As I do not have a copy of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, in front of me I ask the Minister to explain the minor amendment in section 30 to section 44A of the Principal Act as a matter of interest.
SECTION 30.
Question proposed: "That section 30 stand part of the Bill".
Section 44A of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, was inserted in that Act by section 24 of the Road Act, 1968. That section provides that the Minister may make regulations prescribing a general speed limit for public roads. The general speed limit, which is currently 60 m.p.h., applies to all public roads which are not subject to the built-up area speed limit of 30 m.p.h. or which are not subject to a special speed limit. Under section 31 of this Bill there will be a statutory speed limit of 70 m.p.h. for motorways. The amendment in this section is necessary arising from the creation of that new statutory motorway speed limit. The section excludes motorways from the scope of the general speed limit.
The Minister is proposing to increase the speed limit to 70 m.p.h. for motorways. Like my colleagues I clock up many miles driving around the countryside — I normally clock up 30,000 to 35,000 miles per annum. In many cases dual carriageways are ten to 12 miles long, the dual carriageway around Athlone is seven miles long. A speed limit of 60 m.p.h. on dual carriageways and many other stretches of road, for example the road between Kilcock and Enfield, is not reasonable and people do not generally adhere to it. A speed limit of 60 m.p.h. on roads of that standard is too low and if it was increased to a more realistic limit — say, 70 m.p.h. on specific roads — there would be greater adherence to it and perhaps better quality driving. In the foreseeable future the only motorways in this country will be the ring road around Dublin and the motorway from Leixlip to Kinnegad. What other parts of the country have motorways?
(Interruptions.)
The ones I am familiar with.
Is the Deputy referring to motorways as distinct from dual carriageways?
Yes. Will the 70 m.p.h. speed limit apply to dual carriageways?
No.
The speed limit of 60 m.p.h. on dual carriageways is too low and hence will be broken on a regular basis.
Before the summer recess the Minister published a very interesting document called the "National CO2 Abatement Strategy". I compliment the Minister on this document. I would have no major difficulty with the extension of the speed limit to 70 m.p.h. on motorways and on dual carriageways which have the potential to be motorways when our finances allow. I cannot square the two speed limits and I would like the Minister to explain the reasons behind them. The increased level of fuel consumption in cars, due to faster speed limits, will contribute to an increase in CO2 emissions. Will the increase in speed limits go hand in hand with the carbon energy tax? What are the Minister's views on that?
Deputy Doyle is being a bit mischievous.
I am trivialising matters and being mischievous. What else am I doing?
The Deputy obviously disagrees with the points made by Deputy McGrath on this matter. There is no easy solution to this matter. If traffic is slowed up and becomes congested then the problem of environmental degradation and pollution is, of course, increased. We have not much time this afternoon for this type of academic arguing——
I have all the time in the world; I am in no hurry.
One can argue the point either way but congestion and the type of environmental degradation caused by a build-up of traffic in towns or cities is a much greater environmental problem than the one posed by increasing the speed limit which will enable traffic to move faster.
A number of considerations had to be taken into account in increasing the speed limits, for example, the question of enforcement, etc. As I am sure Deputy McGrath is aware, that one could only increase the speed limit on national primary roads if the overall condition of the roads was improved. Otherwise there would be good and bad stretches of road. Having regard to the current spate of activity on our roads it would not be reasonable to increase the speed limit on primary roads. To return to Deputy Doyle's question, it would be impossible to satisfy all the competing demands. There is no doubt that we want traffic to move.
Which demand won?
We want to ensure that traffic using these arteries is more free flowing. The increase in speed limits will reduce the environmental problems associated with congestion. This will help us to meet our obligations in that regard.
With respect, I do not accept the Minister's argument. It is the traffic management system in and around our towns — for example the huge number of traffic lights necessary for safety at various crossroads—that causes a back-up of traffic and slows down traffic. The large number of traffic lights between Dublin and the Naas-Newbridge motorway causes delays in getting onto the motorway. Once a driver is on the motorway there is no obstacle to getting out of town quickly. It is the necessary traffic management system in a very populous built-up area which causes the traffic to move so slowly.
I am not complaining about the 70 miles per hour speed limit, but to publish a Bill almost simultaneously with a national carbon dioxide abatement strategy without explaining which competing consideraton actually won out is a little bit contradictory. Obviously motorway speed limits won over the CO2 abatement in this particular argument.
Could the Minister respond to my query in relation to his views on a carbon energy tax? In other words, if one has to use one's car to get from A to B one can now do so efficiently at 70 miles per hour on a motorway, and there are times when that has to be done, but is the Minister going to encourage the reduction of or unnecessary use of vehicular traffic through an energy tax?
I did not have any notion that we would be travelling down this road this afternoon on a Bill of this kind but the Chairman has allowed freedom like that. The Council of Ministers have moved progressively towards the introduction of a carbon energy tax. Last year vitual agreement had been reached with the exception of one country. We have played our part in all of that. Discussions are ongoing at present between a number of Departments in regard to the problems associated with heat, etc., that will have to be sorted out and that will take some time.
To return then to the other matter. I disagree completely that these traffic problems have to do first with the provision of lights. We have consistently had a growth rate of four per cent per annum in vehicular traffic on our roads and that looks set to continue. The lay-out of the roads, the planning of our cities, the peripheral planning, the problem of port access and many other things have all contributed to that congestion. I would love to think that it was as simple as changing traffic lights but, I am afraid, it is going to cost millions to solve the problems.
I take it that setting the speed limit at 70 miles per hour on motorways is in line with international standards. I understand that in other countries there are quite sophisticated systems for detecting infringements of the speed limit. As we will obviously be constructing more motorways perhaps the Minister would let the House know if he has any plans for introducing such sophisticated detection systems here.
I indicated earlier that I had decided to bring forward on Report Stage a provision which will allow for the use of more modern technology. In regard to whether we are on a par with other countries, generally speaking we are. There are two European countries that may have speed limits slighty lower than those in Ireland. The majority are on a par with or above that.
Has Germany just reduced its speed limit on motorways?
I welcome the provision of a 70 miles per hour speed limit on motorways. It is only reasonable. That is in fact the speed at which people will travel on stretches of motorway. It is also fair to say that on average travelling on motorways is much more fuel efficient than travelling on ordinary roads. The loss of fuel efficiency caused by the extra speed is more than compensated for by not having to stop and start.
The reference to an energy tax frightens me because it seems to be a tax on peripherality. An average of 35,000 miles per year was mentioned, but where I live on the periphery the average annual mileage is 45,000. I am always a bit worried that energy or carbon taxes will wind up as a tax on those who live out on the edge. We must be very careful to ensure that some compensatory mechanism is provided for if an energy tax is contemplated.
I want to refer to speed limits on roads that are not technically motorways. The best example of this is the Athlone relief road which follows all the normal criteria of a motorway in that there is no access except from the left and there is no access from fields or anywhere else on to that road. Is it possible that under the terms of this Bill this road could be deemed a motorway for speed limit purposes? I know that a motorway can be deemed not to be a motorway with the consent of the Minister, but is it possible, for the purposes of a speed limit, to deem a road to be a motorway when it fulfils all the criteria except that there are too many exits and entrances even though they are all on the left? There is no criss-crossing on the road. It is effectively a motorway except for the small technicality I refer to. I would be totally opposed to the higher speed limits on dual carriageways because of cross movement of taffic. Many dual carriageways unfortunately also have field gates etc. opening onto them; that is a totally different issue. I am talking about roads constructed in the future to the type of model we have on the Athlone relief road.
Finally, there are stretches of national and primary roads that are inferior. It has been accepted here that people travel, on average, at higher speeds on national primary roads than they do on local country roads. The speed limit should be brought down to 50 miles per hour because there are notorious stretches on some of those roads. On one such stretch in County Galway there have been many accidents and much money has been spent trying to rectify the position. A lower general speed limit would be warranted here and people on national primary roads should be warned when they are on dangerous stretches of road.
In the context of motorways, difficulties have arisen recently for invalid or disabled drivers who have specially modified cars. I ask the Chairman for a little bit of licence here as there is actually no section in this Bill under which we can bring the matter up. This discussion on motorways is the nearest I can get to it.
If it is outside the remit of the Bill I suggest that Deputy Doyle might write to the Minister and I am sure he would reply.
You have allowed licence to the other side today. Let me just put my question, which is relevant. I know there is a Motorways Act which would need amending, rather than a Road Traffic Bill, in relation to invalid drivers on our motorways. The present law precludes them from using the motorways even in ordinary cars as we now accept them. The old invalid carriages were very light and were dangerous on motorways because of side winds and so on. Would the Minister consider amending the Motorways Act as a matter of urgency to allow the use of motorways by handicapped, incapacitated or invalid drivers who are in standard cars which have been specially adapted to meet their needs? There is an anomaly there now. The present law does not reflect the position of the modern invalid or specially adapted car for the handicapped.
I do not know if the Minister wishes to reply but I have no doubt that he cannot reply off the top of his head. The question the Deputy asks would be more suited to a parliamentary question.
He will get that too. I was wondering what his view is.
The Minister has been very tolerant.
I have been exploited in every possible way here. I am very vulnerable on many of these matters but I will contact Deputy Doyle personally when I have an opportunity to look more closely at what is involved.
Lower speed limits, as suggested by Deputy Ó Cuív, are an option. There would be no difficulty in introducing them if it were deemed necessary. As you know, I am transferring from my Department to the local authorities and county boroughs the powers to deal with these matters. However, it is not just a question of speed limits and signs. Drivers are obliged to take account of traffic and weather conditions, such as fog, frost etc., that make it necessary to take additional precautions. The question of the enforcement of the speed limits is another matter that needs to be dealt with.
Question put and agreed to.
As it is now 6 o'clock it is proposed to adjourn until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, 29 September 1993, to complete Committee Stage.
The Select Committee adjourned at 6 p.m.