Road Safety: Motion.

Mr. Morrissey

I move:

That Seanad Éireann

—notes the commitment of the Government to take a comprehensive set of actions to address the rate of injuries and deaths on our roads;

—acknowledges, specifically, the commitment of the Government to take measures to improve road safety and driver behaviour;

—welcomes the work of Government Departments and agencies to address the serious issue of road safety;

—notes with regret the loss of 118 lives on Irish roads to date this year; and

—urges the Government to continue its commitment to, and investment in, efforts to reduce the number of road traffic accidents on Irish roads.

It gives me great pleasure to propose this motion to the House. It is needed and timely, although I must admit that the statistics that will be referred to over the coming hours will make for extremely depressing listening. I would like to thank Mr. Eddie Shaw and the National Safety Council for their contributions on this issue. Mr. Shaw addressed the national conference of the Progressive Democrats recently and his views and insights should be compulsory listening for all. Those views are integral to my statement in the House this evening.

This motion was proposed in order to reaffirm Government commitments, to commend the work done to date, but most importantly, to save 140 lives this year. That is the central issue. The motion refers to the 118 people who have been killed on our roads so far this year. This is a brutal reality, but the true extent of the carnage is worse than that. For every fatality on our roads, eight more people are seriously injured. This means that since January 2005, there have been over 1,000 people either seriously injured or killed on our roads. Another way of looking at this is that 3,500 people will be killed or seriously injured by the end of this year. That is the context for this motion.

I wish to refer to the current road safety strategy, which is not being implemented at the necessary pace. The delay is due to the cross-departmental approach to addressing road safety. The Departments of Transport, Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Finance all play a crucial role in road safety. The problem is, however, that individual Departments cannot see the full benefits of resources they have invested in road safety measures. I will return to this point later.

When Mr. Shaw addressed our party conference in Cork this month, one point he made stuck in my mind and I wish to share it with the Members of this House. Members should keep the following three figures in their minds: 40, 30 and 20. The figure of 40 represents the number of people killed on our roads every month in 1997; 30 refers to the number of people killed on our roads, per month, in 2003; and 20 is the international best practice kill rate that we are aiming for. I use the term "kill rate" deliberately. There is no point in toying with euphemisms or pleasantries; people are being killed.

Members might ask the reason we are targeting a kill rate of 20 per month rather than a kill rate of zero. We must accept that transport and travelling has a cost. We have 97,000 km. of motorway, 1.9 million licensed vehicles and 2.5 million drivers, which carries a terrible cost. Given the level of activity on our roads, the cost is 20 fatalities per month.

We must look to experience in other locations for hope. The best practices in the world are in Victoria and Queensland, Australia. We can take steps to emulate those practices but we must remove certain barriers. The first barrier to be removed is finance. Narrow cost-benefit analyses have meant that our road strategy is progressing too slowly. The cost of implementing the strategy across Departments is clear, but the cost of not implementing it is not obvious enough. The UN has recognised this problem and produced a report on road carnage. To take the member states of the EU prior to accession, 45,000 people were killed in road accidents across the 15 countries in one year. There were 1.7 million people injured and of that number, 1 million went into acute hospitals through accident and emergency departments. This is a war by any other name and we must think of the costs this war incurs beyond the human misery.

My first critical message is that speed kills. There will be many complex arguments this evening, but if only one message persists, it must be that speed kills. A recent experiment in Gloucestershire, England, proves this point emphatically. The speed limit there was reduced from 30 mph to 20 mph in some areas and the number of collisions involving pedestrians dropped by 80%. So far this year, 20 pedestrians have been killed on Irish roads.

My second critical point relates to human error in accidents. Road accidents are often viewed as pertaining to other people. This is not surprising because only one in six people will ever experience a serious collision. Statistically, an individual would have to drive 3.8 million miles before he or she could expect to be in a serious accident. Naturally it appears to be a matter for others when one looks at those figures. Accidents, from an individual point of view, are freak occurrences. However, from the wider viewpoint, accidents are not freak occurrences but are depressingly predictable, regular and stable.

Approximately 40 people are killed every month. Driver error is a key problem that accounts for approximately 90% of all accidents. The most vulnerable group is males aged 17 to 30. It is not simply the case that people in this group are bad drivers, as some would suggest, but they are inexperienced drivers. They do not realise the implications of driving even 5 km/h too fast. Inexperience, coupled with exceeding the speed limit by 5 km/h, can be catastrophic. When one adds inexperience, speed, drink, drugs and lifestyle issues together, one arrives at the particular phenomenon of high death rates between 6 p.m. on Fridays and 6 a.m. on Mondays. Regrettably, due to the bank holiday, that will be 6 a.m. on Tuesday of next week.

My third point is that enforcement alone will not address this issue. Education is the only hope for this target group. That brings me to the issue of traffic policing. Enforcement works best when one tells people what one is trying to achieve — what is being done and why. Openness, not gardaí in hedges or hidden speed cameras tell people what is happening. That is a critical point Research shows that the public will support tough enforcement if it knows that it will save lives.

We can save lives. The 40, 30, 20 figures that I mentioned are not an idealised calculation by a mathematician. We did it in this country. We attained best international standards in Ireland from November 2002 to the end of February 2003.

Why did we do it then? We had just introduced the penalty points system, and what a momentous change that brought about. Many drivers slowed down just a little. It is as simple as that. Over that period we had a kill rate of just 21 per month. Now it is back in the 30s again, brutal evidence of what has happened, but it is the reality. The problem is that the penalty points system was built on inadequate technology. It unfortunately was not up to scratch. Drivers have realised this and speeding has again increased. Until the technology is up to scratch, the system will not reduce the kill rate, as we would like. The overlap of events such as the introduction of penalty points and the level of accidents can be startling.

We cannot let extraneous events lead to more deaths on our roads. Less enforcement means more deaths. If Garda resources are strained, as for example during the EU Presidency, we will see more accidents. We need to face up to this and to deal with it. We need to return to the post-penalty points model, but with adequate technology and this time we need to sustain it. That will cost money. The benefits and savings are not immediately obvious, particularly to the Department of Finance. However, the savings are there. With reduced accident levels, we free up resources in the health system. Remember, a serious road accident effectively shuts down a hospital accident and emergency department.

When accident rates fell in the summer of 2003, hospitals saw a reduction of some 50% in spinal injuries. Beaumont Hospital reported a major reduction in attendances. Health boards across the country recorded reduced numbers in accident and emergency units and these were real savings. This is where the importance of the interdepartmental approach lies. When it comes to road safety initiatives, the Department of Transport sees the costs, as does the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Finance. It is a scandal that we have no budgetary model to estimate the savings from safety strategies. I suspect major corporations have. It is not realistic to see the traffic corps, for example, simply as a cost. The consultants, Goodbody, estimated in 2004 that a single road fatality cost the State €2 million. The thousands of seriously injured also put a cost on the State. The cost to society of all road collisions is put at €1.1 billion. We must return to the target figure of 20. We must commit more funds and this time ensure that it happens. We can return to best international practice, if that happens.

To return to the target figure of 20 a few things are needed. First is the political will and we have that. The National Safety Council and others have recognised this. Local authorities must face up to their responsibilities. They have control over speed limits and these must be appropriate and consistent to win the support of the driving public. They set the limits and this is an onerous responsibility. The Garda enforce these and the public must be supportive. Limits must be appropriate and consistent.

We need tough enforcement. The public, as I have indicated, will support it, if the initiative is open and shown to reduce the death rate. As legislators we might face criticism for sanctioning tough measures, but we must not shirk from doing so. The minority who criticise us are strong in the media. The majority, who are served by the measures, are for the most part silent. Not all drivers are criminals, but all criminals are drivers.

Finally, we must work harder on the safety strategy. That is why the motion urges the Government to reaffirm its commitment and investment on these issues. The safety strategy must be planned, funded, resourced and evaluated. That is the only way to achieve the goal and save 140 lives every year.

Mr. Dardis

I second the motion. I am particularly pleased to welcome the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, to the House and to acknowledge the fact that the senior Minister has come to hear the debate. Senator Morrissey has set out the main features and challenges that face the motion. We all agree there is a need for ongoing commitment and investment in this area. The facts are dramatic and stark.

As of 9 a.m. yesterday, 118 people had been killed on our roads this year, in 107 accidents. Some 56 of those were car drivers, 23 were passengers, 20 were pedestrians, 15 were motorcyclists and four were bicycle users. Senator Morrissey referred to the cost imposed on the State by such accidents, which is significant. However, it is nothing by comparison with the trauma inflicted on the 118 families affected by these deaths and very many others who are affected by injuries on the roads.

Many suggestions have been made as to why accidents occur. On the Order of Business in the House last week questions were raised about the state of the roads and the degree to which accidents had been cause by defective surfaces. In one high profile incident in particular, it appeared the state of the road in one county had been responsible for a fatal accident. People talk about mechanical failure and road conditions, but the reality is that driver error is the most significant factor of all. Approximately 80% of all fatal injury crashes are accounted for by driver error. The majority of road crashes are caused by those types of errors.

The typical causes of accidents are well known. Excessive speeding accounts for about a quarter of all fatal casualties. Drink driving is very significant, accounting for a third of all fatal crashes. Another major factor is the number of people who do not wear seat belts. Approximately three out of four people in head-on crashes are killed when they are not wearing seat belts. The significance is clear. At a time of changing human behaviour it is difficult to legislate for the way people behave themselves. It is far more difficult to do that than to tackle mechanical failures or road conditions. However, it is a challenge for us as legislators and one that we have to face up to.

When An Agreed Programme for Government between Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats was published at the start of this Administration, it stated that action would be taken to improve road safety and driver behaviour. Considerable progress has been made. We have the penalty points system, an advisory system for driver education in the school curriculum as well as the new road safety strategy, as referred to by Senator Morrissey. This is aimed at tackling speeding, drink driving, seat belt infringements and pedestrian safety.

There is also the whole question of physical intervention. There is an increase in traffic calming measures. This has been implemented adjacent to schools in my county, which is to be welcomed. We must acknowledge that significant investment has been made in the country's road infrastructure and this has helped as well. The better the road standards the fewer the number of accidents. These are examples of what has been done. As Senator Morrissey indicated, the National Safety Council has shown that more work needs to be done. Tackling driver behaviour is a difficult issue but for the sake of the families of the 118 people killed in the last four months, we must do everything we can.

There are three key issues to be addressed, the question of speed, drink and seat belts. Again, Senator Morrissey has dealt with the speed aspect. It is a depressing and frustrating issue for legislators and, I am sure, for the Garda. That has been the case not just here but in other jurisdictions as well. One wonders how often road users have to be told about the dangers of speed and how many of these gory images must we seen in advertisements in the newspapers or on television. The message is unambiguous, that speed is the single largest factor contributing to road deaths in Ireland. At 60 mph, a car travels 88 feet in one second. That is a long distance for reaction time, to say nothing of braking time. Over 40% of fatal accidents are caused by excessive or inappropriate speed. There seems to be a view among people that speed detection rates are low. There were 335,000 detections for speeding in 2002, so speeding drivers are being detected. We must get the message across that something is being done and that people are being caught. Speed limits have to be credible. There is a 60 km/h speed limit on part of the Naas dual carriageway, which is due to the construction work that is taking place there. However, the only vehicle I have seen travel at or under that speed is a tractor. Nobody pays attention to that speed limit, except during rush hour when it impossible to even reach that speed. Speed limits have to be credible and they have to be applied prudently. If they are in need of amendment, then the local authority should do that.

There is a myth that Ireland's drink driving problem has diminished as a result of the Road Traffic Act 2002 and the reduction of blood-alcohol levels. Most people now feel that getting into a car after drinking is more socially unacceptable, but the statistics belie that attitude. International research has found that alcohol has been a contributing factor to 40% of road accidents in Ireland. Approximately 250 motorists are arrested each week for driving under the influence of an intoxicant, while 90% of blood and urine samples analysed are above the alcohol limit for driving. Up to 80% of breath specimens analysed are above this limit as well. We also must not ignore the issue of driving under the influence of drugs.

Another misconception worth highlighting is that many drivers believe that it is safe to drive if they are below the legal limit. That is a mistake, as the risk of being involved in crashes increases in direct proportion to the amount of alcohol. The Government has a duty to ensure that the law is in place to tackle the problem of drink driving and that is being done. I hope those who complained of the demise of the rural pub when this House debated the Road Traffic Act 2002 will show the same consistency when decrying the measures that need to be taken when dealing with drunk driving. Automatic disqualification applies to all drink driving convictions, as well as a maximum fine of €1,270 and a maximum of six months imprisonment.

Alcohol is also a factor in accidents involving pedestrians. Up to one third of pedestrians killed in road accidents demonstrate high blood alcohol levels. Without seat belts, three out of four people would be killed in a 30 mph head-on crash. The laws have been put in place to force people to belt up in the front and rear of the car. The driver is responsible for ensuring that passengers under 17 comply with the law. The laws are there and we need to have a system of enforcement. We must make sure that the benefits of safety strategies are acknowledged and accepted.

The budget for the Garda Vote for road traffic equipment in 2005 is €1,106,000. That investment is used for the purchase and maintenance of road traffic equipment as required. We need to ensure that all requirements are met under the safety strategy. There were some criticisms about the number of speed cameras on the radio today. However, trying to encourage people to abide by the law just before a bank holiday weekend by criticising the lack of speed cameras is not the way to develop road safety.

I welcome the motion. It is an issue about saving lives and 2,033 lives have been needlessly lost since 2000. We have a role in addressing it through the laws that we enact. We need to look at a cross-departmental approach to this. Investment is required, equipment needs to be provided and the law must be enforced. Speed, alcohol and seat-belts are issues, as is the changing of individual behaviour and we are making progress on this. There is an element of personal responsibility in all of this. The State can legislate until the cows come home, but unless people are prepared to take some responsibility, there will still be a high fatality rate on our roads.

Mr. P. Burke

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

notes the failure on the part of the Government to fully implement commitments designed to reduce road deaths; and calls on the Government to ensure the immediate provision of:

—a fully equipped and fully staffed independent traffic corps,

—a complete roll-out of the penalty points system,

—a complete nationwide roll-out of speed cameras,

—and an improvement in the driving standards and testing of motorists through the establishment of the Driving Testing and Standards Agency.

I have no doubt that my amendment will be accepted this evening, as the two previous speakers seemed to speak more in favour of it than the motion. There is little to congratulate the Government on its road safety record, as it is abysmal. We must consider that there is one accident on our roads every 21 minutes and one person is killed every 23 hours. In 2004, 378 people lost their lives on our roads, 43 more than in the previous year. This upward trend is continuing, with road deaths for 2005 up month on month from 20004. This is very worrying. In 2003 there was a significant drop in fatalities, but this was due mainly to a fear factor following the introduction of penalty points. This has long worn off and we are back to the bleak days of carnage and destruction on our roads.

The responsibility for the collapse in the effectiveness of the penalty point system lies solely with the Government. Motorists are no longer worried about getting caught committing motoring offences on the roads. Even if they do get caught there is a good chance they will get off once they go before the courts. Recent experience has proved this and it is not good enough.

The ineffectiveness of the penalty points system is due to the chronic lack of enforcement. The failure of the Government to deliver the extra gardaí since 2002 has made their presence almost non-existent on the roads. It is normal for someone to drive between two major cities without encountering a Garda checkpoint. Nothing has changed since this Government first took office. I do not hold the Garda responsible as it is doing its best, but it does not have the resources in manpower, equipment and information technology required for gardaí to carry out their duties effectively. The Government may let off steam by informing us that the extra gardaí are in the pipeline and that the traffic corps will solve our road fatalities crisis. However, I am far from convinced.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, after much fanfare and over two years late, finally announced the establishment of a traffic corps late last year. The reality is that over the next few years this is likely to change little on our roads. The current staffing level of 530 may seem impressive, but this figure represents the merger of the existing Garda traffic units nationwide. By December 2005, the new traffic corps will increase by only 33, which is about one garda per county. This will hardly have a great impact. The Minister knows well that we needed 700 extra gardaí for the traffic corps, which was promised over two years ago.

Bad law enacted by the Government, namely the Road Traffic Act 2002, has further enhanced the public's perception that it is all right to break road safety laws and be reasonably confident of not facing the rigours of the law. The thousands of motorists before the courts for breaking the speed limits have effectively got off the hook because of problems with the Act. The failure of motorists to get a paper print-out giving details of their speeding offences caught on speed cameras or hand-held devices has meant that many judges have struck out these cases. This has increased the public's lack of confidence in our road safety provisions.

While there is no single cause of road accidents, in the majority of cases driver error is at fault. It is little wonder then we have such a high fatality on our roads. To put it bluntly, the system in Ireland does not produce good and capable drivers and our existing driving test system is a total mess. The current Government has sat back and allowed this chaos to continue and has done nothing during its term in office to tackle the serious deficiencies in the system.

The greatest problem is the number of provisional drivers on our roads. There are 300,000 people on a provisional licence, with 130,000 of them waiting to take a test. Effectively, almost 20% of drivers on our roads do not have a full driving test. In many respects, including the absence of a full driving licence, they are not fully competent to be on our roads. We would not be happy if a similar situation existed with regard to doctors. If a doctor was not fully qualified, we would not put up with having him or her carry out operations.

However, there appears to be no problem with having unqualified drivers on our roads. While I fully understand the situation faced by provisional drivers who must learn the rules of the road and how to drive properly before they can progress to a full licence, the problem in Ireland is that this has become a permanent state of affairs. Provisional licences were not intended to be licences for life, merely a stage of driver progression. However, the fact that many people spend years without ever sitting a full driving test is the responsibility of this ineffectual Government.

With 130,000 people waiting to sit a test, there is no prospect of them getting a full licence for many months, even years. It is the norm for many on provisional licences to have to wait up to a year before being called for a test. If they fail the test, they are put back to the bottom of the queue to languish for another year. In the meantime, they continue to drive.

We need to get the system moving. The Minister has promised us a new super-efficient agency, the Driving Testing and Standards Authority, but this will achieve nothing if the Department of Transport does not hire additional testers. These have been promised since 2002, but we have got nothing. What is wrong with the Minister for Transport that he cannot put his foot down and demand that the Minister for Finance provide the extra funding needed to supply these testers? Only this will cut the queues. Creating another layer of bureaucracy will not.

If we are to create better drivers on our roads, it is clear that drivers need better instruction. We currently have a farcical situation where anyone can set up shop as a driving instructor and offer lessons. This is incredible. One does not even need to have a full driving licence or a car to offer this service. How can we be assured that learner drivers are getting the best possible instruction if we cannot be assured of the quality of the instruction they are receiving? We need better regulation of this area.

It is hardly surprising that almost half of those who sit the driving test fail. There is no quality control over what they are being taught. This is just another example of the problems with our driving standards. These inadequacies have been pointed out time and again to the Minister for Transport and his predecessors, yet they have not acted on the matter. How many more people will be killed before this Government is motivated to act? I do not have any confidence that things will change soon.

What needs to be done is obvious to all. It is beyond me why this Government, despite almost eight years in power, has done so little. The Government cannot sit on its hands any longer. Since it took office, 3,381 people have died on our roads and almost 70,000 have been injured through road accidents. The Government must increase the Garda presence on our roads immediately, fast-track the traffic corps to full complement and improve driving standards and instruction. It must move immediately to cut waiting times and move drivers off provisional licences onto full licences by hiring additional testers. If the Government fails to act, the carnage will continue on our roads for years to come.

Mr. Finucane

I second the amendment in the name of Senator Paddy Burke. He has elaborated on the problems with regard to road safety. I was surprised that the Progressive Democrats proposed this motion because the defects of the current system are obvious. The motion probably clarifies the situation with regard to its deficiencies, but it is not a situation on which the Government can congratulate itself.

This saga began with the Minister's predecessor, Deputy Seamus Brennan. When he announced the penalty points system and changes were made, there was a temporary dip in the number of accidents. This was welcome and the Minister was applauded on his initiative. However, over a period road accidents and fatalities have again increased. We must ask why, against the backdrop of the past two years, there has been a degree of inactivity. The penalty points system has been undermined in recent times, perhaps as a result of the courts throwing out many cases. This brings us back to the legislation and whether it is adequate. Unfortunately, quite often when legislation leaves the House, extra vigilant legal people pick up on the deficiencies in it.

The major difficulty with the system is that drivers driving regularly on a familiar stretch of road know the locations where gardaí will be waiting with their cameras, etc., and slow down accordingly. For example, I know of a particular stretch on a fine modern road in the Limerick area where this is the case. There is never any accident on this stretch because the drivers know there is a 100 km/h restriction and that the gardaí are there on a regular basis. People who travel that road regularly are familiar with the location. There are other similar locations.

Senator Dardis referred to the situation regarding speed cameras and this being highlighted on a bank holiday weekend. The situation should be highlighted because it is farcical. The cameras were set up in three locations, Meath, Louth and Dublin. Some 20 installations were set up and three cameras are rotated between them. However, nine of the camera sites are inoperative and only 11 are functional. How can these three cameras have any application to road safety? It is like a band aid treatment for road safety.

We have heard much talk over the past few years about cameras. The Government is now considering privatising the system and having mobile cameras around the country. The private operator will obviously see the system as a good revenue mechanism. I do not mind whether it is private, as long as we see commitment on speed cameras. Quite often the cameras are hidden from the motorists. They should be in their faces. We should also have as many of them as possible, like in the United Kingdom. There they are in villages and at different locations around the country. People become conscious of them and are more vigilant about their speed as a result.

The situation regarding driving tests is farcical. The Government made a commitment on driving tests in its programme for Government. Now, however, it claims the embargo on recruitment to the Civil Service is deterring it from taking on driving testers. We have 117 driving testers in the country and, depending on location, people wait from an average of over a year for a test to 18 weeks in Ennis. This situation is deplorable because it pressurises people with provisional driving licences. My colleague has already described the type of people driving on provisional licences. Often those provisional licences are renewed regularly.

In Northern Ireland it takes an average of four weeks for people to be called for their test. Perhaps we should see what we can learn from what they are doing there. We do not seem to be getting to grips with the problem. I remember that years ago when we had a similar backlog, the Minister then introduced a measure whereby people with an existing provisional licence were given a full driving licence in order to clear the backlog. I do not advocate this now, but the situation needs some measure introduced to deal with the problem such as the appointment of temporary testers to help clear the backlog. Then the Minister could proceed on a structured basis to deal with driving tests so that people need not wait so long for their test.

The Department of Transport has carried out studies regarding the different locations for driving tests. Why is the failure rate 12% higher in Wicklow than in Shannon or Ennis? There is a wide variation in failure rates by location. Driving testers cannot be blamed because they adhere to standard guidelines. However, the calibre of driving instructors in a number of locations is open to question. A driving instructor can set up without having prior experience or undergoing an examination. The register of instructors is voluntary and includes 1,200 names. However, only one quarter of these are registered. The regulations in this area must be strengthened. Legislation relating to driving tests is on the way and the sooner it is introduced, the better. All these issues feed into road safety problems. If the Government got the formula right by addressing areas under its control, road safety might improve. One does not have to be Einstein to do something in this regard.

Has the Department conducted research on the number of road fatalities that occur between midnight and 5 a.m.? Drugs, alcohol and fatigue are often contributory factors in these accidents. The likelihood of meeting a garda on the road between those hours is remote. Regrettably, many fatalities occur during this period. It is difficult to prove alcohol is the cause of a road fatality but the time at which many of these serious accidents occur is significant. The number of accidents is a problem and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has tried to do something about it by recruiting additional gardaí. However, it is fine to establish a traffic corps and announce that gardaí have been deployed to it. Are sufficient bodies deployed to cover the State?

The issue of road safety is not being taken seriously enough and the jigsaw is not being put together by the Government to do something significant about it. That is why I am surprised the motion has been tabled. The Government's road safety policy has serious defects. The National Roads Authority recently commissioned a Dutch road safety expert. He travelled throughout the State but he did not encounter a garda on road traffic enforcement duty. What critique will he have provided? What will he have said when he returned to Holland regarding how serious Ireland is about tackling road safety issues?

Rosemary Smyth is a well known former rally driver who runs a driving course for transition year pupils in second level schools. It has proved effective in gearing them up to drive subsequently. No State assistance is provided for this course and this should be examined. Special advanced driving courses are run for people who wish to drive fast cars. Centres should be established where young people could be inculcated in good driving habits before they use the road. Senator Morrissey is correct that the driving test is conducted primarily in urban areas and at low speeds and no cognisance is taken of motorway experience or driving at night. Many aspects of the test need to be analysed and addressed. I fully support the amendment.

Mr. Dooley

I welcome the Minister and support the motion. We have had a series of debates on road safety over the past number of years and it is critical that this issue be kept to the forefront of the public agenda, irrespective of whether we disagree on what the Government has done. Hopefully, such debates will continue to ensure drivers take cognisance of good practice on the roads.

It is important to highlight the Government's achievement on road safety, including the regular publication of position papers and documents, which is welcome. The introduction of the penalty points system was also welcome. It may not be achieving the results the Opposition would like but it has formed the framework within which a resolution to this issue can be found.

We could debate statistics all night. No death on our roads is acceptable. However, when the ratio of road fatalities to car numbers is considered, the number of deaths does not look as bad. A greater number of cars are on the road every year so while the number of road fatalities is increasing, when one considers the ratio of cars to fatalities, the trend is in the right direction, which is welcome.

Road safety revolves around all users exercising due care and attention, not only those driving cars. Most of our debates focus on traditional cars, which is understandable, given that most drivers use such vehicles. However, the Government's strategy continues to focus on the wearing of seat belts, speeding and drug and drink driving. These are recognised as the key factors in road accidents.

There is little debate about the behaviour on the road of the drivers of heavy goods vehicles and their practices. I do not wish to have a go at them, given that many of them work in extreme conditions to tight deadlines, particularly those who need to meet boats in our ports and so on. The haulage sector is competitive and the drivers are under unbelievable pressure. However, the speed limit for articulated trucks should be reduced.

Senator Dardis referred to stretches of the N7 approaching Dublin, which I travel a few times a week. I regularly witness heavy goods vehicles overtaking family cars, which are travelling well in excess of the speed limit, particularly in wet conditions. They leave a trail of spray behind, which makes it virtually impossible for other drivers to use the road. Something needs to be done in this regard. The tachograph system used in articulated trucks should be inspected more closely to ensure drivers do not travel in excess of a specified speed. It is usually used to check the number of hours the driver has operated the vehicle but it also has the capacity to monitor the speed at which the vehicle was travelling although that is not done. If this were checked, I would be surprised if any truck drivers would remain on the road.

Long distance driving is also an issue. There was a time when HGV drivers on long distance routes were much older, with some advancing towards retirement. However, nowadays many people in their early 20s are driving trucks. This may be because they are the only people companies can find to do the work given the strong state of our economy. As soon as they have passed the relevant test, they begin driving long distances but they do not have the requisite experience. While they have succeeded in passing the test, they do not have the experience to operate such vehicles. I seek a review of the testing procedures for HGV drivers. While people may be able to pass the test, they do not have the necessary experience to manage these vehicles. A number of articulated trucks have been involved in accidents in recent weeks. The accident on the M50 slip road last week caused gridlock throughout Dublin city. It is time to review this test. The most critically important element is young male drivers. We have had many debates in this House about young males drinking or committing suicide, and now we are faced with young male drivers and the problems they cause. They are referred to in the vernacular as "boy racers", and on a Sunday or Monday morning we all see the predominance of wheel spins and hand-brake turns at rural crossroads. It is increasing to alarming proportions and must be tackled, either through enforcement or through the introduction of some sort of regulation or measure that limits the size or power of engines. I am no mechanical expert in that regard, but there are procedures whereby engines can be limited, such as is the case with HGVs. We will have to consider that, since we cannot depend on such drivers to show due care for other road users. Their behaviour is unbelievable and must be addressed.

Penalty points have worked, by and large. There is the question of enforcement, and it is important that it be taken into account. Even if one doubled the size of the Garda, it would not be able to position gardaí on every crossroads or stretch where accidents take place. There is a real need for co-operation between the Department of Transport and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform regarding the policing of towns and villages at night, particularly over the weekend.

The presence of a garda on a village street when the nightclub or pub closes would prevent many young people attempting to drive out of the village. It is out on the rural road while dropping a girlfriend or mate home that many such accidents occur. Young people under the influence of alcohol or drugs are unable to control their high-powered vehicles. If the focus of enforcement were on the point where the journey first began — by and large in urban or semi-urban areas — one would resolve that problem. The presence of police would also resolve some of the other issues of anti-social behaviour that have regularly been discussed. Enforcement is not so much about the garda in the ditch with the "hair-dryer" or with some kind of covert plan. That might help improve our own driver behaviour, but it will not help resolve the problem of the 19 year old who has just got his hands on a high-powered Honda Civic and is determined to show his mates what he can do. We should focus our attention on towns when tackling the issue of safety.

I wish also to address the NRA, with which I have recently exchanged some correspondence. There is a problem regarding driver fatigue. There is now a motorway from Dundalk to Portlaoise. The NRA has told me that, in general, it is recommended that lay-bys be provided approximately every 10 km on improved rural or all-purpose dual carriageways. It went on to say that it was not, however, intended that lay-bys be provided on single-carriageway roads or motorways, since the latter are intended for fast-moving traffic only, and regulations made under the Roads Act 1993 prohibit vehicles from stopping anywhere within the motorway fence lines, except in special circumstances such as emergencies.

That is not acceptable and I hope the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, can force the NRA to re-examine that issue. I understand it has consulted a safety expert. I make the point not to disturb but to suggest that it need not have gone anywhere, since people around the country regularly write to it on this issue. It concerns the provision of a lay-by. Such lay-bys are provided in England, the United States and in many other countries, where they are incorporated into service stations. However, the NRA is now saying that by-laws prohibit it from providing lay-bys. It is of great importance, as I know myself, since I regularly have to pull over for a cup of coffee or even a sleep on a long stretch of road only to find there is no opportunity to do so.

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen)

I thank the Senators from the Progressive Democrats for proposing this motion this evening and all the Members who have contributed thus far. It affords the House the opportunity to debate an issue that is important both from a national policy perspective and for the personal safety of every citizen in this State.

It is a fact that road safety policy reaches into every home, and the results of road collisions can shatter lives well beyond those directly involved. This House has an enviable record in pursuing debates on road safety, which shows the concerns that Senators from all sides have to ensure the issue retains a high level of focus both in the public consciousness and in the delivery by the Government on its commitments.

Road safety is a multi-faceted area of public policy that demands contributions from Departments, the Garda, dedicated national agencies such as the National Safety Council, the Medical Bureau of Road Safety, the National Roads Authority and local authorities. As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for the co-ordination of road safety at Government level. The framework within which road safety policy is pursued is through the development of national road safety strategies, which provide a central reference for the pursuit of agreed policy initiatives over specified periods.

By 1997, it was clear to the Government and all the agencies involved in road safety that a change of policy was needed to reverse the steady rise in road deaths experienced over the previous three years. A total of 1,362 people lost their lives in road collisions between 1995 and 1997. That is an average annual toll of 454 deaths. While that of itself represents a shocking scenario, what was also of great concern was that the level of road deaths had been rising throughout the mid-1990s, and something dramatic had to be done to address the situation.

By contrast, over the same period, the majority of EU states were experiencing reductions in road deaths. What was particularly striking was that the downward trends were more noticeable and more consistent in those countries that had adopted road safety policies based on the development of strategic approaches featuring specific targeted reductions. The achievement of those reductions was supported by policies aimed at the delivery of improvements in respect of key contributory factors to road collisions, fatalities and serious injuries.

In 1997, faced with ever-rising numbers of road deaths, the Government determined that the only prospect that we had of reversing the trend was to adopt a first national road safety strategy, The Road to Safety, designed to cover the period from 1998 to 2002. The headline target set in the strategy was to achieve a reduction of over 20% in road deaths and serious injuries during its lifetime. The Road to Safety strategy recognised that reducing the incidence of road collisions depended on the deployment of measures to improve the interaction between roads, vehicles, drivers and other road users from a safety perspective. However, it also recognised that the single most important factor is the behaviour of road users.

Accordingly, particular focus was placed on achieving improvements by addressing the three key contributors to road fatalities, namely, excessive speed, non-wearing of seat belts and drink driving, under the last of which I would include driving under the influence of drugs. Those three problem areas still present the greatest challenge to road safety both here and abroad. The road safety strategy outlined activities that ranged across a broad number of areas. However, those identified as having the greatest potential impact were the following: the road safety promotional campaigns; the programmes of accident counter-measures and traffic-calming measures; the extension of the basis for the operation of preliminary breath-testing; and the introduction of a system of penalty points for speeding, failure to wear a seat belt, driving without insurance and careless driving.

The support of targeted enforcement measures by the Garda was seen as being crucial to the achievement of the goals established in the strategy. In overall terms, it has to be said that the strategy was successful in so far as the primary targets established were achieved and, in the case of the reduction in the number of serious injuries, surpassed. Significant reductions in fatalities and serious injuries were recorded in 1998 and 1999 and again in 2002. A review of the strategy carried out by an independent international road safety expert confirmed that the overall approach adopted in the strategy provided the most appropriate response to the overall road safety situation facing us.

The downward trend in fatalities achieved during the years covered by the strategy continued in 2003, when we recorded the lowest number of fatalities, 335, since 1963. Over that 40-year period, the number of vehicles and drivers in Ireland had more than quadrupled. Unfortunately we have seen a greater number of road deaths in 2004 than in the previous year, with provisional end-of-year figures for 2004 showing 380 fatalities. So far this year, we have seen an increase in the number of road deaths, with 118 deaths on the roads by 25 April, compared with 116 at the same date last year.

In that context, while the increase in road deaths so far this year is a cause of immediate concern, it should be viewed against the background of the significant progress achieved, especially over recent years. That does not lessen in any way my concern about the increases, especially as the level of deaths in 2004 is being maintained so far this year. I am convinced, however, that pursuing a strategic approach to road safety policy continues to be the most appropriate way forward.

The number of road deaths in the first two and a half years after the penalty points system was introduced was 143 less than the number of road deaths in the two and a half years preceding the introduction of the system. If the first road safety strategy not been introduced and road deaths had continued to increase at the rate at which they were increasing before the strategy's introduction, the annual number of road deaths would have exceeded 550 in 2002 and would now be much higher. Casualty levels of that nature have ceased to be the norm as a result of the policies which have been implemented and the general approach that has been adopted under the road safety strategy.

The Government's 2004-06 road safety strategy reflects on the need to remain vigilant by focusing on the continued promotion of road safety. Its primary target is to reduce road collision fatalities by 25%, when compared to the average annual number of fatalities between 1998 and 2003, by the end of 2006. If that target is achieved, there will be no more than 300 deaths per annum by the end of the period covered by the strategy. Such an ambitious target will require a strategic and integrated approach on the part of all the road safety agencies.

I have spoken about the recent increase in road deaths, which is a cause of concern. It places the challenge of meeting the target set for the end of 2006 into stark focus. If we are to achieve the target, a significant reversal of the worrying trend that has been noticeable since early 2004 must be achieved. The achievement of the target depends on continuing to emphasise the approach that underpins the strategy. Therefore, there is a need for a continued focus on issues such as speeding, drink driving and the wearing of seat belts. As there continues to be a particular focus on vulnerable road users, the Garda and the National Safety Council launched a campaign focusing on pedestrian safety earlier this week.

The road safety strategy, which seeks to achieve further reductions in deaths and injuries, proposes a range of enforcement, engineering, education and legislation measures. I have a sense of unease when it is suggested that it would somehow be satisfying if the number of deaths on the roads each year were to be reduced to 300. Such a death rate would not be satisfying, but it would demonstrate that Ireland is moving towards best international practice. I would not like one to think that my view and that of the Government is that such a figure would somehow be acceptable.

I have had many discussions with the chairman of the NSC, Mr. Eddie Shaw, who has brought a tremendous level of energy to this area. He has argued that we need to aspire to best international practice. People are right to look for targets when Government strategies are being drawn up and we have done that in this instance. The target will help us to measure whether our policies are successful. We met the target in recent years, but it is clear that the trend for 2004 and so far in 2005 is unacceptable and extremely worrying. We need to increase the level of effort we are making if we are to achieve the targets we are aiming for by 2006.

Many major road safety policy initiatives are being examined over the period of the Government's current road safety strategy. An appropriate form of random preliminary breath testing for drink driving is being considered. I will refer in a moment to the establishment of a network of speed cameras, to be operated by private sector interests. Many Senators have referred to the need for a comprehensive package of measures to address issues relating to driver licensing and testing and that is being considered. The full system of penalty points will be rolled out in the most appropriate manner. In recognition of the importance of enforcement, the Garda has made a commitment to achieving specific levels of enforcement in three key areas — seat belt wearing, speed limits and drink driving.

The proposed introduction of random breath testing has been the subject of significant debate and consideration for many years. The Road Traffic Acts provide that the Garda is empowered to check all drivers who have been involved in road collisions or have been found to have committed a traffic offence. The Garda also has the power to demand a test of a driver who, in the opinion of a member of the force, has consumed alcohol. We need to consider carefully whether we wish to allow for full random breath testing. Senators will be aware that drink driving laws have historically been the subject of regular scrutiny in the courts. I do not intend to pursue a policy initiative in this area until I am satisfied that a more generally applied system of roadside testing provides clear potential for improving road safety on a sustained basis. I am sure the House will appreciate the need for great care in pursuing such an initiative.

A second significant proposal in the new strategy relates to the engagement of private sector interests in the provision and operation of speed cameras. One of the strategy's key targets, which relates to the enforcement of speed limits, depends on the deployment of speed cameras on a scale that would necessitate the involvement of the private sector. The proposal has been the subject of an in-depth examination by a working group, chaired by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and representing other key interests such as the Department of Transport and the Garda Síochána. The working group's report has been presented to me and to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Senators will recall that the involvement of the private sector in providing and operating speed cameras was discussed in some detail during the debate on the Road Traffic Bill 2004. I share the concerns of many Members of both Houses, who said during the debates on the Bill that the ethos of private sector operations may be to maximise profits, rather than to engage in the advancement of road safety. I am pleased, therefore, that the working group's report has clearly recommended that private sector operations should focus on locations where there is a history of speed infringements or there are genuine road safety concerns. The group further recommended that locations for the use of cameras should be determined by the Garda. I am determined to ensure that decisions on camera locations should be made by the Garda, rather than at the whim of private companies.

Mr. Cullen

There was a particular reason for the delay. We had access to a driving test down to five or six weeks recently. That was a very good average. There was an understanding that in certain situations provisions were going to change. This caused an avalanche of applications. There are multiple applications in the system. I am not defending it. More instructors are needed. We need to resolve the situation and I am determined to do it. This Bill will be a vehicle to achieve that.

The enforcement of road traffic laws and the availability of an appropriate deterrent system are of fundamental importance to the establishment of a culture of safety on our roads. However that deterrent system can only be maintained in the long term where the basis for sustained enforcement is available.

The establishment of the new traffic corps, which was announced late last year by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will provide the level of permanent enforcement that is critical to the promotion of road safety for the future. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Garda Commissioner are proposing that 700 additional gardaí will be assigned to a new traffic corps which will be headed up by an assistant commissioner. Approximately 500 gardaí are already involved in traffic duties, so the proposal will bring the total number of gardaí in the traffic corps to 1,200. It is important to state that the figure of 700 does not include the 500 gardaí already involved in traffic duty. The assistant commissioner responsible for the traffic corps has been appointed and I wish him well in his new role.

The introduction of penalty points in 2002 allied to the increase in the maximum levels of financial penalties that can be imposed for traffic offences has had a cautionary effect on road users. The further major extension of the operation of the penalty points system and the supporting fixed charge system, which will be rolled out this year, will further augment the level of deterrent against poor driving behaviour.

I referred earlier to a promotional campaign launched yesterday relating to pedestrian safety. Recent tragic incidents where pedestrian fatalities resulted from collisions with heavy goods vehicles, HGVs, highlight the particular vulnerability of pedestrians. The issue of pedestrian safety in the context of heavy goods vehicles is a subject that has a resonance throughout Europe. In November 2003 the EU adopted Directive 2003/97/EC, which provides for an extension of the field of vision in HGVs to address the issue of blind spots. All new HGVs entering into service from 26 January 2007 will be required to meet the revised standards for field of vision set. I made a statutory instrument for that purpose in December last. In addition, subject to practical engineering constraints and the agreement of the EU Commission, I intend to require existing vehicles of the types covered by the directive to be retrofitted with the necessary mirrors and cameras and monitors. We are required under internal market law to consult with the Commission before imposing technical standards, including standards for vehicles, that are not already provided for in EU law.

All road deaths are tragic, especially those involving vulnerable pedestrians. However, I can advise the House that in 2003, the last year for which full data on road collisions are available, 64 pedestrians were killed on our roads. This is the lowest level since 1997. It is not a satisfactory figure but it is promising that we are going in the right direction. I ask all companies involved in HGVs not to wait until the law is implemented before upgrading their vehicles. The law comes into force under the EU directive in 2007. I would appeal to all owners of vehicles to fit standard equipment. The life of someone is worth the price of a mirror on the front of a cab so that the driver can see where people are. It is a small cost and as Members of the Oireachtas we appeal for people to do this. This will become law soon but there is no reason why responsible people should not do it immediately.

In the short time available to me this evening I have referred to the overall road safety situation at present and our overall goals for the immediate future. I have also referred to a range of major initiatives that are being progressed or planned. Senators will appreciate that there are a range of other issues that are being pursued across many areas. These include a comprehensive review of the National Car Testing Service, the implementation of recommendations made in the report of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board, and the question of the establishment of an agreed basis for the operation of mutual recognition of the penalty point systems operating here, in Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

Senators will appreciate that the Government remains fully committed to the promotion of road safety in its broadest sense. The enhancement of safety across all transport modes is a central goal of my Department. Casualties resulting from road collisions have historically been at a level significantly higher than that experienced across all other modes. For that reason I and my Department will continue to place a high premium on the delivery of policies that will advance road safety on a long-term basis. As we approach the May bank holiday weekend I appeal to the public to drive carefully. The public should respect speed limits, wear safety belts and refrain from drinking and driving. If these three principles are adhered to the number of deaths will be significantly lower. Lives will be saved and injuries will not occur and the outcome will be far better. There is no excuse for drivers behaving irresponsibly. If drivers do not think about themselves I appeal to them to think of others.

Ms O’Rourke

Hear, hear.

Mr. Ryan

I am perplexed by the decision to call two Government speakers in a row. I am not familiar with that precedent.

HGVs travelling at speeds of up to 70 mph are major hazards on roads which are unfit for cars at lower speeds. I welcome the Government's decision to reduce the maximum permissible speed on all non-national roads. I wish evidence existed that speed limits were enforced with vigour. I have experienced cars with flashing lights overtaking me on these roads because I observed the speed limit. People are used to the former speed limit and their experience has not been sufficient to observe the new law. Many good laws exists in terms of road safety and other areas but enforcement is limited. I agree with those who say that personal responsibility is an important element. However, we must use the law to ensure people behave responsibly. The real deterrent is the likelihood of being caught rather than the ensuing penalty. This likelihood was a major factor in the early effectiveness of the penalty points system. However, as it became apparent that apprehensions were unlikely under this system, fewer cars observed speed limits. This was my experience in the months after the introduction of the penalty points system.

Enforcement involving people and technology is important. I acknowledge the Minister's determination to locate speed cameras where gardaí believe them to be of most use. It is of secondary importance to me whether they are run by the public or private sector. However, I agree with Senator Finucane that the locations frequently chosen by gardaí are regarded by many as not the most suitable. People are most likely to be caught at these locations. A senior garda said that those recorded speeding by these cameras also speed elsewhere. As gardaí rarely have speed cameras on other roads this cannot be proven. It is plausible that they pick soft targets.

I have questions on driver testing. People under 20 have higher pass rates than those above that age and men have higher pass rates than women. This contradicts insurance companies' claims that women and those over 20 are safer drivers. I do not know the significance of this fact. A number of women, including one of my family members, failed because they showed excessive caution. I associate an alarming lack of caution with male drivers under 20. If people fail for this reason I must ask what is being tested.

HGVs are a major concern. According to figures from the National Roads Authority they represent 3% of registered vehicles but are involved in 10% of fatal accidents. Vigorous enforcement of speed, safety and load laws are needed. I am glad the Minister has a plan which I hope will work because too many people die in this country. We seem to take that for granted.

Mr. Wilson

I wish to share my time with Senator Brady, by agreement.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Wilson

I welcome the Minister for State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Michael Ahern, and congratulate my PD colleagues for putting forward this motion. I listened with interest to Senator Morrissey expound on statistics, some of which were sad. The toll of 336 road deaths in 2003 was the lowest since 1963. It is a cause for concern that the toll increased in 2004.

To achieve a reduction in road deaths and injuries, an integrated approach involving a range of different measures is required. No single measure will achieve the desired result. The introduction of the penalty points system in October 2002 was very welcome. This scheme aimed to change driver behaviour. Drivers who incur points face the loss of their licence and will therefore think twice before further breaches bring them closer to the 12 point threshold. Currently, penalty points can be incurred for not wearing a seat belt, careless driving and driving without insurance. I have stated here on a number of occasions that penalty points should not be imposed on somebody who drives without insurance. A person who drives without insurance should be put off the road, not given penalty points.

Ms K. Walsh

Hear, hear.

Mr. Wilson

I continue to hold that view.

The penalty points system cannot be taken in isolation because other Government initiatives have led to safer roads. The low cost accident reduction schemes funded by the Government have been very successful since their introduction some years ago, and I am delighted they are to continue. The signing, lighting and cats' eyes programme announced by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is also playing a major role in road safety.

I welcome the metrication of the speed limit signs. I ask the Minister to give consideration to the provision of additional warning signs in Border areas outlining clearly that the speed limits indicated are metric and not miles per hour. I also ask the Minister to speed up consultation with the authorities in Northern Ireland to allow drivers from that jurisdiction be included in the penalty points system here and drivers here be included in the penalty points system in the North. We all try to adhere to the rules of the road but, unfortunately, people who are resident in Northern Ireland and drive Northern Ireland registered cars often do not adhere to the speed limits and break them wholesale. I am talking about someone driving at 150 or 160 km/h in a 100 km/h zone. Those people know that if they are caught they will only receive a fine and, in most cases, they do not pay it. I urge the Minister to speed up consultation with the authorities in Northern Ireland.

I welcome the review of the national car test announced recently by the Minister of State, Deputy Callely. I welcome also the Minister's statement in his contribution that all new HGVs entering into service from 26 January 2007 will be required to meet the revised standards for field of vision etc. There have been a number of fatalities in the town of Castleblayney, in my own constituency. Elderly people have been killed because the drivers of these articulated lorries could not see them as they did not have fullmirror vision.

Mr. Brady

I welcome the Minister to the House and the opportunity to speak on the motion. All road users, be they car drivers, cyclists or pedestrians, have a personal responsibility for the actions they take, a point made earlier in the debate.

The Minister outlined the road safety strategies that have been put in place, which focus on education, enforcement, engineering and legislation. It is widely accepted that bad roads contribute to road accidents in a major way. The upgrading of roads has been quite successful and a priority for the Government under the national development plan. It is essential that in attempting to increase safety on our roads we examine the question of upgrading roads. An audit of suburban roads should be done as a matter of urgency. It is not only in rural areas that we have potholes. In many estates throughout the city there are major problems. There are problems also in terms of the non-conformity of road ramps and road markings wearing out quickly. All those issues contribute to the debate on road safety.

Senators mentioned the smooth transition from miles per hour to metric values. That is a great example of the way an initiative can be properly signalled, with information given to the public and a time limit imposed and properly implemented.

There have been numerous attempts to change road users' behaviour over the years. The reduction in deaths within a certain timeframe that the Minister mentioned in his contribution is without doubt due to the measures that were taken, including the introduction of the penalty points system, but no one measure will solve these problems. The introduction of the Garda traffic corps, the ring-fencing of funding and the appointment of an assistant commissioner to head the traffic corps are welcome initiatives. The targeting of resources on information campaigns have proved to be extremely successful over the years. I am sure we can all rhyme off the green cross code at this stage and that is due to information videos and television advertisements.

We must have better traffic management. Traffic jams lead to frustration and frustration leads to bad driving, which in turn leads to accidents. With the increase in the volume of cars on our roads over recent years we need a more free-flowing, driver orientated traffic management system. In fairness to Dublin City Council, it has put major resources into the management of traffic around the city, which I have no doubt has contributed to a reduction in the number of accidents. Issues such as signage, road markings and lighting are hugely important when it comes to traffic.

All of those measures must be taken as a whole. There is not one solution to this problem. It takes a comprehensive, co-ordinated effort and the Minister and the Department are implementing that.

Mr. J. Phelan

I am glad to speak on the motion, which provides Opposition Members with an opportunity to voice their concerns about an area of public policy that is clearly unsatisfactory. I am somewhat surprised that the Progressive Democrats would use their time to raise an issue on which the Government has singularly failed.

Despite what I have heard from the Minister and Government speakers, problems on our roads are as bad if not worse than they have ever been in the past. The Minister and Government Senators spoke about the amount of money being spent. If that is to be used as a means of measuring the success of road safety, the Government is very successful but if the number of fatalities and serious accidents on our roads is used as a measure, the Government has made a mess of this whole area. The situation is now far worse than it ever was previously and I am surprised that such an opportunity to debate this issue would be presented to us but I intend to take it.

I agreed with much, although not all, of what the Minister said. One point that was particularly interesting was when he spoke about the working group that is examining the whole area of speed cameras. I was glad he agreed with the recommendation of the working group that the gardaí would be involved in choosing the areas where speed cameras will be sited. That is very important because there is a danger that if private enterprise were to be brought into this area it would be used purely as a means of generating revenue and would not necessarily relate to accident black-spots. I welcome the Minister's reference to that in his contribution, although I do not welcome much else therein.

Since the beginning of the year we have seen yet again a significant and steady increase in the number of people killed on the roads. I am not trying to make a political point because these accidents are very distressing for the families concerned and for all communities throughout the country. This is something on which politicians on all sides of the House should focus but I am disappointed that the Government does not appear to have grasped the nettle in that regard. Its attitude is to fire a few more million euro at the problem but we will not get any value for the money we are spending, nor will we see any significant decreases in what are the obvious indicators of the success of the road safety programme. That would be very disappointing.

As the Cathaoirleach will be aware, some 330,000 people have provisional licences, of whom 130,000 are waiting for a driving test. It is a very significant number. Despite continuous promises since 1997 that the figures would be cut dramatically, we have not seen a significant reduction. The first step to be taken is to ensure that more people pass the driving test, which would mean a higher proportion of fully licensed drivers on our roads. As the majority of accidents can be ascribed to some form of driver error, it is not good enough that 330,000 drivers have provisional licences. It is certainly not good enough that there is a delay of up to a year in some parts of the country to get a driving test. We were promised the matter would be addressed, but it was not. It is another of the broken promises in which the Government has specialised.

There has been a dramatic change in speed limits which are now set in kilometres rather than miles per hour. The opportunity was missed to introduce a more harmonised system of speed limits. There are many examples of dual-carriageways on which one can travel at limited speeds while significantly substandard national secondary roads permit travel at the full 100 km/h speed limit. It is not acceptable. Near where I live at the entrance to Waterford city on its Kilkenny side, there is a short stretch of dual-carriageway, which is the best road in south county Kilkenny. It has only a 60 km/h speed limit while the inferior road which leads to it has a 100 km/h speed limit. Quite often, Garda speed checks are mounted on what are obviously safer stretches of road rather than on the narrow, twisting, older routes on which accidents are more likely. If we are serious about tackling deaths on our roads, we must adopt a more realistic approach to speed limiting. The opportunity to adopt such an approach was when the new system was introduced, but it was missed.

While construction is taking place on only some of the Naas dual-carriageway, the entire road has a speed limit of 60 km/h. It is making what was already a disastrous scenario for commuters even worse every morning and evening. I was caught in traffic on the road this morning myself and missed a division in the House.

Mr. Cummins

There is no excuse.

An Cathaoirleach

I must be neutral.

Mr. J. Phelan

There are many who find themselves in a similar position every day. The adoption of a more harmonised approach to speed limits by all local authorities and the Department would create circumstances in which more commonsensical speed limits were applied.

We have seen legislation which is considered by many to make the way clear for the privatisation of driver testing in future. While I am not against the idea of privatisation in the sector, a significant overhaul of the test itself is required. The test does not address the overtaking of another vehicle, which is the most dangerous manoeuvre one can attempt in a car but incorporates reversing around a junction, which is illegal. The test is archaic. I urge the Minister to harmonise speed limits and ensure the test is more relevant to the circumstances drivers encounter on today's roads.

Ms K. Walsh

I wish to share my time with Senator Brennan.

An Cathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Ms K. Walsh

I appreciate having a few moments to speak about circumstances which have brought great tragedy to many families. There have been 118 deaths on our roads this year, which is not simply a statistic but a reference to 118 tragic stories of loss and sorrow for the families of those who have lost their lives. Senator Morrissey spelt out the main points of the motion our party has moved this evening and I hope all Members will support the initiatives for which he has called. Investment must be matched with real action and improvements. I wish to address the use of headlights during daylight hours, the cleanliness of headlights and number plates and pedestrian safety.

Research has shown that leaving dipped headlights switched on during daylight hours, regardless of weather, reduces the risk of collision, especially while overtaking. Laws in Canada, Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Norway and Sweden require vehicles to operate with their lights on during daytime. The practice has been in place in Canada since 1989, since which time the Government there estimates it has saved 120 lives each year. It would be foolish to fail to consider the introduction of similar measures in this jurisdiction, especially for heavy goods vehicles. There are many large vehicles on our roads transporting goods in our prosperous economy, which it would be safer to operate with dipped headlights switched on at all times. If these vehicles at least were required to use headlights, we would not have to depend on drivers to activate them as light faded in the evening.

It is imperative that drivers of vehicles, especially large lorries, keep their headlights, indicators and number plates clean and visible. We must ensure that drivers are compelled by law to keep their vehicles in the safest possible condition. Bus drivers in particular have a responsibility to all of us and to themselves. Research has shown that dirty headlights can reduce a driver's night vision by 50% to 90%. I would like to see all regulation in the area reviewed to remove all possible risk from our roads. While the points are specific, I wished to have them aired in the House.

I welcome the new pedestrian safety campaign which the Garda has launched. The initiative is aimed at raising awareness among pedestrians of the dangers posed by road traffic. The focus is on the dangers posed by trucks and blind spots due to the increase in the incidence of fatal injuries of pedestrians by vehicles in recent years. Last year, 84 pedestrians were killed on our roads, which is nearly two per week. The Garda is especially anxious to raise awareness among pedestrians that if they cannot see the driver of a truck or other high-cab vehicles, it means the driver cannot see them. It is a simple message which could save lives.

There is a specific duty to pedestrians, especially at night given the occurrence of more than two thirds of fatal pedestrian accidents during the hours of darkness. While pedestrians can hear a car coming and see its lights, a driver may not see a pedestrian. A driver will certainly not hear a pedestrian. If necessary, we should make it compulsory for pedestrians walking on roads at night to wear reflective arm bands or Sam Browne belts to make them visible at distance.

In addition to raising these points, I wish to ensure we do all we can as legislators to raise as many issues as possible. We have a duty to make these points and to encourage the public to take whatever steps are necessary to reduce the numbers of sad stories for families of people who lose their lives on Irish roads.

Mr. Brennan

I support the motion and welcome the Government's commitment to act to address the serious issues of safety and the rates of death and injury on our roads. Traffic levels have never been higher, with 1.9 million vehicles on Irish roads. I acknowledge the safety measures programme of the National Roads Authority which has contributed greatly by improving dangerous sections of road.

I also welcome the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's review of speed limits, especially on national secondary roads and county roads. The onus is now on local authorities to bring about these changes, especially close to schools and built-up areas. I also look forward to the traffic corps being increased to 1,200 members. When that happens it will play a leading role in improving safety on roads. That is an increase of 500 gardaí——

Mr. J. Phelan

We will all be gone by then.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brennan should be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. Brennan

A recent report on road safety has identified 20 sections of national roads which are in need of attention. It is important that these roads receive urgent attention from the Department and the National Roads Authority.

I call for a road safety programme to be introduced to the curriculum at leaving certificate level. It would be of significant benefit if driving tests could be introduced at that stage. The motion before the House has given an opportunity to all parties to participate in identifying areas in need of attention. I wish the Minister well in implementing his programme.

Dr. Henry

I welcome the public awareness programme which has been launched in regard to pedestrians. A total of 43 children have been killed on our roads, which is the highest rate in Europe. This matter must be tackled. We all hope it will be tackled successful.

The incompetence of the Government regarding driver testing, its failure to regulate driving instructors and to provide a proper structure for driver training leads one to question its commitment and its ability to deliver on the commitments that have been referred to in the motion. Theory is one thing but putting things into practice is another. The Government has been very good in the area of theory, press releases, position papers and documents, as mentioned by people even on the other side of the House, but when it comes to practice and actual delivery the Government is found wanting at all times.

Mr. Morrissey

I thank all the Senators who participated in this debate. I also thank the Minister for Transport for staying so long in the House today.

We have been criticised by some in this House for choosing this subject for tonight's motion. If it was so important to Opposition Members why have they not addressed it in their Private Members' time before now? We tabled this motion before the bank holiday weekend for one reason, namely, we wanted to focus attention on road safety. We wanted to address the issue of how we try to save 140 lives per year.

The most positive aspect of the debate was the statement by the Minister about the recommendations on speed cameras and the privatisation of their operation. A great deal has been made of that issue. I welcome the Minister's commitment that the operation and location of cameras will not be dependent on the numbers caught, as is the case with clampers in Dublin.

Many speakers referred to speed limits which is an issue for local authorities. As Senator John Paul Phelan said, there should be appropriate and consistent speed limits across the country. Local authorities have that onerous responsibility. Garda enforcement of the speed limits must also be consistent and appropriate in order to achieve the public and driver support necessary.

With regard to the issue of driver testing and the new standards authority, the Minister has been very forthright in this debate, stating that we need more testers and that he will work on that issue. One of the reasons for this motion was to establish the Government's position.

There might be only 33 new members added to the traffic corps this year but I hear little from the opposition as they realise there will be 2,000 extra gardaí on the streets by the time this Government's term of office ends.

Mr. J. Phelan

There will not. The college will not be able to cope.

Mr. Cummins

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform knows that.

Mr. Morrissey

There will be almost 700 extra gardaí in the traffic corps, bringing its total to 1,200.

Mr. J. Phelan

Senator Morrissey should not provoke the Opposition.

Mr. Morrissey

I am not here to defend heavy goods vehicles or the haulage industry, but this country depends on that industry for transporting our exports and raw materials. The heavy goods vehicle industry must be policed correctly and with that I would like to see the regulations on the weight that can be carried by these vehicles, particularly in the building industry, properly enforced. The recent traffic accident on the M50 at Lucan was mentioned and I understand the truck involved had not held a haulage licence since last December.

At times I wonder why more pedestrians are not killed. Pedestrians as well as motorists have a personal responsibility for their safety but how many times do we see pedestrians walk in front of cars? What personal responsibility do they bear?

Ms K. Walsh

Exactly.

Mr. Morrissey

Through cost-benefit analysis, all Departments can see the costs of road safety. We do not have a budgetary provision or methodology to evaluate the benefits but on examining the Goodbody consultants report, the benefits are quite clear. Each fatality costs the State €2 million and each serious injury costs in excess of €200,000, and that must be considered.

With regard to drivers between the ages of 17 and 30 years, when one mixes the lethal weapons of speed, inexperience and drink and drugs one gets the phenomenon we see every weekend. The simple message from this debate is that speed kills. I welcome the forthrightness of many Members here in stating what action we want taken on this matter. I thank the Minister for his presence at the debate.

Amendment put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 14; Níl, 27.

Tá

Browne, Fergal.
Burke, Paddy.
Burke, Ulick.
Coghlan, Paul.
Cummins, Maurice.
Feighan, Frank.
Hayes, Brian.
Henry, Mary.
McHugh, Joe.
O’Toole, Joe.
Phelan, John.
Ross, Shane.
Ryan, Brendan.
Terry, Sheila.

Níl

Brady, Cyprian.
Brennan, Michael.
Cox, Margaret.
Dardis, John.
Dooley, Timmy.
Feeney, Geraldine.
Fitzgerald, Liam.
Glynn, Camillus.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Kett, Tony.
Kitt, Michael P.
Leyden, Terry.
Lydon, Donal J.
MacSharry, Marc.
Minihan, John.
Mooney, Paschal C.
Morrissey, Tom.
Moylan, Pat.
Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
O’Brien, Francis.
O’Rourke, Mary.
Phelan, Kieran.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Walsh, Jim.
Walsh, Kate.
White, Mary M.
Wilson, Diarmuid.

Tellers: Tá, Senators P. Burke and Cummins; Níl, Senators Minihan and Moylan.

Amendment declared lost.

Motion put and declared carried.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 27 Apr 2005

Road Safety: Motion.

Tá

Níl

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Apr 2005