Priority Questions
1. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport his plans to deal with the financial shortfall in Iarnród Éireann in the capital budget for the rail network; his views on whether closing certain rail lines is a potential solution and his further views on establishing a multi-stakeholder forum to deliberate on and propose solutions to the financial difficulties. [42238/17]
View answerThe precarious financial position of Iarnród Éireann has been widely reported on. The Minister received a draft rail review report from the NTA around this time last year or possibly before then which stated that unless there was a serious cash injection for Iarnród Éireann, we would see widespread closures. There was also a reference to the possibility of a combination of closures and a cash injection. Will the Minister tell the House what the current state of play is in Iarnród Éireann? Does he envisage the closure of rail lines? On foot of the budget will there be increased funding for Iarnród Éireann?
The Deputy is aware that the taxpayer make a very large and recurring contribution each year to Iarnród Éireann. This contribution takes the form of both current, PSO, funding and capital funding under what is known as the infrastructure management multi-annual contract, IMMAC. In 2017 funding under the PSO and IMMAC programmes will cumulatively increase by over 17% when compared to 2016, bringing total funding to over €304 million.
Last year the National Transport Authority and larnród Éireann published the rail review report 2016, on which the NTA held a public consultation process. Over 300 submissions were received by the NTA in response to the consultation process. They have now all been examined and the NTA submitted a report on them to my Department last week. I will consider the report and then bring it to the Government. It is my intention that the report on the consultation process should be published by the NTA following consideration by the Government. In advance of that happening, no decisions have been taken on matters such as the future of individual rail lines or investment in the company and its relevant infrastructure.
As the Deputy is aware, I made a commitment to meet the trade unions once the industrial relations dispute at Bus Éireann was fully resolved. That meeting took place on 10 July and I found the exchange to be both useful and informative. I reiterated my wish to hold dialogue with all public transport stakeholders as my Department moved forward in its review of public transport policy in line with the commitment in the programme for Government. I requested each of the unions to make submissions to me on the format and issues that might be covered in the proposed dialogue. They expressed an eagerness to do so and I look forward to receiving the submissions. I would also welcome suggestions the Deputy or other Opposition spokespersons might have to make. If they would like to attend the forum, they are welcome to do so. Planning for the forum is at a preparatory stage, but I envisage a meaningful exchange of views on how we should shape the development of public transport policy in the next ten to 15 years.
Will the Minister outline how much of an increase in PSO and capital funding he has secured for thisyear? The draft rail review report clearly stated there was a need for an increase in funding of €640 million over a five-year period. We have a serious problem as the workers have not received an increase in over ten years. Negotiations are ongoing, but there is the potential for strikes. There is a serious issue related to capacity on rail lines. The number of carriages at different times has been reconfigured on some rail lines in my constituency to fill a gap. In other words, carriages were removed from early morning commuter trains and attached to later trains to fill a vacancy. Simply, insufficient money is being put into Iarnród Éireann to allow it to provide an efficient and effective service and passengers are the ones who are being compromised in that regard.
I thank the Deputy for bringing that specific case to my attention. It would, however, be more appropriate to bring it to the attention of management in Iarnród Éireann. I will do so if the Deputy gives me the details of the case, particularly if it is in his constituency. I have not heard widespread reports of it happening around the country or being a systemic problem. In fact, it is the first complaint of that sort I have received from any Deputy, but I will certainly address it, if the Deputy gives me the details.
The PSO subvention is increasing. Last year Iarnród Éireann received 13% more than it had received in 2015, while this year the PSO subvention will increase by a further 10%, as the Deputy knows. To answer his question about budget 2018, I have secured an 8% increase in overall Exchequer funding for PSO services across the bus and rail networks. This means that over €285 million will be allocated in 2018 to support the delivery of these socially necessary but financially unviable services. It is, of course, an issue that requires careful scrutiny to ensure the taxpayer is receiving value for money in the services delivered, given the considerable expenditure incurred. As is normal, the precise allocations for the companies involved, including Iarnród Éireann, will be decided by the NTA in the exercise of its statutory mandate and in accordance with the various contract arrangements it has entered into with PSO service providers. Overall, PSO and capital funding for Iarnród Éireann this year is expected to reach €315 million.
I thank the Minister for the offer to make management aware of the issue I raised. I was made it aware of it during the summer. The point I am making is that Iarnród Éireann does not have sufficient cash to meet demand on its rail lines. It does not have sufficient rolling stock as we have not invested significantly in the rail network.
If we do not do that we put the future viability of our rail network at risk.
I went to Brussels earlier this year and met officials at the Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport who made the point that we have not made any application for funding, as the Italians did, to invest in and improve our infrastructure and rail carriages.
When will the Minister publish the rail review? My party made a submission to it over 12 months ago. The review should be published and we should have a full and frank debate here. When will that happen? When will the Minister honour his commitment on the multi-stakeholder forum that he promised in advance of meeting trade unions but that has yet to be established?
We had a meeting of the multi-stakeholder forum on 10 July. It was a very successful and constructive meeting with representatives of all the unions, including the chief of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU. That resulted in an agreement that they would send suggestions to me about how the forum would work. I am awaiting some of those. I am absolutely committed to doing this. We will not be holding a stakeholder forum under the threat of a strike or industrial dispute. It would be inappropriate to do so because that would dominate the proceedings.
The purpose of the stakeholder forum is to hear the views of all those, particularly the workforce and management but also the National Transport Authority, NTA, and others, on the future of transport in this country. That will gel very well with the fact that the report and the public consultation on the rail review will come together and be considered by Government and by me. Decisions will be made on that basis. We have, however, to bear in mind the national planning framework when we make those decisions. It would be crazy to make decisions on the future of individual railway lines or rail in this country without considering the report of the national planning framework which is coming shortly.
2. Deputy Imelda Munster asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the actions he is considering to address the ongoing financial difficulties at Iarnród Éireann; the actions he plans to take to secure the future viability and success of the company; if line closures, fare increases, increases in funding for the free travel pass, increased subvention, compensation for previous under funding and increased capital investment have been considered, which of these actions are likely to be pursued; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42240/17]
View answerWhat actions has the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport taken to address the ongoing financial difficulties at Iarnród Éireann and to secure its future viability and success? Will there be line closures, fare increases or increases in funding for the free travel pass? None of this is clear in the budget.
I refer the Deputy to my reply to Priority Question No. 1 because it contains some of the content that Deputy Munster will need.
The National Transport Authority, NTA, has statutory responsibility for regulating fares charged by public transport operators, while the funding of the free travel scheme is primarily a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection.
I recognise that there are issues for consideration in relation to how we fund our rail network and by extension Iarnród Éireann. In August 2015 my Department published the strategic investment framework for land transport which outlined the funding pressures across both our rail and road networks and made a number of recommendations in respect of our key priorities and principles for future investment.
In respect of rail, the strategic investment framework recommended the development of a new rail policy and, as a step towards this, the Rail Review Report 2016 was published and was issued for a public consultation by the NTA. As I have mentioned, just last week the Department received the NTA's report about that consultation process and the range of submissions that were received. As noted within the rail review, its analysis predates the finalisation of the national planning framework which is being developed under the leadership of the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government to guide national, regional and local planning opportunities throughout Ireland together with investment decisions for at least the next two decades.
Last week, the Government began a public consultation on the draft framework that has been prepared and which is entitled, Ireland 2040 – Our Plan. I look forward to the finalisation and adoption by Government in the coming months of the new National Planning Framework following the current consultation. The approach it adopts toward land use planning and settlement patterns for the country will have significant impacts on the potential of rail and other transport infrastructure and services into the future. When finalised, the new national planning framework will form an important context for my consideration of issues raised by the rail review report and for any recommendations that I may bring to Government in due course.
We are years behind our European counterparts when it comes to investment in our rail infrastructure. Does the Minister accept that it is the State's responsibility to invest in our public rail network and that Iarnród Éireann is on the brink of collapse due to financial problems caused by lack of funding and investment for years? This led to serious safety issues being raised in the company but the Minister did not think our national rail network, Iarnród Éireann, merited mention in his budget or his press release on the budget. In view of the dire financial crisis it is in what specific new additional money has been ringfenced for capital investment and public service obligation, PSO, funding in Iarnród Éireann?
As I have already stated in reply to Deputy Troy, an 8% increase in the overall Exchequer funding for PSO services will be distributed across the bus and rail networks. As is normal the allocations to the companies, including Iarnród Éireann will not be decided by me. It is consistently peddled in this House that somehow I have an involvement in the day to day running of, or allocations to the individual Córas Iompair Éireann, CIÉ, companies. I have not. This will be decided, and rightly so, by the NTA in the exercise of its statutory mandate in accordance with the various contract arrangements in place with public service providers. Using dramatic words such as being on the verge of collapse is a repetitive narrative but Iarnród Éireann is in a very critical financial situation. That is no secret. The rail review has made recommendations and pointed out the crying need that this and all the CIÉ companies have for capital.
A paltry 8% increase in PSO funding across our bus and rail public transport network makes it clear that the Minister is no fan or friend of Iarnród Éireann, Bus Éireann, public transport or rural Ireland. His boss, the Minister for Finance, said yesterday in respect of the budget that a paltry increase of €9.6 million was to be spread across public transport services and our crumbling road infrastructure and network. That is unbelievably shameful given the crisis in our public transport network and the roads infrastructure. It shows the Minister's true colours. I do not think he has taken this crisis in public transport seriously at all. He seems to have completely abandoned public transport and the people who rely on it and need it, along with the roads infrastructure. He is happy to have got the Stepaside Garda station reopened as his prize and to hell with public transport or roads infrastructure funding. The Minister knows fine well that the two portfolios crucial to preparing this country for Brexit are transport and agriculture and there is nothing in this budget that shows the Minister is taking that seriously.
The Minister got his prize and he rolled over, and his attitude is to hell with public transport and our roads. There is nothing in this. It is one of the worst allocations. What efforts did he put into it? It is dismal.
Briefly, as an aside, I would like to thank Sinn Féin from the bottom of my heart for the stalwart support its members gave for the reopening of Stepaside Garda station.
That is not even the Minister's brief, this area is his brief.
It could not have been done without the Deputy and her colleagues-----
The Minister abandoned his brief for parish-pump politics.
Allow the Minister to continue without interruption.
-----campaigning for it so strongly, and I thank her very much for that.
I ask the Minister not to invite interruption.
This area is the Minister's brief. It has been given the worst allocation of all.
The Minister was shafted.
Now let me get back to my brief having thanked the Deputy so much for her help.
The Minister has only 30 seconds remaining. He will be out of time.
The Minister did not put up a fight for it.
I know I will be out of time and the Chair might ask the Deputy not to interrupt me. That is not paltry money. The Deputy need not talk to me about paltry money. Overall Exchequer funding, including public service obligation, PSO, and capital investment, for Iarnród Éireann this year is expected to reach €315 million.
Deputy Munster, we cannot have more interruptions.
The Minister rolled over.
Do not tell me that is paltry money. That is not paltry money. It is serious money.
I am going to move on to the next question.
I just want to cite one other figure and it is fair that it would come out. Between 2008 and 2016 the taxpayer has made more than €5 billion available to the three CIÉ companies across both PSO and capital investment programmes.
That is their tax money.
That is not paltry money. That is money which I hope has been and is well spent. It is my job to see that is well spent and I will see that it is well spent. The taxpayer is entitled to value for that money, not empty rhetoric from Deputy Munster.
The Minister got his prize and he has rolled over on transport.
3. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will increase the tourism marketing budget to mitigate the decline in visitor numbers from the UK in view of the decline in visitor numbers experienced in 2017; and his views on whether the capital budget for tourism development is adequate to deal with the emerging difficulties in the sector. [42239/17]
View answerThese questions were tabled prior to the budget. I acknowledge that yesterday we saw a small increase in the tourism and marketing budget to mitigate against the decline in visitor numbers from the United Kingdom in light of Brexit. Will the Minister outline specifically how much additional funding will be allocated to Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland for advertising and marketing in light of Brexit? Will additional staff be hired or what is the Government's plan? Since Brexit we have had no plan to deal with the sharp decline in visitor numbers from the United Kingdom.
That is a fair question and one which I suspect will be asked and answered continually in the months ahead, and it is fair that this should be monitored monthly. I welcome the overall growth in visit numbers to Ireland in the first eight months of 2017. However, the decline in the numbers visiting from Great Britain continues to be a concern. While growth from North America, mainland Europe and other markets has allowed us to maintain upward momentum, it is important that we would take appropriate action to address the Great Britain decline.
Overseas marketing is vital for tourism. While recent tourism performance has been strong, research in our key overseas markets has indicated that Ireland’s share of voice needs to be strengthened. To that end, I have secured €2 million in budget 2018 for digital investment in tourism marketing, both to help restore Ireland’s share of voice vis-à-vis its competitors and also to develop growth from alternative markets. This is critical in the context of Brexit and the decline in visitors from Britain.
Tourism Ireland and industry partners, working in collaboration with Fáilte Ireland, have implemented a series of actions in the Great Britain market to address the implications of Brexit and the fall in the value of sterling. For example, a greater focus has been placed on culturally curious visitors, who are less impacted by currency fluctuations, and highlighting off-season breaks and value offers. As well as this, Tourism Ireland is continuing its market diversification strategy. This aims to attract more visitors from markets which deliver longer stays and, therefore, higher revenue returns. This strategy is bearing fruit, as evidenced by the significant increase in visitors from North America and other markets thus far in 2017.
The existing capital plan for 2016-2022 provides an allocation of almost €126 million for tourism product development. Fáilte Ireland's tourism investment strategy 2016-2022 lays out the funding streams and delivery mechanisms for this allocation. I am pleased to have secured an additional allocation of almost €33 million for tourism product development in the mid-term review of the capital plan, bringing the total amount available to almost €160 million. This capital budget will contribute significantly to the development of the tourism sector. In line with the tourism commitments in A Programme for A Partnership Government, this capital budget will enable Fáilte Ireland to invest in the further development of the signature experience brands, including the Wild Atlantic Way. It will also allow Fáilte Ireland to progress the development of a brand for the Lakelands region as a separate proposition to sit alongside the Wild Atlantic Way and Ireland’s Ancient East. I assume that last sentence has great appeal to Deputy Troy.
The overall growth in our tourist numbers is welcome, but that is largely due to the huge increase in the number of US visitors. That usually depends on favourable exchange rates. That exchange rate can fall in the same way as the UK visitor numbers have fallen. Unfortunately, what I understand from the Minister's reply, and he can correct me if I am wrong, is that only a measly additional €2 million will be invested in marketing next year. The capital funding of up to €33 million that he mentioned will be spent over a period of five years over the duration of the next capital plan. An allocation of €2 million is not adequate for the amount of marketing that needs to be done in the UK and in mainland Europe to compensate for the loss in UK visitor numbers. Did the Minister have an opportunity to read the submission forwarded in advance of the budget by the Irish Tourism Industry Confederation, the representative body working with the many stakeholders in the tourism sector? When we consider what the Minister has delivered, it does not go anywhere near addressing the serious issue of the fall in UK visitor numbers.
While I accept the genuineness of what the Deputy said, he should not expect anybody on any side of the House to anticipate currency movements. As he rightly pointed out, the reduction in visitor numbers from the UK has been compensated for partly by the visitor numbers from the US. Also, what is happening within Fáilte Ireland is something very commendable. It will receive €2 million and will also receive a massive capital injection over the next five years. It would be wrong to dismiss the four years after this year and say that they are not part of the equation. They will be very important because the consequences of Brexit will be permanent and long term. What Fáilte Ireland has done is to enter into and extend its diversification of markets campaign and we have seen from it that it is concentrating on markets where they are bigger spenders than the UK and where revenue is greater. Let us not be too depressed about this. The increase from all these other countries is to be welcomed. The figures were up from nearly every other sector.
Go raibh maith agat.
Just one more second-----
The Minister will have to use his remaining minute to make that point.
I will use it to give those figures because they are very important.
Tourism is the largest indigenous industry on our island. However, it is not given the recognition that it deserves. I acknowledge the retention of the 9% VAT rate. My party supported that and I am glad that the Government retained it. It is part of the package, but an allocation of €2 million for the marketing budget to address the severe drop in UK visitor numbers does not cut the mustard. While the allocation of €33 million over five years is welcome, that is only €6 million per year in additional capital expenditure. Any county which any of us represents and any of our constituencies would spend that €6 million in a couple of months.
I welcome the fact that the Minister is coming around to the Lakelands brand and the €1 million that is being addressed to that. When will that brand be up and running? Will staff be assigned to the development and implementation of that brand? How will that €1 million be spent? Last year, Fáilte Ireland gave County Longford €2,000 towards marketing, the lowest for any county.
While it is doing great work, there are areas which need to be addressed.
The Deputy is rightly acknowledging the work which has been done. I would like to be able to allocate large sums of money to every part of my Department. The competing interests are vast. I remind the Deputy that the tourism marketing fund for 2017 is not €2 million; rather, it is €36 million. Let us not pretend-----
I refer to the increase.
The Deputy is correct about the increase being only €2 million, but there is €36 million on top of that. It is a lot of money to spend on marketing and it has been used well. In some ways it has proved how successful it has been by having brought so many visitors to Ireland. I have no doubt but that it will continue to use the money successfully.
I am glad that the Deputy has acknowledged that the tourist industry and lobbying from Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland on the issue of VAT has been extremely important. In discussions with the Government, my Department and I maintained that the VAT rate should remain at 9%. It is absolutely vital for the smaller hospitality part of the industry.
We must continue to warn the larger hotels throughout Ireland that if their price gouging and taking money from people in an opportunistic way is damaging the interests of the country, we will be obliged to reconsider the advantages from which they are benefitting. It is not intended to increase the 9% VAT rate for the tourist industry as a whole.
4. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the position regarding the industrial relations situation in Irish Rail; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42237/17]
View answerQuestion No. 4 is in the name of Deputy Barry. Permission has been given to Deputy Paul Murphy to ask it.
A leopard clearly does not change its spots. The exchange between the Minister and Deputy Munster was quite revealing. We have a Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport who begrudges spending public money on developing public transport. I suspect I know the answer to my question, which is whether the Minister accepts responsibility for being obliged to intervene in the situation in Irish Rail. Workers have been pushed to take strike action at the end of the month by the actions of management. The Minister's intervention should take the form of paying what was recommended by the National Transport Authority, NTA, namely, €125 million to combat underfunding over the previous six years.
I thank the Deputy for his question. He is anticipating something a little prematurely but I will, of course, take into account what he has to say. I share his disappointment regarding last week’s news that the discussions between unions and Iarnród Éireann led by the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, ended without agreement.
I have responsibility for policy and overall funding for public transport. As I have previously stated, the State already makes a very large and recurring contribution to Iarnród Éireann. This year, that will amount to more than €300 million in current and capital expenditure.
As the Deputy knows, I am not involved in the day-to-day operations of public transport. Industrial relations and pay are a matter for the company and its employees. Pay disputes have to be solved by engagement between employers and staff. The State can assist through the normal industrial relations machinery available in these circumstances, and the Labour Court and Workplace Relations Commission are the appropriate fora for these discussions.
As I stated in response to previous questions and as the Deputy will be aware, I previously committed to meeting with trade unions in the transport sector once industrial relations disputes were fully resolved. A meeting took place on 10 July and proved useful and informative to me and the trade unions. The purpose of the meeting was to allow trade unions an opportunity to outline any issues of concern about policy as may have been expressed in recent months. I again made it clear at that meeting that it was not appropriate for me to be involved in industrial relations negotiations. They and others expressed their views on this matter very strongly and eloquently.
It is disappointing that the discussions at the WRC did not reach agreement recently. Everyone knows this situation will require these discussions to continue in order for a resolution to be found.
The reason the discussions at the WRC did not reach agreement was because the management proposal was extremely aggressive. In real terms, it was effectively a wage cut. There was an official nominal increase of 1.5%. However, there were 18 conditions attached, including a reduction in contract hours, accepting outsourcing, forced redeployment and freezing increments. We spoke to workers for whom that would mean an effective pay cut of at least €60 per week. The workers are absolutely correct to take action.
Obviously, the Minister does the usual routine of Ministers for Transport, Tourism and Sport when industrial situations arise, namely, to say this has nothing to do with them. The problem the Minister has is that he has a report on his desk, the rail review from the NTA, which recommends that €125 million be given to Irish Rail to compensate for underfunding from 2010 to 2016, inclusive. It would make a significant difference to the legacy debt of Irish Rail, which stands at €160 million and which is clearly a large part of the context of this discussion. Will the Minister agree to at least do that?
I will not comment with such authority as Deputy Murphy on the negotiations which took place. I will not make any comment on the merits of the proposal which was made to both parties. That is a matter for both parties to resolve between themselves, as they have done in previous disputes involving the subsidiaries of CIE companies.
I deeply regret that there is a dispute of this sort. My job is to represent the interests of the taxpaying public and passengers and to express the hope that both parties will get together and once again resume talks in order that we can have a secure and efficient company.
The Deputy is correct when he talks about the rail review having acknowledged the problems. The report, which is sitting on my desk, refers to significant problems. The problems are being and will be addressed. I have already expressed to other Deputies the essential nature of publishing the national framework report before making dramatic decisions on funding or on the future of Iarnród Éireann.
Let us put some facts on the table. Passenger numbers and revenue are at an all-time high in Irish Rail. However, due to cuts, it is spending all of the available money on track and engine maintenance. More people are using rail services. There is a very important ideological element which comes from the Government and Irish Rail management and the chief executive officer, CEO, Mr. David Franks. It is an agenda of underfunding, outsourcing and privatisation. It is an agenda which sees it as acceptable that the CEO would spend at least €20,000 on a fishing trip to entertain European rail CEOs, while not being willing to offer his workers a decent deal.
The CEO has come from Keolis UK in Britain, which has newly-privatised railways, and the outsourcing of Irish Rail services was pushed through even though they are more expensive when delivered by a subcontractor than when run by Irish Rail. I warn the Minister that if he continues on this road he is liable to further undermine and destroy our public transport. We saw what happened in Britain, where the political backlash has resulted in a situation whereby 76% of the public support renationalisation of the railways and redevelopment of public transport as a public service. That is what we should be doing.
I thank the Deputy for his contribution. I wish to once again nail the privatisation myth that he seems to peddle as some sort of mantra for his troops. Perhaps he has not heard what I have repeatedly said in this House and in joint committees, namely, that I am not pursuing the privatisation route in Iarnród Éireann, Bus Éireann or Dublin Bus.
That is not the intention. The problems of funding, which the Deputy correctly highlighted, will have to be addressed. There are ones which we share. They will be addressed effectively. It is very difficult to address such problems when there is an industrial dispute threatening and, as the Deputy said, despite the fact that passenger numbers are rising, thank God, but the company still finds itself in a critical situation. I will be addressing those problems, not under the threat of any industrial difficulties which we have but in the long term. The problems are and will be addressed.
5. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport when the section of the Road Traffic Act 2016 will be commenced which makes vehicle owners liable if they allow an unaccompanied learner to drive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42236/17]
View answerLast week was road safety week but up to a few days ago 118 citizens had, tragically, died on the roads this year. Before last Christmas we passed the Road Traffic Act. Section 35A specifically said it shall be an offence for the owner of a vehicle to allow it to be driven by an unaccompanied learner driver. In the past ten months the Minister has done absolutely nothing to commence the section. As he is aware, the provision came forward in response to calls from the PARC road safety group and also Mr. Noel Clancy, a farmer from north Cork, who tragically lost his wife Geraldine and daughter Louise in a road traffic crash involving an unaccompanied learner driver. The Minister promised just after Christmas that the relevant section would come into force as soon as possible and that he would check with the Attorney General. He also told RTÉ on 6 January last, in response to the Clancy family's demands, that this would be done, but it still has not been done ten months later.
Everything the Deputy said is correct. I am, as I suspect some of those who are present in the House know, totally behind this amendment. I accepted it from the Opposition on the day it was moved and I am still supportive of it. Let me explain what has happened in the meantime. I think Members will probably understand it. Deputy Munster, who proposed the amendment, is in the House.
It is an offence for learner drivers to drive unaccompanied under the Road Traffic Acts and enforcement of this requirement is a matter for An Garda Síochána. During the debate on the Road Traffic Bill 2016, to which Deputy Broughan rightly referred, several Deputies raised the case of Geraldine and Louise Clancy, who were tragically killed in December 2015 in a collision with an unaccompanied learner driver. The Clancy family asked that owners of cars who allowed learners to drive them unaccompanied would be held accountable. Amendments to give effect to that were proposed at the time, and I accepted an amendment proposed by Deputy Munster. Under the amendment it is to be an offence for a vehicle owner to allow a learner to drive their vehicle unaccompanied, with the penalty on conviction of a fine up to a maximum of €2,000 and-or imprisonment up to a maximum of six months. As I stated in the debate, in accepting this amendment, learners who drive unaccompanied are committing an offence, and it is very reasonable that people who knowingly facilitate this offence share responsibility for it. As a result, section 39 of the Road Traffic Act 2016 provides for the offence where the owner of a vehicle allows it to be driven by a learner driver driving unaccompanied.
As there was, unfortunately, no opportunity for full proper legal scrutiny of the text in advance of its adoption, I indicated that the amendment would need such scrutiny before commencement. Preliminary legal advice has been obtained and has outlined a number of issues which would need to be addressed prior to commencement. These include drafting and definitions, the question of strict liability and interaction with other road traffic legislative provisions. However, I am anxious to address this issue and I have asked my officials to look at amending section 41 of the Road Traffic Act 1994, to give power to An Garda Síochána to detain vehicles driven by an unaccompanied learner driver, which they do not currently have.
Everyone needs to be aware that a learner permit is not a licence to drive but a permit allowing somebody to drive without a licence for the purpose of learning. It is not to be treated as a licence, nor do we want to go back to the old culture whereby some people were happy to remain learners for decades. I want to enact this measure and I assure both Deputy Broughan and Deputy Munster that I will do everything to see that this measure is enacted.
The Minister's reply is very disappointing. There does not seem to be any sense of urgency. The previous Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, gave me some very stark figures a few months ago on the number of fatal and serious collisions involving unaccompanied learner drivers between 2012 and the end of November 2016. In 2012 unaccompanied learner drivers were involved in seven fatal collisions and 22 very serious traffic collisions. In 2013 they were involved in four fatal collisions and two unspecified fatal collisions and ten were involved in serious traffic collisions. In 2014 eight learner drivers were involved in fatal traffic collisions and 32 in serious traffic collisions. In 2015 a total of 16 learner drivers were involved in fatal traffic collisions and 24 in serious traffic collisions. Up to November 2016, seven unaccompanied learner drivers were involved in fatal traffic collisions and 24 in serious traffic collisions. Those are very stark figures. I expect Deputy Munster would feel exactly as I do that the Minister is not acting with the sense of urgency that the situation demands. He told us he would get legal advice and he could come forward with whatever amendment is necessary to the 1961 Act or the 1994 Act but he simply has not done so.
Other sections of the 2016 Act have not been commenced, for example, the rickshaw provision. What is the point in coming into the House when the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport is not acting? Looking at the Estimates for the Department I also feel he was shafted in the budget negotiations. We came into the House and spent hours talking about legislation, we passed the legislation and did our legislative job-----
Could Deputy Broughan allow the Minister to respond please?
-----yet the Minister failed to commence it or implement it. He is not doing his job.
I am being too lenient. The Minister has one minute.
Deputy Broughan referred to the Estimates. We will come to that under another heading some other day.
Later today.
What he said is just not true as we got the most enormous injection of money, which I suspect is more than any transport Minister has ever had in terms of capital investment. I will address the point about rickshaws. That was the subject of another amendment I accepted in this House. I referred it to the people who know about it, namely, the NTA, and it is coming forward with proposals to amend the rickshaw legislation and that will be done. The issue is being addressed directly as a result of exchanges in this House and by virtue of the fact that I accepted the proposed amendment.
The reason we are having a debate on this issue is because I accepted Deputy Broughan's amendment. It is not very often that amendments get accepted on the floor of this House. The difficulty is not in the content but in the drafting. The difficulty is in the definitions. That is what I have to clear up. It would be madness for me to go ahead with this particular amendment, laudable and all as it is, if it was to land in the courts on day one. What I want to do is make sure it is robust, bullet-proof and that we do save lives when we introduce the measure. The last thing I want to do is to complicate the law on unaccompanied drivers by accepting an amendment which is flawed. My ambition is to see it through but to see it through as good law.
The Minister has had an opportunity to do something in conjunction with his staff in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. We have had incredible gaps over the years between the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Department of Justice and Equality. The upshot of it is that we still have horrendous lists of tragedies year in and year out on Irish roads.
The Minister referred also to a related matter. I proposed an amendment to the Road Traffic Act 2016 to strengthen the powers of An Garda Síochána where an unaccompanied learner driver is stopped. The Minister accepts that there is still a lacuna in the legislation in that the Garda cannot simply seize the car or ask for somebody with a driving licence to take the car back to where it is based.
The PARC road safety group stated at the time that when a garda stops a learner driver and charges him or her with driving unaccompanied, it certainly makes no sense whatever for the garda to allow the driver to continue driving unaccompanied. The Minister has acknowledged that it needs to be changed but once again we do not seem to have a sense of urgency from him in amending section 41 of the Road Traffic Act 1994. There are also matters relating to the non-payment of fines or fixed-charge notices with regard to unaccompanied drivers. It is a major area of the Minister's brief. President Higgins signed the Act into law before Christmas last year, including provisions for unaccompanied learner drivers, but the bottom line is that we are here, ten months later, still begging the Minister to take action on this. He is still dragging his heels.
I share the Deputy's frustration, and I would say, and I am saying, the same things in many ways. The problem arises if the Deputy wants me simply to defy advice on matters of this sort, as it would probably be grossly irresponsible, particularly where human lives are at stake. We are all on the same side. I want to make sure human lives are saved. I have spent a large amount of time this year on these matters and the signs and statistics are encouraging; they are nothing like good enough but we seem to have made some progress in the area. It is not enough and there is more to do. The Deputy may be right in saying there is need for a greater urgency but we are tackling this in a multifaceted way, with the simple objective of saving lives. I know that is the Deputy's interest. I can guarantee him this will be pursued.
