. If you are nimble you run but I am not nimble and I find it more and more difficult to cross the road. I presume people of a certain age still have their rights. If the motorists did not go around that way, I do not think they could get around.

There are certain things in the Bill with regard to enforcement and there is the driving test. Speaking for myself, I would never have passed a driving test which required me to know what an engine was. I have been driving for quite a long time and I never had an accident but if I had been examined in regard to the details of an engine, I would not have passed the test. The type of test that is required is one in regard to road courtesy rather than knowledge of engines. The most reckless drivers on the road are those who are experts on engines and they take all kinds of risks because they have all kinds of knowledge. The test I should like to see is in regard to how a person behaves on the road.

The arrangements about speed limits are admirable and allow the Minister to impose speed limits and to vary them in the light of experience. The speed limit in the Bill is 30 miles an hour. I live on the Templeogue Road which is a main road to Wicklow and Wexford and also to the south because you can get to Naas from that road. When you have a new car and have to travel at 30 miles an hour, you are in everybody's way. It seems to me that 30 miles an hour, while it is desirable, is a speed limit which it will nearly impossible to enforce. I think I am right in saying that the Minister has power to vary it and make it more realistic.

I wonder if there is any way of defining pedestrian's rights. I take it the Minister is not responsible but it is no harm to remark that from Rathfarnham, through Terenure and down to the quays by Harold's Cross, there is only one pedestrian crossing, which is at the school at the Hospice. It is a very wide road and there is no way of getting across. In a great many cases when people are crossing, the traffic lights change. I do not know what the position is in law or whether the pedestrian has rights. He may have but if he insists on them, he will probably get killed and that is no use to him.

One other matter I should like to see dealt with is in the use of horns. I think there is a provision in the 1933 Act that motorists can be prosecuted for creating a nuisance through the use of horns. I should like to see an endeavour being made to have a silence period say from 11 p.m. to 8 a.m. I know that on all main roads there are a great many motorists who drive on the horn and do that even in winter evenings when it is dark, at 10 o'clock, 11 o'clock and 12 midnight. On the road on which I live, people sound their horns to get other people out of the way, but everybody knows that at night time the proper use of one's headlights is sufficient for this purpose. In many cities, in Rome and Paris, for instance, the introduction of silence zones has been very successful and they should be tried in Dublin. Some people suffer inconvenience because they have to live on corners which perhaps were once quiet places but which are now subject to all kinds of noises.

There are aspects of this matter which are not certain. I saw, for example, that there was a discussion about people travelling in different lanes through traffic lights. What does that mean? If I am turning left at traffic lights, I approach them as near as possible to my left and if I am not going left, I leave room for cars beside me but people come up on your left and shoot out in front of you. I do not assert my rights any longer. Professional drivers can assert their rights but I never try. In Dublin, it is quite common for people to approach on your left and then go ahead in front of you.

I wonder is that the law? I am sure the Minister would know. I do not know what the law is. I do feel that this whole question of driving and death on the roads cannot be dealt with merely by passing laws. When we pass this law, we will be only at the beginning. I think improving the roads is not such a wonderful thing. Quite lately, I saw a very bad accident on a very wide road.

I think it was the late P.S. O'Hegarty, an inveterate cyclist, who said that the proper thing was not to make better roads but to put traps or gullies on them. If these gullies were approached at speed, the drivers would break their wheels, if not their necks. There is something in that. If Senators lived, as I do, on a road on which there is heavy traffic, on which people travel at enormous speeds, they would feel that a big notice in Templeogue: "Beware of the Gullies" or "Mind Your Wheels" might be of some use. It would not be of much use, but it might be of some use. It could not be done, of course, because it would cause trouble to other people, but there is no doubt whatever that the problem of speeding on the roads will have to be dealt with.

It is not a problem of a social nature. It is not rich people who speed; it is not the people with enormous cars who speed. My experience is that small cars, in particular, seem to be driven at very high speeds. It is not the motorists who are the most neglectful. Women with prams and children approaching to cross a road at a pedestrian crossing find crowds of cyclists there and a great many motorists and bus drivers shove their vehicles right across pedestrian crossings in the presence of policemen who do not seem to take any notice. It is no wonder that pedestrians do not bother about pedestrian crossings because when they go to cross, they find them already occupied by cyclists, motor cyclists or motor vehicles. If we could have the enforcement of some clear and uniform law even in a simpler Bill, it would do a lot of good.

I welcome the idea of driving tests. I am not quite convinced—I think the Minister gave way on this matter in the other House—on the question of summary punishment, but I am prepared to hear it argued. If there was clarity and enforcement even in a simpler code than this, we would have made considerable progress. The Bill should certainly get a Second Reading.

Mr. Lenihan

As a legal practitioner, the sections of the Bill which interest me most are Sections 48 to 55 in Part V dealing with driving offences. A certain amount of public hysteria has been generated, both by public utterances and press editorials, with regard to the problem of dangerous driving and, in particular, the problem of drunken driving. The latter problem in particular has been exaggerated. Actually Garda statistics bear me out in the statement that something in the region of 90 per cent. of all driving offences are not related to drink. In many cases, this public hysteria tends to prevent some unfortunates from getting justice when charged with offences under the road traffic code.

That sort of public hysteria in regard to driving offences was responsible to a certain degree for what I might describe as the Draconian provision of mandatory imprisonment penalties for drunken driving and dangerous driving which result in serious bodily harm or fatality. The Minister met the wishes expressed in the other House on Report Stage, and in regard to both those offences, there is now a fine alternative. I feel that justice is best served by that provision, because one can quite easily imagine a case of minimum dangerous driving resulting, through misfortune or otherwise, in serious bodily harm or a fatal accident. Under the original provision, that would result in mandatory imprisonment. I feel that provision was wrong. It would mean that the courts would operate as a cypher and impose the penalty which, by legislation, they must impose. That has been adjusted now and judicial discretion is provided to take into account the type of case I have mentioned.

For the same reason, I am glad there is a similar fine alternative in the case of drunken driving. Any person who practises in the courts sees the enormous variations in cases of drunken driving from the borderline case to the man who is completely and absolutely incapable because of drink. A judicial tribunal such as the courts, can exercise discretion as between the case of minimum drunkenness and maximum drunkenness. The original provision was brought about by the excessive public hysteria about driving offences, and in particular, drunken driving offences.

Another basis for the section which referred to dangerous driving which caused bodily harm or a fatality was that it was said that far too few convictions were being obtained where manslaughter was charged arising from a road accident, and that the courts took a rather liberal view in charges to juries. The Attorney General v. Dunleavy is the classic case of manslaughter arising out of a road accident. In recent months, the courts have been taking a more strict view of those cases in charging juries. There have been quite a few convictions of manslaughter arising out of driving offences. In the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court about three weeks ago there were two manslaughter prosecutions arising out of driving offences in which convictions were secured on the manslaughter charge and the present penalty imposed. I believe that, provided judges take a proper view of the matter in the really serious cases of driving offences involving a fatality, convictions can be got under the existing manslaughter provisions. I agree that the situation was not quite as satisfactory 12 months ago as it is today. The position now is that convictions are being got in manslaughter charges in driving offences where a fatality occurs.

In regard to the drunken driving problem, I very much welcome the Minister's announcement here, and on Report Stage in the Dáil, that he is setting up a commission to consider the question of blood tests or some similar scientific tests by which the degree of drunkenness can be ascertained. I would not go as far as some of our humourless and puritanical neighbours in the Scandinavian countries have gone. They can get a conviction of drunken driving if the blood test shows the driver has consumed a few half whiskeys, a few bottles of beer, or the equivalent. We should not go as far as that. There should be a little more latitude here about the type of test in respect of this problem of ascertaining when a man is incapable of driving a vehicle by reason of the consumption of drink.

Because of a court decision a year or two ago, it is now permissible for members of the Garda to give expert evidence in the courts on drunkenness. Formerly, medical evidence was required but it is no longer required. If a man is charged with drunkenness and Garda A, B or C stands up in court and says that he staggered or smelled of alcohol, supporting medical evidence is no longer required. I believe that could give rise to a dangerous situation. I do not mean this as any reflection on the Gardaí, but by reason of their training and their day-to-day routine, they tend to give stock examples of drunkenness: He staggered; he smelled of alcohol; and his speech was slurred. You get the same stock examples to sustain the view that he was drunk coming up in the courts day in and day out. That situation could lead to abuse by reason of the Guards dealing with the matter inevitably in a routine way. That could lead to abuse, particularly when it does not require to be supported by medical evidence.

The real answer to it—and this is also the Minister's view—is that there should be some scientific test. The whole question of convincing proof in the district court at the moment as to whether a man is drunk or not is highly unsatisfactory. I welcome the Minister's announcement that he is setting up a commission to deal with this problem. My only plea is that we do not put the scale too low but that we put it within reason and modification, bearing in mind the fact that a person who is charged with an offence is also a person who has rights and privileges. We should not overweigh this argument against a driving offence by way of hysteria. It is because the individual has his rights that I welcome particularly the provisions which eliminate the mandatory jail sentence. I welcome for that very same reason a scientific test. If there is a scientific test, the individual can rest assured that his case will not be prejudiced.

Mrs. Dowdall

I welcome this measure, too. I hope that, when enacted, it will have been improved in its passage through this House and that the conditions on the roads and road traffic conditions generally will be greatly improved. Most of what is called reckless and careless driving would be eliminated by ordinary simple education and by people using good manners. If I had to define reckless driving, I would say it is inevitably somebody who in the ordinary social sense is quite well-behaved and whose manners are extremely good but to whom something seems to happen when he or she gets behind the wheel of a car. The savage or primeval in all of us seems to take control and people behave quite irrationally.

The many points mentioned by Senator Hayes are experiences that we all have in our ordinary driving from day to day. I would agree that what we need at the moment is education in road safety. On that account I was very pleased with one point in the speech made by the Minister. He proposes to grant money to local authorities for this purpose and to the Safety First Association which is an Association that over the years has taken upon itself this enormous task of educating us to try to avoid accidents.

We are all aware in recent times of very many fatal accidents caused by dangerous parking of large vehicles on the road at night and, indeed, small vehicles as well. There are parts of our city which are used at night exclusively for the parking of these great lorries and trucks. They have no indicators or lights on them. They happen to be in a part of the city which is well-lighted. They are a positive danger. Large trucks parked or being driven at night are inadequately lit at the back or at the sides. In other countries they have to have a light every couple of feet on the side of a large truck. Here they seem to have one or two small lights at the back which are quite inadequate to indicate to passing motorists the extent of these great trucks. These are parked at night with one light in front and another behind. There should be many more lights.

I cannot agree with Senator Lenihan in regard to the hysteria about drunken drivers. I think it is a lamentable situation that because a man is drunk in charge of this lethal weapon, he cannot at once be taken off the road by whatever means we have. Perhaps we could take them off the road and lock them up for the time being. That would be a kind thing to do. I think they should be removed from the road at once and any quibbles as to whether they are or are not drunk and whether they prove in law that they are drunk or sober is a very unimportant matter when it is suspected by a Garda. In this case, I would be with the Garda 100 per cent. If the Gardaí have the slightest suspicion that a person is not competent to drive a vehicle, I say that he should be removed from the road at that moment. What happens to the person after that is another day's work. The technicalities of knowing what quantity of alcohol a person has in his bloodstream is a very unimportant point, when you consider the dangers to other people on the road.

The rights of the individual are very much discussed in this country, but the individual in this case is a menace to other individuals. I doubt very much that we will get in a short time to the point of having all this technical examination of the blood and all the rest of it. I hope we do; I hope we will perfect the system whereby there will be no legal or technical difficulty in regard to a person driving under the influence of drink.

In the meantime, I certainly would agree that if the Gardaí have any doubt whatever about a person being incapable of driving, that person should be stopped from driving at once. We will have other opportunities to discuss this. Just now, that is all I have to say except to congratulate the Minister and express the hope he will be able to improve the conditions on our roads by this new measure.

Mr. O'Grady

Like the previous speaker, I, too, would disagree very strongly with the views expressed by my colleague, Senator Lenihan, on the question of drunken driving. In my opinion, a man who drives a car while drunk or under the influence of drink is a potential murderer and, as Senator Mrs. Dowdall pointed out, should not be permitted to continue with the murderous engine in his hands. Last year, I understand that 300 were killed on the roads in this country. I do not know how many may have been killed by drunken drivers or if any at all were killed by these people. Four thousand others were seriously injured. It is a very serious situation.

With regard to punishment, a man who can afford the luxury of getting drunk before he starts motoring does not mind a fine of £5 or even £10. To some of these gentlemen who have money to burn, that is no deterrent. They will go out from the court and start off again. Something will have to be done. If this new system of testing the blood will ease that situation we shall be very pleased. I should also like to point out that even a small quantity of alcohol has an injurious effect on the brain. I daresay it differs with the capacity of different individuals. Some people may be able to take a lot of it. We all remember the case of the lady driver who was found drunk under a car in Lucan. When a Garda found her, she said: "Hello, Catswhiskers" to him. That was her response to the Garda. She admitted having taken 18 glasses of brandy. I do not know the price of a glass of brandy but I think it is 5/-. Eighteen glasses would cost £4 10s. She was imposing a little fine on herself to make her funny but she was capable of doing a lot of damage.

I do not want to single out the ladies; I am sure that that would be an exceptional case. One will meet perhaps 100 and more men under the influence for every one of the opposite sex. A fine, in my opinion, in such a case is just a way of letting off the wealthy man. The poor man, for a lesser offence, might have to go to jail if he could not afford to pay the fine.

I am afraid I would be a very poor justice if I had to decide cases. I am afraid I would be violently prejudiced against the man brought before me on a charge of drunken driving or half-drunken driving. One needs all one's wits nowadays on congested roads in cities and towns. Some towns have old, narrow streets. Take my native Ennis, for instance. It is much easier to drive in the worst traffic jam in Dublin than in some of the streets of my native place. A person would want to know his geography in order to avoid an accident there, even when he is stone cold sober.

The trouble about this Bill is that with the tremendous number of sections, we would all want to start going to school again before we could have the vaguest idea of all the implications involved. There are many people who commit offences with regard to traffic lights and movement against traffic lights. Senator Hayes mentioned a driver coming across from the left-hand side, after passing the traffic lights, and turning right. I do not think a driver is correct to come along at speed and then turn right after the traffic lights. It could lead to a very serious accident if another driver happened to be coming in the opposite direction and was unaware of the approach from the left.

I agree that everyone driving a car will, as it were, have to commence school all over again and make themselves familiar with the various sections of this Bill and other legislation which has been in force in the past so as to avoid accidents on the road I which are taking such an awful toll of life in modern times. Perhaps it might be worse in more densely populated countries than here but, with our small population, the loss of 300 people is a terrible tragedy.

We all welcome this new measure. We hope that, as a result of the measure, with the co-operation of the Gardaí and in particular, of the legal fraternity, very beneficial results will follow. I admit I might be prejudiced, but to my mind, the legal fraternity are always inclined to be on the side of the Good Samaritan. Take a man charged with driving under the influence. If the Gardaí prove substantially that he has taken more than he should have to be on the road, the district justice might have another point of view on it and let that man off with a slight fine. I do not think that should be permissible.

Another thing is that in different courts different fines are imposed for the same kind of offence. I dread going home at night at a late hour from this House. Immediately around certain public houses, both sides of the road are lined with cars, even at 11 p.m., 11.30 p.m., and later, to the danger of every motorist passing on a legitimate journey.

Mr. Ryan

I should like to welcome this Bill and to congratulate the Minister on the manner in which he has introduced it. I refer to the White Paper he issued some time ago to give everybody interested in this problem an opportunity of studying what was proposed in the Bill and of making proposals of their own. I refer also to the manner in which he met amendments suggested in the Dáil and the many amendments he made in an effort to meet various points of view.

This Bill is badly required. Having regard to the constant increase in the number of vehicles on the roads and to the increasing speed of these vehicles, it is very important that every effort should be made to keep the roads as safe as possible for those using vehicles of all kinds and for pedestrians. Although a great deal has been done to make the road safer by giving us better roads, wider roads, dual carriageways, the removal of corners, and so on—although all that is very important and has done a great deal of good—it is far more important that there should be very strict measures as to the manner in which vehicles are controlled.

Provision for a driving test is essential. I understand it will be restricted for the time being to new drivers and possibly those who have been convicted of certain offences. I suggest—it would be possible under the Bill as it stands—in relation to anybody who shows by his driving, without necessarily committing a specific offence, that he is a potential danger on the roads, that a member of the Garda should be empowered to require him to submit to a test within 30 days or something like that and, if he has not passed the test within that time, that his licence should be revoked. It might be necessary to provide for an appeal to the district court by the person concerned if he felt the demand by the Garda authorities was unreasonable. It would induce people to be very careful in their driving if they felt that, apart from being convicted of an offence, they were liable at any time to be asked to undergo a driving test.

When I say I welcome driving tests, I think that by far the most important part of the driving test is the test as to whether the person is familiar with the rules of the road and whether he realises there are certain conventions and certain courtesies to be observed. By and large, we have not many bad drivers in the sense of people who cannot drive a car. Any intelligent person can become competent to drive, but unfortunately we have a great number of drivers who are unfamiliar with the rules of the road and completely unaware of the fact that they have obligations, for example, to give way to other traffic in certain circumstances and that even in certain circumstances, if there is a particular rule, they should still give way in order to avoid the possibility of an accident or a dangerous situation developing. It is often the good driver, the man who has been driving for ten, 15 or 20 years, who might make an excellent racing driver in the sense of being competent to drive, who seems to be completely unaware of the rules of the road and that there are certain courtesies and conventions to be observed: He is unaware that he has an obligation to other users of the road, apart merely from getting from point A to point B.

For that reason, something on the line I suggest, asking a person to submit to a test if he shows he is not aware of these rules, is something which would make him much more careful when driving. One thing which a person who has been driving for a long time dreads more than anything else is the possibility of having to undergo a test.

The Minister in his opening speech said that it was intended to have a publicity campaign to familiarise the public with the contents of the Bill and generally with the rules of the road. I was glad to hear that. It will go a long way towards meeting the problem I have mentioned, of people who are not aware of, or not willing to comply with, road courtesies and so on.

I should like to ask the Minister to comment on two points. One is that compulsory insurance applies only to third parties and does not apply to passengers in a car. My experience in the courts has been that passengers are very often the victims of accidents and are injured in accidents. Arising from the fact that there is no compulsory passenger insurance, if a passenger finds that the motorist was not insured and attempts to make a claim with the Motor Insurers Bureau, he finds that the agreement with the Minister for Local Government and the Motor Insurers Bureau applies only in cases in which passenger insurance is in operation. This means that a passenger would have no claim against the bureau for personal injuries. I am sure there are many reasons for and against this, but I should like the Minister to comment on the reasons which induced him not to make a change in this respect.

The second point may be covered by one of the sections dealing with the inspection of vehicles. It is in regard to such vehicles as mechanically propelled agricultural implements of one kind or another which appear on our roads. There is one implement which is used for lifting haycocks and which has five or six huge spikes sticking out at the rear. Every time I see one of them on the road and let my imagination run riot, I visualise the most horrible accidents occurring and the terrible injuries involved if anybody ran into one of them, not so much in a motor car, where they would have some protection, but on a bicycle or a motor cycle. It seems to me that some regulation should prohibit the use of a vehicle of that kind on the highway without some sort of guard or protection to prevent it from causing damage in the event of anybody colliding with it. That is all I wish to say, except to congratulate the Minister on the Bill.

Mr. L'Estrange

I welcome the Bill and wish to congratulate the Minister on its introduction. I think it is long over-due. We all admit that an up-to-date code is necessary in present-day conditions and the need for this legislation is beyond question. We heard the Minister state that even last year, in round figures, there were 300 fatal accidents and 4,000 involving personal injuries on our roads. I do not agree with Senator Lenihan when he refers to mass hysteria. As a matter of fact, I am inclined to think that our attitude to road accidents is a most shocking indictment of our present age. Road accidents are too often the results of drunken driving and the result of idiotic and bad behaviour by both drivers and pedestrians. Unfortunately today there are many people who seem to have little regard for the Fifth Commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." Many human lives are snuffed out and limbs broken through the careless use of modern vehicles. I looked up some statistics recently and I found that from 1921 to 1959, the number of deaths in world air disasters totalled 5,090 and the number of deaths from earthquakes totalled 307,756. The number of fatal road accidents in Britain was 201,000 for the same period. The estimate for Europe was 1,000,000 and for the United States of America 1,190,000 and here in our own country it is reckoned that between 5,000 and 5,500 people have been killed since 1921. That is a serious problem and a problem which should be faced up to immediately. If things are to continue as they are at present, at least 300 more people who are alive today, in full health and vigour, will be in their graves before this day 12 months; 300 families will be bereaved and many will have lost their breadwinner. Over 4,000 more people will be injured. We have this dreadful waste of life and loss of money.

In the Twenty Six counties we have over 300,000 vehicles. The Minister may have the correct figure, but I think it is roughly 300,000. Over 335,000 people, I think, have driving licences. Due to the closing down of the branch lines, more traffic is thrown on the roads: more lorries, buses, cars, motor cycles—and I think the number of auto-cycles in the past couple of years must have increased by 200 or 300 per cent. As I say, I suppose the Minister will have the correct figure.

We all know that when the amount of traffic on the roads increases, the risk to life and limb increases accordingly. Unfortunately, many of our roads were not made for the big buses, the lorries and the huge trailers we see on them at the present time. In fact, I suppose we could say that this increase in traffic has made the introduction of this Bill mandatory, if we are to deal effectively with lawbreakers and prevent deaths on our roads in future.

I agree with Senator Mrs. Dowdall that we must educate our people and have a proper code of rules and good road manners. I have advocated in this House before that there should be some form of small booklet setting out the road code, the rules and regulations and the "dos" and "don'ts" of the road traffic code, with a place into which the driving licence can be slipped. The Gardaí have authority under this Bill to stop a person and question him on the road code.

We must try to change the mental attitude of our people towards this whole problem. We must try to impress on our people that if everyone took more care on our roads, we could perhaps prevent 30, 40 or 50 per cent. of the deaths that are taking place on our roads today. We must try to impress on our motorists that if they drink, they should definitely not drive, and that if they have a defective car, they should not take it on the road but bring it to the nearest garage and have it put into a proper state of repair. We should try to impress on drivers that they should not drive at excessive speeds, no matter what hurry, they are in, and that it is better to be five minutes late than to be the late John Citizen. We should impress on them also that they should not pass on bends.

Travelling the roads today, as Senator Hayes said, you will find small cars travelling at very excessive speeds. I drive a reasonably big car that can do a very fast speed. I suppose my car is capable of doing 80 m.p.h. I usually drive at between 50 and 55 m.p.h. and I am passed by six-horse-power cars which leave me standing on the road, so to speak. They are doing anything from 70 to 75 m.p.h. but if there is an accident and they appear in the courts, they say they were driving at 30 to 35 m.p.h.

We should also educate our cyclists. They should have lights on their bicycles and, in their own interests more than anyone else's, they should definitely have reflectors on their machines—and a very good reflector at that. When driving at night, and especially when meeting another car, it is very hard to see a cyclist if he has not got a proper reflector fitted to his bicycle. In addition, when meeting cars, they should keep as near as possible to their own side of the road.

We should also try to educate pedestrians. We all know they have their rights on the roads, but as well as having rights, they have duties and responsibilities to other users of the roads. Jay-walking is a danger to themselves and to others. Everyone, motorists, cyclists and pedestrians, should know the highway code.

School children should be taught the highway code at least in so far as it affects pedestrians. I have to admit that I do not think I know which is the proper side of the road to walk on. I know that I meet children coming from one school walking on the left hand side of the road, and coming from another school walking on the right hand side. These are things that should be taught in our national schools.

I am sorry I cannot agree with Senator Lenihan. I agree with the Senator who said that drunken drivers are potential murderers. I agree that drunken drivers should and must be put off the roads. A far greater percentage of accidents is due to drunken driving than people care to admit. I knew young men who were killed in car accidents because they were under the influence of drink. That fact did not come out because no one wanted the parents to think their son had been killed while under the influence of drink. It is a well-known fact in this country that if a man is killed due to the consumption of alcohol, or due to the fact that he is under the influence of drink, that fact does not come out. Perhaps that is right in the interests of the relatives, but it is done in any case. A great percentage of the accidents which come in to the courts are due to people taking too much to drink.

The law should be enforced without fear or favour, no matter who the culprit is, whether it is a rich man or a poor man who is involved and irrespective of whether or not he is in a good position. Unfortunately, the law is not being enforced throughout the length and breadth of the country. Even our police authorities are afraid to apprehend certain people who are in well-paid positions and have pull, as it is known. There are too many people who say: "I will see so-and-so, the T.D.; or I will see so-and-so, the Senator."

I have been approached by a few people but I can say that never in my life have I gone to the Minister for Justice, a Garda superintendent or any one like that, on behalf of anyone with drink taken who was concerned in an accident, but I know people who have drink taken and have been in accidents and they have been able to get out of it because of political pull. That is completely wrong and I hope we will hear no more of it in future.

Senator Lenihan talked about mass hysteria and said it was easier now to get a conviction for drunken driving than it was some years ago. In 1959, 479 people were charged with being drunk in charge, or attempting to drive while drunk, and the percentage of convictions was less than 10 per cent. or 12 per cent. Last year, 535 people were brought to court for driving or attempting to drive while drunk. Again, the number of convictions was very small. The police are almost afraid to do their duty to bring people to court because there is such an attack made upon them by solicitors and counsel for the defence in respect of those who are under the influence of drink that one often thinks it is the policeman who is in the dock and not the man who is charged with crime. That is completely wrong. Everyone who uses the road, whether the driver of a car, a pedestrian or cyclist, is under a heavy duty to take reasonable care. If that reasonable care were taken by all and if the law were enforced as it should be enforced and as I hope it will be enforced in the future, I think we could prevent 50 per cent of the accidents that take place today.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Maraon leis na daoine eile, ba mhaith liom comhgáirdeachas a dhéanamh leis an Aire mar gheall ar an mBille seo a thúirt ós ár gcóir. Tá súil agam go n-éireoidh leis. Is fada atá gá leis an mBille see. Tá riachtanas ann le rialú agus riarú ar lucht gluaisteáin ar neithe eile agus ar dhaoine ar na bóithre. D'fhás an riachtanas sin go h-an-mhear ar fad ó méadaíodh uimhir na gcaranna, na ngluaisteán agus na gléasanna eile iompair ar na bóithre. Níor ghluais an dlí chomh tapaidh leis an méadú a tháinig ar an mbaol a d'fhás as sin. Ach tá san mBille see, measaim, soláthar maith dhá dhéanamh chun rial agus smacht éigin a chur ar neithe a bhaineann leis an obair atá i gceist againn.

Ar dtúis, is dóigh liomsa gur gá an-mhéid oiliúna do lucht tiomána, oiliúnt ar an inneall atá dhá thiomáint acu, oiliúint ar an tslí is sábháilte chun an bóthar a chur díobh gan dochar do dhaoine eile agus oiliúint ar gach duine chun iad féin a iompair agus a chosaint ar dhochar nó díobháil a dhéanamh dá chéile nó dóibh féin. Tá riachtanas ann an teagasc sin go léir a chur ar fáil. Ní hiad amháin lucht tiomána a chaithfidh an teagasc sin d'fháil ach an pobal ar fad, pobal siúl an bhóthair, pobal gluaisteáin, pobal gléasraí eile agus fiú amháin pobal le h-ainmhithe agus chúrsaí eile a bhaineann le bealaigh agus le bóithre na tíre.

Tuigim san mBille seo gur ar na daoine a bheidh ag lorg ceadúnais a éileófar triail nó teastanna. Is trua liomsa a rá gur dóigh liom go bhfuil sé fíor-riachtanach an triail sin a chur ar a lán daoine atá ag tiomáint ghluaisteán leis na blianta. Tá siad chomh neamh-chúramach sin, chomh lán de thoirtéis go bhfuil gluaisteán acu, go gceapann siad gur féidir leo imeacht leo ar fíbín ar fuaid bailte na tíre. Do chuirfinnse triail orthu an chéad lá eile a raghaidis amach ar na bóithre agus na daoine a shábháil ar an mbaol a dheineailn siad don phobal.

Maidir le lucht siúil ar na bóithre is rí-mhinic gurb iad sin fé ndeara cuid den olc. Deineann siad neamh-chúram den ghluaisteán a thagann ina ndiaidh nó rompa le barr faillí. Faoin dteideal deireanach sin do chuirfinn leanaí gan eolas, leanaí óga a bhíonn ar fuaid na mbóithre agus sna bailte móra. Beidh sé deacair oiliúint a thúirt dóibh conas iad féin a chosaint, conas aithint go bhfuil daoine ag gabháil an tslí nach bhfuil chomh mór fé smacht agus atá siad féin. Sin é an rud is deacaire i gceist na h-oiliúna, na daoine óga gan chiall atá fé mar a bheadh caoirigh gan chiall, nó ainmhithe beaga gan chiall agus a dheineann an rud díchéille nuair a thagann rud go hobann orthu. Cuireann siad lad féin i mbaol agus ní hamháin sin ach cuireann siad lucht tiomána i mbaol. Sin iad na neithe a chaithfear a scrúdú agus oiliúint agus gnó poiblí a dhéanamh den oiliúint sin i leith na gluaiseachta see ar na bóithre.

Caithfear ní eile a mheas agus a scrúdú. Baineann sé seo go mór le bailte móra agus áiteanna a bhfuil pobal mór sa tír. Is minic ná tugtar am do dhuine dul treasna bóthair. Tagann gluaisteán ar luas 30 nó 40 míle san uair agus na daoine aosta nó na daoine nach bhfuil lú na ngéag go ró-oilte acu, mo dhalta féin, ní tugtar am dóibh an treasna a chríochnú. Is minic san gcathair nach bhfanann roint gluaisteán go dtí go mbíonn an treasna glanta ag daoine in aon chor ach a luaithe a bhíonn slí siúd leo ar fíbín gan tuiscint ró-mhaith acu do néaróga na ndaoine.

Tá rud amháin maidir le bealaigh treasna sna bailte. Is minic a sílim gur mór an trua gan teagasc ar leith a thúirt mar gheall air. Bíonn líon caranna lastiar dá chéile gach ceann acu ag feitheamh le hathrú na soillsí. Is minic ná bíonn an ceann deireanach imithe thar an treasna nuair a thagann athrú soilse arís a stopann cuid desna caranna a bhíonn sa líne.

Anois, deartear liom i gcathaireacha eile go bhfuil nós múinte ag lucht gluaisteáin nuair atá siad ag feitheamh laistiar de solas. Nuair athríonn an solas, gluaiseann an sreath caranna ar fad ag an am céanna. Níl sé sin mar nós annseo. Gluaiseann an chéad car agus ní thosníonn an tárna char go dtí go bhfuil an chéad ceann 10 nó 20 troigh roimhe agus, mar sin, i ndiadh a chéile. Ansin, nuair ná bhíonn ach b'féidir sé caranna imithe tríd na soilse, athrítear an dath arís agus bíonn ar an faoileach eile fanúint.

Dá ngluaiseach an slua iomlán le chéile do bheadh sé ar a gcumas uile go léir dul tríd na soilse. Do bhéadh fhios acu, freisin, go mbeadh sé contúirteach feitheamh nó stad ag am mar sin agus, sa tslí sin, rachadh siad treasna. Bíodh sin mar atá, níl an nós sin foluimithe againn i mBaile Átha Cliath ar cuma ar bith. Ní ghluaiseann an tárna nó an triú car go dtí go bhfuil an chéad car ag gluaiseacht treasna na soilse.

Rud eile go mba mhaith liom go ndéanfaí rud éigin faoi isea an glór agus an fothrom ós na caranna agus na rothair gluaiste agus na rudaí eile a dheineann an oiread sin torann agus cliotair agus iad ag gluaiseacht leo. Tá saghasanna car ann a ghluaiseann ciúin go leor, nach osclann freathracha na spéire leis an torann a dheineann siad; ach tá gluaisteáin eile agus níl na huairlísí ionnta chun an ghlór do bhogadh, go haraithe chuid des na caranna eatroma cosúil leis na cinn a úsáidtear go minic ag rásanna. Do chuireadh an fothrom a dheineann siad sin mearbheall ar aon duine agus is fíor an rud céanna a rá faoi chuid des na rothair ghluaisteáin agus na "scooters", chuid acu níos measa ná car ó thaobh fothrom agus ghlór.

Do bhíomar ag cainnt faoi séideadh na hadharcha. Níl sé sin ro olc i mBaile Atha Cliath. Tá roinnt daoine nach ligeann a lámh ó'n adhare ar chur ar bith. Deineann siad an oiread fothrom agus is féidir leo chun daoine a scuabadh amach as a slí í dtró is go ndéanfar slí dóibh.

Professor Hayes

Lá agus oiche.

Pádraig Ó Siochfhradha

Lá agus oiche. Níl aon mhaitheas ann go bhfeiceann siad na daoine ós a gcomhair. Tosaíonn siad ag séideadh na hadharcha chomh cruaidh agus is féidir leo i gcathair nach dóigh liom go mba cheart go mbeadh adharcha á seideadh ar chur ar bith. Freisean, sílim nach bhfuil sé cheart go mbeadh an ghlór as na hinneall chomh hárd agus atá sé ó roinnt des na carr beaga agus na gluais rothair. Sin rud a dhéanann muintir na cathrach bodhair. Bíonn ort do bhéal d'éisteacht má tá tú ag cainnt le haoinne ar thaobh na sráide agus tagann cuid dóibh id threo. Sin cuid de no rudaí gur dóigh liom go mba chóir féachaint chucha.

Rinneadh trácht d'ól agus an tubaist a dheineann an t-ól i gcursaí tiomáint. Is fíor nach bhfuil aon rud ar bith níos measa ná duine ar meisce ag tiomáint gluaistán agus é ag dul ar fuid an bothair nó na sráideanna. Is ionan é agus fear meisce a ligint amach ar an bóthair le inneall-ghunna agus a thosnódh ag caitheamh píléir ar fud na sráide. Tá an fear eile chomh contúrach leis. Rachadh cuid des na píléar suas ins an spéir ach ní raghadh an car ins an spéir.

Is fíor, má deintear scrúdú ar na timpistí a thárlaíonn, nach lad muintir an óil ar fad atá cionntach leis na timpistí ar fad. Thárlaíonn timpistí do dhaoine nach nólann braon agus tárlófaí sin arís agus tarlófaí sé in ainneoin pé rialacha a dheintear. Maidir le fear an óil, ní bheadh aon trua agam dó ach pionós a chur air chomh fada agus atá ól tógtha aige agus é i mbun car. Is trua nár coimeadach an pionós a bhí ins an mBille ar dtus agus nach bhfuil ann anois. Is marathóil aoinne a rachadh i gear nó a ghluaiseadh tríd na sráideanna ina bhfuil na daoine agus gan é a bheith in dhon an car a smachtú nó a dhiriú nó a choimead amach ó dhaoine.

Arís, deirim go bhfuil sé fíorriachtannach ar fad an phobal do theagasc ar nósanna tiomáiniochta, dea bhéasa ar na bóithre do mhúineadh dóibh chomh maith le chionas aire a thabhairt dóibh féin—agus sin é an príomh rud, sílim. Dá bhrí sin, tá sé riachtanach tosnú leis an teagasc le leanaí scoile agus a dhinne ionntu an baoghal atá ann agus chomh tabhachtach agus atá sé a bheith ag siar fhearrach orthu féin. Tá na daoine a thiománann gluaisteáin á dhéanamh fá'n dlí agus aoinne atá cionntach i dtionóisc ba chóir é a smachtú agus pionós a chur air. Caithfear aithne do thabhairt do's na rudaí sin. Caithfear trácht a dhéanamh dos na nithe sin ins an teagasc. Tá na contúirt ag méadú in aghaidh na bliana agus tá sé fíor-riachtanach síor-chaint do dhéanamh futha agus don contúirt bás atá ann d'óg agus d'aosta.

Ní hé sin é an taon rud atá contúirteach. Cimíd gach lá na heitealáin. Gléasanna an-mhaith iad chun daoine a mharú go mear agus go hiomlán. Ach támaíd ag phlé anois rudaí a ritheann ar na bóithre i measc an phobail, áit atámuid ag siúl. Tá an ceart ag na tiománaighthe usáid a bhaint as na bóithre ach bá chóir go mbeadh aithne acu ar ár gceart freisin. Freisin, ba chóir go mbeadh deaghbhéasa ag gach aoinne ag dul tríd na sráideanna idir siúileóirí agus tiomáinithe.

Molaim an Bhille agus an tAire a thug isteach í. Tá súil agam, nuair a bheidh sé ina Acht, nach mbeidh aon leathscéil ann chun daoine a shaoradh ó smacht an dlí, má tá siad cionntach faoi rialacha an bóthair.

Mr. J.L. O'Sullivan

I welcome this Bill. There is no doubt that it was needed and that everybody in this country was alarmed at the number of accidents on the roads day after day. There is no doubt that drink has contributed to a number of accidents on the road. Everything possible should be done to deter the man who is under the influence of drink from driving. Of course there are other factors which, in my opinion, are also responsible for accidents. In my opinion, speed is becoming a major cause of accidents. I entirely agree with Senator L'Estrange that every driving licence issued should be accompanied by a copy of the highway code. That is very important, especially for youthful drivers who are getting their licences for the first time, and indeed it would be no harm if older drivers referred to it now and again.

Senator Ryan referred to farm implements which are driven on our roads. I suppose they will appear in greater numbers as the harvesting season approaches. I would not like to put any impediment in the way of these implements being driven on the road. They are very necessary and very costly implements and their owners are contributing heavy taxes to the State. While I agree that they should be well lighted, I do not think they should be prevented from coming on our roads.

There is one other matter which I think should be dealt with, that is, the question of trailers attached to big lorries. We see them every day on our roads. They are dangerous enough on our main roads but they are more so on minor roads. In West Cork, where our railway has been taken from us, we have a good example of this and the chief offenders are Córas Iompair Éireann who send lorries and trailers from Skibbereen to Cork and from Bandon to Cork. You may see six big lorries with trailers attached to them and motorists are compelled to wait behind them because there are many bends on these roads and they cannot pass out. The railway line crossed the road at different points and in addition to bends there are bridges and it is nearly impossible to travel this road.

If C.I.E. are going to retain these big transports—they look more like trains than the trains themselves—I would ask the Minister to have the roads straightened out so that people will have an opportunity of travelling along them. The trailers are responsible for delays on the road. Something should be done immediately before the tourist season starts properly —and there are prospects in our area that it will be a very good one—to see that these lorries and trailers are not put on the road indiscriminately.

I have seen them driving up and down with nothing in them. I do not know whether that is to illustrate their power or to show that they are available but they will be the cause of very serious accidents. They may be all right on main roads but they are a public nuisance on the small country road in the district I come from. I hope that before the tourist season advances much further, at least the trailers will be taken off and the people will have an opportunity to look at the country through which they are passing instead of having to keep an eye on the road all the time.

Mr. Cole

I also should like to congratulate the Minister on bringing in this comprehensive Bill and to compliment him on the great patience he showed in the Dáil and which I hope he will show here also. It is a very necessary Bill but a great many of these regulations already existed in some form or another, and while I do not like to say they were not enforced, I feel they could have been enforced a little more vigorously at times.

A great many people are unfamiliar with the rules of the road. My impression is that in the country, 99 times out of 100, there is nobody there to enforce the regulations and another road user will not report the offending motorist. I have seen cases of appalling driving especially in areas where a sporting event or a holiday fixture is being held. There is not very much evidence of Garda cars to enforce the rules and while I do not want to see a series of prosecutions against people, we should have more "courtesy cops" for a while to warn these people in regard to small points in driving etiquette. On three occasions recently, I had to stop almost dead to give way to cars which were passing out coming towards me. That involved cases of older cars which had not got the required speed to pass out more modern cars. If for six months or 12 months after this Bill has been passed, it were seen that the Minister and the Guards intended to enforce the rules stringently, it would be a good thing.

I am sorry that in regard to bye-laws, the Minister to a certain extent has disregarded the local authority. I think the section says that certain bye-laws will be made by the Commissioner after consultation with the local authority. I should have thought that the local authority and the Commissioner together would be quite capable of and more suitable for making local bye-laws than the Department. Another responsibility has been taken away from the local authorities. A great many local authorities have been actively interested in making bye-laws for their own urban districts and yet, now apparently, they are to be consulted only on what, to my mind, does not matter very much at all.

In that regard, I should like some explanation from the Minister of Section 86 (9) (d) which relates to stopping places or stands in respect of a route upon which omnibuses are operated and provides:

a sign or markings provided under or in pursuance of this subsection may be provided on a public road without the consent of the road authority charged with the maintenance of the road;

It strikes me that could lead to an extraordinary position in which, say, a private bus company might decide to erect rather showy road signs or markings at stopping places for their buses. I cannot think who would be responsible for limiting the size or the position of those road signs.

Section 85 fixes the stopping places and stands for buses. Would the Commissioner have power under that section to prohibit a person from leaving a bus at an unauthorised stopping place? I am thinking of the cities particularly. A person might decide that the nearest place, or the easiest place, to home was somewhere between two stopping places and jump from the bus, with the result that a car following would be in great danger of running him down.

One other matter struck me when Senator O'Sullivan was speaking, and I did not come across it in the Bill. Has the Commissioner power to compel slow moving vehicles to drive at a certain distance from other slow moving vehicles in order that faster moving vehicles may pass them one at a time? That is very important. Quite often, you meet two or three slow moving lorries, perhaps with trailers. The drivers stay close together, with the result that if you want to pass, you have to be able to go 100 yards ahead to pass the two or three vehicles together. In other countries there are bye-laws which compel them to drive a certain distance apart in order that an overtaking car can pass them one at a time.

I agree with what has been said about drunken drivers and the menace they are on the roads. Perhaps there is a mental attitude in this country against compulsion to a certain extent, but I would urge on the Minister when this Bill becomes an Act to initiate a campaign to get the assistance of the public in dealing with people who are liable to drive while drunk. In that respect also, there is no reason why we should not approach the publicans, perhaps in a semi-private circular, in an effort to get their assistance also. They could perhaps do a great deal of good by persuading customers that they should not drive their cars or lorry or whatever it might be. I would urge on the Minister to initiate a campaign seeking the assistance of as many people as he can in that respect. The other matters with which I wish to deal can be dealt with on Committee Stage.

Professor Quinlan

I welcome this Bill and I congratulate the Minister and his Department on it, under two headings especially. The first is that the Bill consolidates into one Bill the road traffic regulations. It does not seek to amend the 1933 Act but presents the whole thing in one Bill. That is very commendable and it is the type of Bill we like to get, where we can see all the various provisions at one reading, rather than having to chase back to an old Bill which refers to other provisions in a previous Bill. The Minister is to be heartily congratulated on that.

Secondly, the Minister is to be congratulated on his approach to the Bill. A special committee was set up and followed by a White Paper, and a very reasonable interval was allowed for representation and discussion. In that sense, it is a very well explored Bill and one which we feel tackles a very vital problem in a most praiseworthy manner.

Most of the provisions of the Bill are essentially Committee Stage for discussion purposes. We all agree with the principle of the Bill. We all agree with the necessity for tightening up these regulations and taking every measure possible to cut down the death rate on our roads. Consequently, most of the work will really be done on Committee Stage, but there are just one or two points I should like to raise at this stage.

I welcome the provision with regard to driving tests, but in their administration, I think due regard should be had to older people, retired people and so on, who have been driving for a number of years. Their faculties may be failing slightly but to be deprived of their right to drive would be a very heavy penalty on them. I wonder whether it would be possible to have some restricted licence issued to such people, for instance, preventing them from driving, except in daylight hours, or within a certain number of miles of their homes?

Secondly, the Bill seems to embody one major concern of traffic that is, the question of traffic signs. I should like to see very heavy penalties imposed on those who deface such signs. It is deplorable to see signs turned the wrong way around or, worse still, pulled down and broken. I have it on good authority that it is scarcely possible to get steel plates strong enough to avoid being broken. In this comprehensive measure, it might be possible to introduce a section dealing specifically with traffic signs or at least with penalties for defacing them. That would be a very worthwhile addition to our road traffic code.

On the question of parking meters, we have all seen them operating in other countries, and they seem to be the ideal answer, but a practical engineer with whom I discussed them in our traffic department said: "It is all very well, but who is going to stand guard over these meters? I guarantee if two dozen meters are provided, at the end of one week, a dozen will be out of action." Again, that calls for very heavy penalties.

Above all, if we are seeking to educate the public in the rules of the road, part of that education should surely be directed to the young people, and especially to those in the 14 to 18 age group, who very often think it is a high achievement to be able to turn and twist road signs, to work out some means of putting traffic lights out of action, or to prevent parking meters from operating properly. There is one other point which concerns the question of imprisonment or fine. I think the amendment brought in by the Minister is very wise in that case. It was originally intended that imprisonment would be mandatory, in which case there would scarcely be any necessity for the local courts to try the cases. We must leave the matter to the discretion of the local courts. There must be varying degrees of offence. They will sort themselves out into a practice as applied by the district justices in those cases. It is very wise to leave the option there.

With regard to the question of overall speed, it seems to me that a speed of 30 miles per hour in built-up areas is rather low. Of course, it depends a great deal upon what is meant by a built-up area. Will a village on a main road count as a built-up area? Underground crossings for pedestrians along the main roads and in some of the larger towns might be an answer to the problem.

The other points I have in mind can best be raised on the Committee Stage. I do not wish to take up the time of the House, seeing that Senator Ó Maoláin has an announcement to make on what he wishes to do in regard to the motions.

Tomás Ó Maoláin

I think we should continue. There are not so many who wish to speak. Perhaps, we might get an indication of the number?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I think it will be quite all right if the Minister will not be too long.

Professor Hayes

Does that mean that we adjourn at 10 o'clock?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

We will not be long after 10 o'clock, judging by the indications.

Professor Hayes

Could we fix a time ?

Tomás Ó Maoláin

I suggest that the Minister could begin his reply at 10 o'clock.

Mr. Carton

At a quarter to 10.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I think the Minister will be in at a quarter to 10.

Seán Ó Donnabháin

I do not intend to delay the House, like other speakers. I should like to make a few personal remarks in connection with this Bill. It is a very voluminous document consisting of 91 pages and 127 sections. It was certainly debated at length in the other House. I presume there was a greater number of amendments in the other House. They are more in contact with the people than we are here and we have to bow to their opinions.

Professor Hayes

That thesis should be combated, Sir.

Seán Ó Donnabháin

I am commenting on the fact that it has been debated by a greater number of public representatives in the other House. We will have to take cognisance of that.

Professor Hayes

Yes.

Seán Ó Donnabháin

I have not read all the Bill, I admit. I read the accounts in the newspapers but what strikes me is the fact that many members of this House previously forcefully objected to legislation by regulation, order and bye-law. When this voluminous document becomes law, there will be a vast collection of bye-laws, regulations and orders. I am afraid we will find it difficult in future to interpret the law as far as road traffic is concerned.

Fatal accidents hit the headlines always. There are many accidents which might have been fatal and in respect of which no proceedings were taken. The accidents that do not happen are far more numerous than the ones that happen. One such accident happened to myself. I want to refer to one difficulty. Part IV concerns speed limits. Section 44 does not refer to any speed limit generally. The Minister may make regulations. I understand that there is no speed limit at present. You can go 100 miles an hour or more, if your car is capable of that speed. The Bill only provides for the making of regulations governing speed limits generally.

Section 45 says that there shall be a speed limit of 30 miles per hour in respect of all public roads in built-up areas. Candidly, that worries me a bit. Are we doing the right thing? A speed of 30 miles per hour is too slow. Were we to drive at 35 miles an hour, it would not contribute to any more accidents than travelling at 25 miles per hour or 30 miles per hour. I have experience of driving through Belfast and the northern counties where there is this 30 miles per hour regulation. They have it in Britain also. We find it hard to keep to that regulation here. I found it very difficult to keep a check on the places where you were to drive within the 30 miles. I want to have here the liberty to drive at a greater speed. The Clontarf road is a bit of a speed track. It is a built-up area. Driving along there, I think we would all be held up for driving at a greater speed than 30 miles per hour.

I think it would be difficult to designate a speed in built-up areas. A speed of 30 miles an hour is slow. It will not provide any greater safety than a speed of 35 miles per hour. In the centre of the city, one has to drive at five, ten and fifteen miles an hour, but in the other case I think it will be difficult to impose that limit on all of us.

My other point is in relation to travelling at night. I abhor driving at night against on-coming traffic with headlights glaring or with headlights dimmed. I suggest that nobody should be allowed to drive at more than 50 miles an hour at night. You have a certain control over your car when you are travelling at 30 or 40 miles an hour. Anybody driving above that speed cannot stop within the time requisite to prevent an accident, after passing on-coming vehicles with glaring lights. I know people say that one's lights are the best signal at night and that, unless there are cattle on the road, there is then no danger of people or vehicles crossing the road. With the mounting speed of vehicles and the increased numbers of them on the roads, I recommend the Minister to consider a limit of 50 miles. In that way, anybody going from Dublin to Cork can say: "I have such and such a distance to travel. I may not travel at a faster speed than 50 miles per hour. I can regulate the time and start accordingly."

People drive shockingly fast on the road at night, depending on their lights. I got a shock myself on one occasion when passing a very high lorry with, I think, the lights full on. As I passed, I had my headlights dipped. Immediately after passing the vehicle, I switched on my headlights as quickly as possible and saw two children walking on the road within 30 yards of my car. If I had been going fast, I could not have avoided an accident.

These are the serious suggestions that I make—that the 35 niiles or 30 miles per hour speed limit in the built-up areas is low and that anybody driving at night on an open road should be limited to 50 miles per hour.

Miss Davidson

Every thinking citizen must welcome this Bill. It is the first Traffic Act since 1933, I think, and the traffic on the roads to-day bears no relation to the traffic in 1933.

The Bill should go a long way to make the roads safer but, as Senator L'Estrange has said, until the drunken driver is forced off the roads, we cannot feel completely safe, either as pedestrians or as drivers. I would, therefore, support his plea for the severest possible penalties which the law permits in cases of drunken driving.

There are many incompetent drivers on the roads and the enforcement of the driving tests should take care of them. I do not know what form the tests will take but I would ask that some knowledge of what takes place under the bonnet of the car should be expected.

Anyone in the habit of travelling by car in this city will agree that there is much driving without consideration of other road users or, in other words, that the bad manners of many motorists contribute greatly to accidents and near accidents.

By education and propaganda, motorists must be trained into having more consideration for both pedestrians and their fellow motorists. Where there is dangerous driving due to a disregard of ordinary good manners in the use of a car, whether there is an accident or not, heavy fines should be imposed. I suggest that part of such fines should be used to give special lessons in road drill to children and to issue propaganda leaflets to schools.

There are many small items in regard to car fittings that the Minister could keep an eye on. There is the big showy car, carrying lights like a travelling circus. When the brakes of such cars are applied, or when the searchlight indicators are switched on, the motorist following in a more modest model is blinded and remains in that condition for a few seconds and, on the roads to-day, seconds are vital.

Some attempt should be made to standardise lighting systems as these can be a cause of accidents. The same thing applies to indicators—some cars have them placed high and others low and it is often difficult to see quickly when a car is making a turn, particularly when the driver fails to give the signal in good time.

Senator O'Sullivan mentioned speeding as a dangerous practice. I am sure the Minister travels the Stillorgan-Dún Laoghaire road on occasion; if he does, he will know what a speed track looks like even if he never saw Brooklands.

I do not know if the Minister controls crossings but I would ask that there should be more pedestrian crossings on the road I have mentioned. I have waited very long periods, having alighted from a bus, but there was no possibility of crossing because of the endless stream of cars, none of which would pull up to allow anyone to cross. This is ordinary evening traffic, but when there are races in the vicinity, the situation is even worse. There have been several fatal accidents at the particular part of the road I have in mind, that is, near Brewery Road, quite close to a school which caters for deaf children.

The Bill, if it is enforced, should do much to reduce the slaughter on the roads and I heartily support it.

Mr. Louis Walsh

Like other speakers, I should like to compliment the Minister on this excellent piece of traffic legislation which is badly required. We must protect our society by sterner methods due to the increased number of mechanical vehicles on our roads which probably is indicative of the higher standard of living of our people in the past few years. At any rate, there are one or two sections of the Bill which I am particularly glad the Minister has brought in. I refer to the question of speed in built-up areas.

The Minister and I have considerable knowledge of driving through a part of our territory which is not yet under the control of the Department of Local Government. We realise how fast we drive when we have to reduce the speed to 30 miles per hour when passing through these towns and villages. Senator Ó Donnabháin seems to feel that 30 miles per hour is too low. I think it is a good guide to us that we are driving too fast. I am quite satisfied that, in consequence of the reduction of speed which takes place in these towns and villages, fewer accidents are taking place.

One of the troubles in the country today is the fact that there are not sufficient places for parking cars in our towns and in our villages. We can see, for instance, the number of towns in which it is an infringement of the law to park a car within 30 feet of a road junction. The reason for that is that there is nowhere else for the car to go.

I feel there is considerable delay on the part of the Commissioner of the Gárda and sometimes on the part of the members of an urban district council in bringing in the necessary by-laws to provide that parking shall not take place in streets which are too narrow. In one provincial town which I pass through very frequently, the street is exceedingly narrow but cars are parked on both sides of it. Sometimes that leads to traffic jams and considerable delay in passing through.

I feel that if responsibility rests with the members of an urban district council, who are business people to a fair extent, because they do not want to divert trade from their premises or because they wish to encourage the farming community to come and park as conveniently as possible to their premises, there will be undue delay in bringing in these necessary regulations to provide car parks. The Minister in this Bill has made provision whereby money from the Road Fund can be diverted for the provision of car parks. I should like the Minister to encourage local authorities to make alternative sites available as soon as possible for car parks.

I am very glad the Minister has relented about getting courts to inflict prison sentences for infringements of certain sections of the Bill. I feel, like other Senators, that the court should have this discretion and that they are as capable of deciding as any member of this House. They have all the facts before them and they are trained lawyers and will do the right thing. The disqualification of a licence is very often just as great a hardship as being sentenced to jail for one month.

There are many people who require to drive vehicles in order to earn their livelihood and I am particularly pleased that there is provision now for appeals to the court after a certain period of time and that there is provision for the court to remove the disqualification, if it thinks fit. It was undesirable that this power should be in the hands of the Minister for Justice because at times people suggested that political influence was being used. The court is the proper authority for dealing with this matter.

I hope there will be some provision whereby dimming will be mandatory, apart from the present provision requiring dimming appliances to be affixed to a vehicle. There is no doubt that on many occasions at night, drivers, and particularly lorry drivers, do not dim as often as they should and sometimes serious accidents take place as a result. I am glad that the registered owner of a vehicle will now be responsible for infringements of parking regulations. Up to this it was often difficult to prove who was the person who had done the actual parking and consequently the Guards were not in a position to bring the offender to court.

Under these regulations, the registered owner will be responsible and for that reason, there should be a considerable improvement in regard to parking offences. I would be very anxious to see that when these parking regulations are brought in accommodation for parking will be provided. There is no point in bringing in regulations that cannot be put into force.

Senator Ó Donnabháin stated that people who drive at over 50 miles an hour at night should be prosecuted. It would be very difficult to detect such an offence and I do not believe in bringing in legislation which cannot be I enforced.

In regard to disqualification or jail sentences for offences under this Bill, if it appears that the Guard who brings the offender to court will be responsible for that person losing his licence or being put in jail, then he may turn a blind eye. We all know that medical people have a certain bias in favour of the defendant because they realise that on their evidence may depend whether a person's licence will be endorsed. Therefore, if the discretion is not left to the court, if it depends on the person who has to give evidence, on which evidence the individual may lose his livelihood or be put in prison, too many people may be allowed to infringe the law without being brought to justice. For that reason, I am pleased that the mandatory sections which the Minister originally proposed to bring in are not now to be implemented.

I do not think that imprisonment is a good thing if it can be avoided. It has a demoralising effect because people sent to jail have to mix with evil associates. Jail is only a deterrent for those who have never been there, but once people have been sent to jail, they have a habit of going back again. If you look at statistics you will see that a number of people in jail at the moment have been there on many occasions. The only other effect that jail has is to reform and from what I have stated, I do not think that people are reformed by being sent to jail. Therefore, disqualification is sufficiently severe in most cases. I hope that regulations will be brought in at the earliest possible moment and that in consequences many lives will be saved, that fewer people will be injured and consequently that motor insurance premiums will eventually be reduced.

Mr. Blaney

I must say I am very gratified indeed to find that the general attitude towards this measure has been a welcoming one, in principle, at any rate, if not in regard to exact detail. Quite a few points have been raised but one which was common to many of the speakers was in regard to enforcement and the feeling that this measure, if not properly enforced, would be a waste of time. I can assure the House that those are my sentiments and that I would feel that my time had been much more wasted than the time of the good people here if in fact, through lack of enforcement, the measure were to fall into disuse and disrespect. So strongly did I believe this that it was almost a condition of my bringing in this measure that I got from the Minister for Justice, on behalf of the Garda, a very definite assurance that there would be full co-operation by the Garda and full enforcement by the Garda of this measure when enacted by the Oireachtas. With that assurance, I am fully satisfied that the fears expressed here this evening are groundless.

Another matter which has been mentioned by quite a few Senators is the need for the education of road users, and the existence of so much ignorance in the use of the roads. Let me say straight away that while we all seem to think of the vehicle drivers when we talk of road traac and the traffic laws, there are many others who use the roads and misuse them as frequently and, indeed, more frequently than do the vehicle drivers. I suppose that is only natural because a mechanically propelled vehicle, be it a bus, car, scooter or motor cycle, is a very dangerous weapon and indeed a lethal weapon in the hands of one who is not careful or considerate of other road users. We are all inclined to talk of road traffic, enforcement and infringements as if these infringements and abuses were solely the responsibility of the drivers of vehicles.

Without any doubt, there is a great deal of ignorance of the rules of the road, no matter what anyone says. There is no question whatsoever about that. I do not hold myself out as knowing the rules of the road as well as I should. As one who has driven quite a lot on the roads, I would go so far as to say that not one person out of five in the country knows the rules of the roads as prescribed by our-present regulations. If we are to eradicate that general ignorance of our road code, we must look to the younger generation now coming up. In their own interests, they should be instructed in the road code at a very tender age. They should be taught in the schools, no matter how young they may be. It is never too early for them to start learning to look after themselves and to have regard to other road users as they grow up.

If we are to make headway in that direction, and headway we must make if we are to improve the present situation of abysmal ignorance of the road code, the proper place and the lasting place to make the first big effort is in the minds of the young, to make them aware of their responsibilities not only in regard to their own safety but in consideration of the safety of others as they go through life. Various efforts will be made to try to educate the rest of us but, at this stage, our minds are not as impressionable as the minds of young people still at school. Every possible effort will be made, and indeed we are looking forward to the introduction of our own television service which will be an excellent medium for education for the young and the not so young. They will see on their own television screens how they should behave and are expected to behave, as distinct from the manner in which they think they are behaving on our roads today.

Mention has also been made of the fact that increased traffic seems to have brought increased accidents. I wonder is the increased number of road users who do not have regard or consideration for other road users the cause of the increase in the number of accidents, rather than the increase in traffic itself? I believe the misuse of the roads is the cause of the increase in accidents, rather than the actual increase in the number of vehicles. I do not hold with the argument that the increase in the number of vehicles— if properly used—would cause an increase in the number of accidents.

Senator Ryan raised the question of the Insurance Bureau and wondered whether or not passengers were covered under the agreement with the Bureau. The position at the moment is that passengers other than passengers on public service vehicles are not so covered by the agreement which is in existence between this Bureau and the insurance companies. It is possible, of course, that a new agreement may be arrived at, but I think to comment further on what we may expect a new agreement to cover, or hope or feel it should cover, at this juncture would not, possibly, be in the best interests of getting that agreement in a new and advantageous way. In answer to the question, passengers other than passengers on P.S.V. are not covered by the agreement between the Bureau and the insurance companies.

I think it was Senator Hayes who mentioned the question of silent zones. The Senator will be glad to know that under Section 11 there is power whereby this matter can be controlled. Senator Hayes, and other Senators also, queried the wisdom of the 30 m.p.h. speed limit. That speed limit has been regarded as being rather low. I made a particular point of saying that while there would be a difference of opinion as to whether it was too low or too high, the general consensus of opinion might be that it is too low but that we will have the power to change the limit upwards or downwards, as the case may be. Of the two courses, I should prefer to start low and move up rather than start high and move down. From my experience in the towns, villages and cities of the Six Counties——

Professor Hayes

May I say that, for Dublin, inside the canal bridges in the old city, 30 m.p.h. is certainly right, but outside the canal bridges, there is a doubt.

Mr. Blaney

I am very glad Senator Hayes mentioned that difference because the general opinion was that it was too low.

Professor Hayes

There is doubt there. I was thinking of outside the canal bridges.

Mr. Blaney

I do not think it is too low with a limit of 30, 35 or 40 m.p.h. prosecutions will scarcely arise unless the speed limit is actually exceeded by about five miles. There is that margin of error, or whatever you like to call it, to be added on to the speed limit and it is at that point that you can expect enforcement to take place. There is no question of bringing anyone to heel for an infringement of .2, .3, .4, or .5 of a mile but when you get to 34 or 35 m.p.h. you will undoubtedly and justifiably get the knock. That is why I say that 30 m.p.h. is not an unreasonable figure. From my experience of driving in the Six Counties, that would not be an undue burden on anybody. There is another point which can be tied in with Senator Hayes's interjection.

While that would be that general speed limit and while it would be the intention to apply the general speed limit of 30 m.p.h. in the various county boroughs, urban areas and so on, there is power within the framework of the Bill to vary it. On request and by Ministerial order, the speed limit on an open road within a city can be brought up to 40 miles an hour. In fact, we will say that a small village on a through traffic route can be brought under the 30, all depending upon the circumstances and the location of the road. These matters will arise and can be dealt with only after we have applied a general over-all speed in the first instance. We can then start to deal with the exceptions which might be that in Dublin, outside the canals, there could be a case made for increasing a speed limit of 30 miles an hour. There may be a road or roads leading into and out of the city where the speed limit with benefit to all, could be increased. These exceptional cases will be dealt with after we have got going on the over-all application of the 30 miles per hour as the starting point.

Senator Mrs. Dowdall thought that large trucks were not properly lighted, particularly at the rear and sides. This is a matter which can and, indeed, will be covered by regulations made under Section 11.

Senator Ryan suggested a procedure that might possibly give rise to abuse. He said that a Garda should be able to require a person thought to be driving badly to undergo a test. Section 28 does enable an officer of the Garda to apply to the courts to disqualify a person in respect of whom that officer considers there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is incompetent to drive. The court can, if satisfied, disqualify that person until he has passed his driving test. That is not quite as direct a method as Senator Ryan sought. Nevertheless, in a more indirect and possibly in a better safeguarded way for the general public interest, we can get the same end ultimately with recourse to the courts.

It is the belief and the intention of those of us who are sponsoring this measure to require drivers to be tested in regard to their competency for driving and their knowledge of the rules of the road but it goes without saying that we cannot do it all right away. We have got to start somewhere. We indicated that we propose starting with the new applicants for driving licences. Possibly, that has something to be said for it and something to be said against it. My own belief is that we should start with the new applicants rather than pick out a particular group within those who already hold licences and have had experience in the past.

There will be arguments as to why this category or that category should be taken rather than the new applicants. The argument will be used that it is not the inexperienced driver who has accidents, the implication being that it is the experienced drivers who do have accidents. I wonder how many of those who argue thus think of the number of accidents caused indirectly, if not directly, by the incompetent handling of vehicles on the roads by new drivers and persons learning to drive? How many accidents are caused by those who, if you suggested to them they were doing anything wrong would practically have a fit, who hold, in their belief of self-righteousness, to the righthand edge of the white line in the centre of the road and move at 25 miles per hour whom neither God nor man can shift? They believe, I have no doubt, that what they are doing is right and proper and if everybody else did likewise, there would be no accidents. If everybody else did likewise in other spheres, there would not be anything else, either.

There were a few other points raised which possibly might be of some interest. Senator O'Sullivan of Cork mentioned the trailers and the heavy trucks using those much maligned narrow roads of West Cork which are carrying traffic far beyond their capacity as a result of the closing of the railways in that part of the country. The idea that there are C.I.E. lorries with huge trailers more reminiscent of trains than trucks using these roads unnecessarily is something that is beyond me. I cannot understand that C.I.E., as would appear to the Senator——

Mr. J.L. O'Sullivan

The feeling is that they want to impress on the people that, although they were losing £50,000 per annum on the railway line, they are not entirely broke.

Mr. Blaney

I would suggest that instead of looking for the £500,000 to bring the roads up to accommodate these unnecessary trucks which C.I.E. are parading round West Cork, C.I.E. might be asked to consider stabling those trucks elsewhere and bring some smaller trucks to that area. From the roads point of view, from the economic point of view and from the point of view of the visiting tourist, not to speak of the natives, I think that would be an ideal solution for all concerned.

Senator Cole suggested that in regard to the making of road traffic regulations, the power should lie directly with the local authority rather than what is proposed. He suggested that we have taken something away from the local authorities. I do not agree that we have taken anything away from them. The reason we think the Garda should initiate in this matter is to get uniformity throughout the local authority areas in the country. It is better that the initiative should lie with a group or a central body such as the Garda and that by obliging them to consult each local authority, local views will be fully considered before model bye-laws are presented to the Minister.

If the Garda Commissioner has not given sufficient weight to what the local people think, even at that stage the Minister is obliged to give full consideration to and consult with the views of these local authorities. Accordingly, if anything is overlooked by the Garda Commissioner, the Minister can correct it at that stage and modify the bye-laws to fit in with the views of the local authorities. In that way, I believe we can take care of the interests of the local authorities and each individual case, while at the same time, as nearly as possible, make a uniform approach to our local traffic bye-laws. Overall, we will have a better system of local bye-laws than if we left the matter to each individual local authority.

Somebody wondered if Section 85 would enable the driver of a bus improperly parked to be prosecuted. Bye-laws under Section 86 will have this effect.

Section 86 provides for road markings at those spots and whether these markings must be of a form that will not be objectionable or too large or in some way or another not just up to standard. The fact is that these markings must be of a type approved by the Minister under Section 86 (9) (c) of the Bill before us.

Senator Quinlan mentioned in particular the question of limiting driving licences for aged people. The wisdom of this is something I should not like to come down on straight off without very much further consideration. The power to do so is in the Bill and we can consider it and could have a look at it. At the moment, I would not agree or disagree that it would be good or bad but I think there is no doubt that we shall take the power to do it. The same Senator also spoke strongly as to his feelings in regard to defaced traffic and other signs of that nature. He asked whether or not we had any power to do anything about it. We have, in section 95 (12) of the Bill.

A question was also raised about parking meters. In this regard of course we take it that local bye-laws would probably cover this and it would arise under subsections (1) and (2) of Section 90. There is just one note that I have here. The fact that I have already mentioned it briefly should not preclude me from giving the House a little further elaboration of what is intended in regard to the application of the thirty mile per hour speed limit. I shall give the House a short excerpt from the White Paper as issued before the Bill came before you. In relation to this matter it reads as follows:

The Minister for Local Government may by regulations exclude any particular road in those areas from the scope of the speed limit or bring within its scope particular roads outside those areas. Thus, through roads in a village or suburban roads in a county might be included or wide, clear roads in a city might be excluded; the police and local authorities concerned would be consulted before such decisions were taken.

that in fact is what we think and did circulate in the White Paper. It gives fairly full scope and a fairly flexible arrangement which I think can be made to accommodate all possible circumstances and considerations in regard to this matter.

Senator Ó Donnabháin suggested that we should have a fifty mile per hour speed limit for all vehicles at night time. We could of course do this and we have the power to do so under Section 44 but, again, the wisdom of the step and indeed the limit mentioned or what limit there would be if we did get down to deciding on some such lines are matters I should not like to comment on at this stage.

Senator Cole mentioned something with which I thoroughly agree, namely, the question of courtesy cops and the point that we should not appear to start to go out after the offenders but rather that we should try to bring them to behave in the proper way. I entirely agree with that approach. It is not our intention or our wish and it is not our belief that the best way is to go out after our road users and persecute them, to follow them up and to try to get convictions. That is not the intention of this measure at all. Only in the last resort will these prosecutions take place. When all else has failed, we must punish. I think that really is the whole approach of this matter of road traffic. It is far from my mind that there should be any bye-law, as it were, or officers of the law to bring everybody into court and to try to instil into them the good sense they should have on the roads.

The idea of "traffic cops" in our cities and built-up areas is one which, I believe, will pay off handsomely. I think we can rest fairly easy in our minds that the Garda, who, I believe, are speedily becoming equipped for this type of work, will be in a position to do just that type of job in the not too distant future. I am a great believer in this type of collective enforcement rather than in prosecutions. The prosecutions undoubtedly will come also in their own good time but they are not the be-all and the end-all of this Bill.

There has been mention here that it would be difficult to know all the law, that this is a pretty hefty volume even as it is. It has rightly been said that, when all the various regulations and bye-laws have been added to it. it will be very formidable and a subject which it will be very difficult or impossible for people to know all about. I do not believe it will be necessary to know everything that is in this Bill or in every bye-law and regulation that is made. We will come to know many things and we know a great deal already.

If we abide by all the ordinary, everyday rules and routine I do not think we need worry too much, if we mind ourselves, about what exactly is contained within the two sides of this document or the covers of any regulation that may be made arising from it. The question of knowing everything in this Bill is one which I think can be brought too far. There are the specialists in the law in this country and indeed in this House. We are not bereft of quite a considerable number. They are there. They are fully trained for this job. It is to them we have got to go when we get into trouble. Therefore, why worry our heads about knowing every last thing in this law when, in fact, we have people trained in the law itself whose job it will be, at our expense, to instruct us as to what we have done wrong and how to get out of it. When we have people properly trained in this line and whom we will pay in the future to educate us, if in fact we ever need them, why should we worry ourselves unduly about knowing every provision contained in this Bill?

The question of more pedestrian crossings was mentioned by Senator Miss Davidson and particularly did she relate this matter to the Bray Road. It is a matter which undoubtedly may need extension. As the House will recall, it is not so very long since we introduced these pedestrian crossings for the first time. Naturally, the Garda Commissioner and those concerned with laying them down, in the first instance, went rather warily into this matter, were possibly somewhat conservative or over-economic in their use. I think it was better to approach the matter in that way than to splash them all over the place and then find they were a nuisance and unnecessary and had to be removed. I have no doubt there may be on the Bray Road, and at other places points where further pedestrian crossings are required. The views of the Senator will be brought to the notice of those concerned with policy in this matter and possibly further crossings will be provided to allow the Senator to get across the road more easily in future.

The question of dimming devices has been mentioned. That is a matter which will be dealt with by regulation. The point was aptly brought out by Senator Walsh who said that while you have to have proper dimming devices on vehicles, their proper use is really what we are after. That is very true. There is not much point in having dimming devices, if they are not used. It is only too true that on the roads today, in keeping with the lack of consideration generally that we find in all walks of life at the moment, there is this complete disregard by some of our road users for other road users. This is particularly true if the person in question has brighter lights than those coming towards him.

It is amazing what will happen if you have a dazzling spotlight on your car which is not on but which you put on when you have dipped your ordinary headlights and those meeting you pay no attention. If you flip on your spotlight, you very soon get the reaction you had expected in the first instance. That law of the jungle has really gone too far and it is a law of the jungle today. Fortunately, we still have some bends on our roads which save us from the glare of approaching headlights. Where we have straight and fast stretches carrying heavy traffic, we have the roadhog who not only wants the whole road but also has dazzling lights. He blazes through with his lights full on while you have to pull up. Somebody said that the thing was that in such a situation, you had to pull up dead. My relief always is that I was not dead when I pulled up.

It is a fact that there is this unwholesome law of the jungle developing, particularly in relation to night driving. From my experience of night driving, I would say that the practice of dipping headlights when you are within 100 yards of the other vehicle is no use. I have always dipped my headlights as I would like others to dip them. I have done that over the years, believe it or not. I have always done it before the actual lamps came into my line of vision or my lamps came into the vision of those approaching me. If dipping is not done, then it is very often useless because the damage has been done once the light strikes the windscreen and glances off it, as it can so mysteriously do. You get the shot in your eyes and there is nothing much you can do but pull up and you are fortunate if you pull up on your own side and get clear.

All this comes back to the question of dimming devices and their proper use. We will try to ensure that not only are the regulations proper regulations but that they are used in the future. If that is done, the toll on our roads at nighttime will be lessened and a great number of fatal accidents will be avoided. There was one thing which was said here and I do not think it was intended the way I took it up. It was said that jail only deters those who have never been there. It does not really matter if that is what was said but when I took it up and looked at it, I thought it was really good. It is a very good argument why jail should be mandatory because fortunately there are so many more who have not been in jail than have been in jail. If it does deter those who have never been there, we would have chastened drivers on our roads, all feeling they might go there if we made a jail sentence mandatory.

On the question of mandatory jail sentences, I want to say that apparently a misconception of what was intended has grown up. I have heard it said that it would be better if discretion in this matter were left to the courts and that if we had mandatory jail sentences, there would be little sense in having courts at all. That is not the conclusion to draw from what we proposed to do. In the case where drunken driving was proved or where driving under the influence was proved, there was a proposal that a jail sentence be imposed, no matter for how short a period. There was no reason why, once guilt had been proved, an hour's sentence or up to five years could not be given. Surely there was absolute discretion there, discretion to give a sentence of an hour, or a half an hour, which might have been spent in court, or five years at the limit. They can still give them that and I have no doubt they will and in many cases, it will be deserved.

What really decided me to do away with mandatory jail sentences for driving under the influence was because in the situation which obtains, there is a complete lack of means of determination of whether a man is under the influence. There is a complete lack of any real technical know-how to decide when such a point has been reached. It is because of that lack that I felt injustice could be done and in fact may be done, although I doubt it because the benefit of the doubt usually goes the other way in these cases. It was with a view to determining the matter once and for all that a commission is being set up. I have bowed to the wishes of quite a number of members in the other House who thought that this mandatory jail sentence should be removed.

It may well be that when the commission comes to consider the whole question of drunken driving or driving under the influence, they will report back and give us a method whereby it will be possible to ensure that when a man is convicted of driving under the influence, he will have been under the influence. There would be a lot less doubt in my mind then as to where the man should go than there is now. This whole matter may be reviewed and you may come to discuss it at a later stage as an amendment to this Bill. However, what we are discussing is the question of mandatory jail sentence which have been removed in these two cases.

Farm machinery was mentioned and it was said that while we should see to it that such machinery is properly lighted, we should not impede its usage on the roads in any way.

I should like to say in regard to that matter that there is no doubt whatever that farm machinery is most important. We cannot do without it. It is equally true that farm machinery is brought onto our roads—due to pressure of work possibly, the season or the weather-very often in a manner that is a real danger to other road users. I am thinking of large machinery. Very often their width is 10 or 12 feet and very often, possibly from usage in the fields, through grass or cereal crops or otherwise, it is not easy to see them coming out on the roads. That type of thing is done unwittingly but nevertheless it is done, and it creates a real hazard on our roads. There will be regulations of various kinds to discourage it but I am afraid that when farmers are going from one field to another, regulations will not have very much effect on them. We should try to get it into their minds that what seems innocent to them is dangerous to others, and get their co-operation and consideration for other road users.

As other speakers have said, this is a Committee Bill. I thoroughly agree and with that in mind I do not intend to say anything further except that it has been my wish in the other House and in this House that it should be as near an agreed measure as possible. I want to pay tribute in this House— I had not the barefaced cheek to do so in the House where it belongs—to the members of the Dáil, the Opposition as well as those belonging to my own Party—to members of all Parties in that House—for the manner in which the matter was kept completely on an objective plane and for the constructive discussions we had there on all Stages, from the Second Stage to the Final Stage. I want to express my appreciation in this House, and I am sure it will get back to the other House. As I say, I could not say it to their faces.

We still need general unanimity on this matter in order to get acceptance by the public of what is contained in the Bill. That is why I have been most anxious that we should have near unanimity in the two Houses. If we have not got unanimity here, there is not much hope of getting it outside. If we are to make any impression on the staggering toll on our roads today, we require unanimity and with the help of all members of the two Houses and other interested parties, I believe we could go a long way to awaken a sense of responsibility and awareness in our road users, drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

If we could get that awareness and get people to understand that all users of the roads are due some consideration, we would have gone half way towards solving this problem which is, without doubt, the scourge of modern mankind. If we can get that goodwill, that thoughtfulness and that sense of thinking, we will have done a great deal and this Bill will bring to heel those few whom we all hope will become even fewer who still will not consider anyone's welfare but their own.

As I say, this is a Committee Stage Bill and on Committee Stage, we will be able to discuss the various matters which I am sure every member of the House has considered. If there is any information which any member of the House may wish to have between now and Committee Stage which he cannot find in the debates or in the Bill, and which would be of assistance to him in considering this matter, I shall be only too glad to provide it.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 12th July, 1961.

The Seanad adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 12th July, 1961.