Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs debate -
Wednesday, 29 Sep 1993

SECTION 39.

Mrs. Doyle

I move amendment No. 65a:

In page 33, subsection (1), lines 1 to 5, to delete paragraph (c).

I am endeavouring to indicate my disapproval of the fact that the Minister proposes to impound untaxed vehicles as well as uninsured ones. I support the Minister's proposals for uninsured vehicles — not everyone does — but I think that driving a car without insurance is a danger to the general community and incurs a huge cost to the State. It is totally unacceptable. However, I would distinguish between driving an uninsured car and an untaxed one. Using this first time weapon of impounding untaxed cars is going too far. In fact, it will probably weaken the impact of using the measure for uninsured cars. An on-the-spot fine system is already in place for untaxed cars, and while there is a problem of compliance with taxing vehicles, an untaxed car is not a danger and has no cost imperative for the general public. It is a crime of different proportions.

Mr. Ferris

It is a crime?

Mrs. Doyle

Not necessarily. I beg to differ with him slightly on that. We can, however, discuss that point if the Deputy wishes, but it is not necessarily so. We are the only country in Europe to support the introduction of impounding untaxed vehicles, a measure which many would feel is draconian. I support the Minister because of the enormity of the problem of insurance. The problem is compounded by the unacceptable levels of insurance costs, particularly for young people. It is a matter we have to resolve. Uninsured vehicles are a danger to the public and an enormous cost to the Exchequer. Untaxed vehicles represent a crime of a different proportion and should be treated differently. Impounding untaxed cars is like taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut. However, I support the Minister because a sledgehammer is needed to deal with the lack of insurance discs and uninsured cars.

We also need clarification as to what exactly will be a lack of insurance. An insurance disc on the windscreen does not necessarily mean that a driver is covered by insurance to drive that car. Will motorists be obliged to carry insurance certificates with them all the time also? If one is uninsured does it automatically mean that the car will be impounded, as I understand from the briefing document the Minister circulated? When exactly is a car likely to be impounded for no insurance if not being insured and not having a disc up is not an absolute in terms of the likelihood of being insured? I ask the Minister those questions in relation to insurance but I urge that there is no immediate or obvious reason untaxed cars should be impounded. Under this heading it should be deleted as I propose in my amendment.

Mr. M. Smith

The provisions of the section empower the Garda to take vehicles on the spot for either motor tax or motor insurance offences or where the driver is too young to hold a driving licence.

Mrs. Doyle

We have no problem with that.

Mr. M. Smith

I see no reason a power to impound should not apply to the offence of driving without motor tax. Since 1983 it has been the practice of the Garda to remove and detain vehicles on the spot whose drivers have committed parking offences and more minor traffic offences. Under the Road Traffic Removal, Storage and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations about 7,000 cars are impounded each year for parking on freeways.

In 1991 the national level of motor tax evasion was estimated at between 10 and 13 per cent and the annual loss in motor tax revenue is about £20 million. That is approximately the figure and it would make an extraordinary difference to what we do with our county roads system in the year. Approximately £17 million is paid out through the Insurance Bureau arising from accidents which involved non-insured drivers. There are extraordinary amounts of money involved in this general area and the law abiding motorist should not have to subsidise the evader.

The proposed new powers for the Garda will not be exercised solely because a valid tax disc is not displayed. When exercising their powers, gardaí will be required to be satisfied that the vehicle is not taxed and in so doing will consult the national vehicle file to which they have direct access on a 24-hour basis. At the moment the Garda can prosecute if the tax disc has expired with a day or two. In enforcing the existing law in relation to road tax, including display of a tax disc, the Garda use discretion. People are not prosecuted unless road tax has expired for at least one month. The same discretion will apply to impounding. No one will have a vehicle impounded if the tax is only a couple of weeks out of date.

When I first considered this provision I was of the same mind as Deputy Doyle in relation to insurance and I have no problem about impounding in that regard. I have no problem about impounding when it comes to the tax on cars where a driver is obviously under age and without a licence, whether it is joyriding or whatever. I would be prepared to accept an amendment in relation to the tax, provided Deputy Doyle specified a time. As she is aware, in relation to the taxing of cars the Garda authorities already have reasonable discretion, but are we going to accept that where somebody repeatedly drives his car which is untaxed we would regard that as acceptable? I do not think that is what the Deputy wants.

Between now and Report Stage, the Deputy may bring forward an amendment which will take account of the type of situation I mentioned — the blatant ignoring of the normal requirements in this area. I am prepared to go as far as I can in accepting the democratic wishes of the House as long as full account is taken of that. I have to emphasise that there is in the region of £20 million lost to the State. This is vital money for the community in terms of the management of roads, the maintenance of county roads, etc., and one is expecting the law abiding citizen to carry the evader.

It is not envisaged that non-display of tax on a once off basis is the area for immediate impounding but rather consistent and blatant offences — car tax on its own, insurance on is own, a combination of both or joyriders. In that regard I do not think we should stand back from taking the measures proposed here.

Mrs. Doyle

I have no difficulty in relation to the joyrider provision or the insurance. Is the Minister saying that the on-the-spot fine system has not worked for untaxed cars?

Mr. M. Smith

As I said earlier, there is a review of the system which will indicate what has been happening. There are aspects that need improvement; there is no doubt about that.

Mrs. Doyle

Would there be a case for increasing considerably the on-the-spot fine for untaxed cars? Is it £20 at the moment or thereabouts?

Mr. M. Smith

It is £50.

Mrs. Doyle

Obviously if the law is being enforced that figure is not a sufficient deterrent to the evader. Generally I think the law is being enforced reasonably well. I wonder what proportion of cases come back a second time, still without tax over the same period.

Mr. M. Smith

I think the percentage of non-taxed cars is holding firm at between 10 and 13 per cent, which is very high.

Mr. Ferris

The problem with on-the-spot fines is that they are usually associated with traffic wardens or built up areas, but there are many untaxed cars in rural areas.

Mrs. Doyle

I have been at many Garda checks where they look at one's tax disc, insurance disc and tyres. I regularly come across them on rural roads.

Mr. Ferris

The Minister is saying that the number of untaxed cars remains the same.

Mrs. Doyle

I am trying to tease out with the Minister why the on-the-spot fine system is not a sufficient deterrent.

Mr. M. Smith

Let us be frank about this. In the public mind, in terms of the effectiveness of an on-the-spot fine or impounding a car, there is no question but impounding is a much better deterrent. The level of insurance evasion at the moment is between 6 and 8 per cent, and that has been radically improved. It is still unacceptable but it is relatively close to international experience regarding high costs, young people and all the other problems associated with insurance. However, with 10 to 13 per cent of cars on the road untaxed, if one relates that to road improvement and to other taxpayers carrying the burden, it is an unacceptable rate which is remaining stubbornly high. I want this provision in as a deterrent and I am prepared to accept an amendment which would specify the type of circumstances where it would be——

Mrs. Doyle

Does the Minister mean for the persistently untaxed car as distinct from someone who let six weeks slip past the renewal date?

Mr. M. Smith

I do not want to get into that; letting six weeks slip past is a little casual.

Mrs. Doyle

I accept that, particularly as motor tax offices now send out reminders; they stopped for a year or two and that caused major problems. The reminder is a very useful weapon. The Minister also reinstated the three month or quarterly tax disc and I thank him for that because it was a flight of fancy to think that removing the three month provision would have helped compliance. Many people cannot get the larger sum of money together to tax a car every six months. This quarterly provision helps those on low incomes to stay within the law. I will look again at the amendment and take it up on Report Stage.

Am I correct in saying that the Minister broadly accepts the principle of my amendment and that, provided he can catch the persistent offender, he will again examine it? Does the Minister think, however, that an on-the-spot fine is not sufficient for a certain percentage of untaxed cars — the chronic cases — so there has to be a cut off stage where the on-the-spot fine is no longer relevant and impounding becomes justified?

Mr. M. Smith

Yes.

Mrs. Doyle

Has the Minister a time limit in mind which he feels will be acceptable?

Mr. M. Smith

I could not be more helpful than I have already been.

Mrs. Doyle

There is already provision for a month so it has to be a longer period.

Mr. M. Smith

My responsibilities are greater than those of the Deputy. I am perfectly happy, if there is any reluctance on the Deputy's part——

Mrs. Doyle

There is and it is not just my view; I voice the opinion of many organisations on this area.

Mr. M. Smith

——to bring forward the amendment myself. I have the final responsibility and I do not want to be seen to shirk it.

Mrs. Doyle

Has the Minister any major objection to the amendment?

Mr. M. Smith

As long as between 10 and 13 per cent of cars on the road are not taxed and while I have responsibility for maintaining roads, despite that loss of income, I want to do something positive about it.

Mrs. Doyle

I apologise for persisting but this is an important area. With the extension of the powers of gardaí to enter with force and arrest without a warrant in private dwellings and the removal of the discretion from judges in terms of penalties and sentencing, this is the third area on which we have received most representation from responsible groups throughout the country.

The joyrider is a danger to himself and the general public and must be removed from the road by whatever means necessary. An uninsured car is a danger to the driver, the passengers and the public. The untaxed car is also a problem but it is of a different magnitude as one is not endangering the public or oneself by driving an untaxed car. I would like to reserve the weapon of impounding for the first two problems, the resolution of which, as the Minister said, requires urgent and immediate attention.

We need to ensure greater compliance in the area of road tax but impounding untaxed cars is excessive. The effectiveness of impounding cars when dealing with the uninsured and the joyrider may be diluted by extending it to an area which does not involve danger to the public. It is breaking the law but it is not a danger to the public.

Mr. M. Smith

I tended to take that view initially but if one considers that when dealing with the offence of parking a car on a freeway, 7,000 cars a year are impounded without a word or a complaint——

Mrs. Doyle

But they could be parked dangerously, which they obviously are, if they are in a high speed area.

Mr. M. Smith

I know but in terms of powers one would have to accept that there have been no problems with implementation in this area. I do not wish to have a situation where a car is immediately impounded when there is a once off failure to pay road tax. However, I want to deal with the persistent problem and the stubbornness of that statistic which is that one out of 11 to 13 people on the road are driving untaxed cars while we are under enormous pressure to find resources to maintain and improve our roads.

We have to make choices and they are not easy. Impounding is a very useful deterrent. As I said earlier, I am prepared to allow the Deputy to put forward an amendment to describe the persistent nature of the offence. I will not refrain from doing so myself, which would ease some of the Deputy's — and my— fears. However, I want to solve the problem so I will do that on Report Stage.

Mr. Nealon

There is a serious obligation on the Minister to introduce an amendment which will meet the objections. The intention of the Bill is to reduce carnage on the roads and to reduce the number of accidents. The Minister has done a good job in that respect and, because of that this committee has given him substantial powers which enable him to bring in stringent penalties. Those powers are given with a view to reducing the number of accidents but this is something totally different.

As the Minister said, this is a revenue collection exercise; it is not really a road traffic exercise. He mentioned the figure and, therefore, we must look on this somewhat differently. The Minister has not fully explained why the court system cannot work in this area. It may not work in its present fashion; higher fines may be required or some other scheme but we cannot say that the court system is too cumbersome because it is our democratic system for dealing with these matters.

It is draconian to impound cars when dealing with this type of offence. There is an infinite number of circumstances where a car may not be taxed with good reason or due to extenuating circumstances. The Minister has been good enough to tell us that there will be some consultation with the national vehicle registration to see if the car was taxed in recent times and not just judge the situation by looking at a disc. Will that also indicate whether it is a first offence? Allowance should be made for a first offence.

These are serious issues and the Minister said he will examine the area. The committee expects him to do so because this is different from the other powers which this committee has willingly given in appreciation of what he is doing. I hope to see a reduction in road accidents and carnage on the roads arising out of what he is doing. However, I would put this power in a different category and class it as a revenue collection exercise.

Mr. M. Smith

I would also put it in a different category and that is why I made a number of suggestions to see if we can accommodate what I want to achieve and what the democratic wishes of the House requires. A number of steps have been taken. We have to deal with the question of the existing law, on-the-spot fines and the unacceptable percentage of untaxed car or other vehicles on our roads.

I do not wish to see impounding when dealing with a first offence or the type of cases outlined. However, where a driver persistently ignores his or her obligations, we need some further deterrent. I will re-examine the matter to see how I can specify more accurately the circumstances in which I would envisage the use of powers of this nature which, I admit, are very strong.

Mr. Finucane

I respect what the Minister said, particularly about the discretionary powers of the gardaí. Due to computerisation, many companies can operate a system in the area of credit control whereby they know the people defaulting. I am sure that, similarly, the county councils have statistics which would give a fair indication of the identity of persistent defaulters.

I am aware of quite a few travellers who habitually do not have road tax. They usually come to me with their problems when they are in court. There is a segment who do not seem to have any qualms about it. They will pay the fine and look to us to petition the Minister and have it reduced. When it is sorted out they are back on the road. I often wonder whether they delight in trying to outwit the system. I realise there are also concerns about their freedom of movement but we will not discuss that aspect as parallel situations can develop in other areas of freedom of access.

I appreciate what the Minister said and I also appreciate the concerns on this side. I have often driven my car without tax; one may forget about it for a week or two and then the gardaí may bring it to one's attention and ask that the tax be renewed. I appreciate the reassurance that the gardaí are not after such offenders.

There certainly are habitual offenders and I have often wondered, particularly when one of them approaches me on a regular basis, if that person should be driving a car when he exercises no responsibility in taxing it. Some of those people belong to the 10 to 12 per cent mentioned and they will continue doing so because they know there is a weakness in the system. They go to court where there is a sympathetic judge; then they probably approach the TD who puts forward a plea because there is only a small amount of money coming into the house where there are six or seven children and naturally it will be referred back and reduced. Then the same offence is repeated; I find such offenders particularly tiresome, I do not want to be accused of pinpointing just one segment of the community but there is a problem there.

Mr. M. Smith

There is no doubt about it. I appreciate the Deputy's comments because whenever I have sat on committees dealing with mobile trailers or the convoys of trailers seen around the country, proposals are inevitably made for stricter enforcement of the road traffic legislation in this, insurance and other areas. That is always suggested primarily because a considerable number of travellers, for one reason or another, blatantly and continuously avoid making the necessary payments for their vehicles.

Mr. Nealon

Will the owner of the untaxed vehicle have to go to court or will he get his vehicle back before he has it taxed?

Mr. M. Smith

There would not be any point in impounding the car unless the tax was paid before the car was released.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Ms Keogh

I move amendment No. 66:

In page 33, subsection (2) (b), line 15, after "waiver" to insert "or deferral".

It struck me that the Minister is being generous in the circumstances by providing for the waiver of charges. Perhaps in some circumstances it might be wise to defer charges for a specific period of time. I am not pushing this amendment but somebody might be able to pay a charge at a later date. What is the Minister's opinion?

Mr. M. Smith

I am not sure what the Deputy wishes to achieve. Does she wish to defer the charges? There are clear circumstances where charges may be waived. I do not know why the Deputy wishes to defer the charges: you make a decision to do one or the other. Does she have a special case in mind?

Ms Keogh

A person may be under financial constraint at a particular time and rather than have a complete waiver of a charge, it could be deferred for a period of, for instance, a month.

Mr. M. Smith

If that is what is involved I would like to accommodate it. We can accept the amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 39, as amended, agreed to.