Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Jul 1928

Vol. 25 No. 5

QUESTION ON THE ADJOURNMENT. - CONTROL OF MOTOR BUS TRAFFIC.

The question of the regulation and control of motor bus traffic has been raised on several occasions in this House, and on every occasion that the matter has been raised here we have been answered by the assurance that an Inter-departmental Traffic Committee has been set up by the Ministry, and pending the report and recommendations of that committee nothing in the shape of amending legislation could be considered. The question of introducing an amending Bill regarding traffic regulations in connection with motor buses is a problem in itself, but the administration of the law as we find it to-day is quite another matter. I am here to charge the Minister and the Department responsible for the administration of these traffic regulations with not having these regulations carried out in the way they should be. There is not the supervision one would expect, and which would be in the interests of the travelling public. As a result, within the past seven or eight days two persons have been killed on Merrion Road. I thought fit to put down a question in connection with this matter. The Minister, in reply, gave me information to show that for the first six months of 1927 there were 354 prosecutions for speeding and overcrowding, and 261 convictions were secured. The average fine in the case of those convicted works out at 16s. each. In the first six months of 1928 there were 1,505 prosecutions and 1,266 convictions, and the average fine works out at 13s. 8d. in the case of each person convicted. That would go to show that there is leniency rather than an attempt on the part of the Minister's Department to enforce the existing traffic regulations. There is an increase of almost 300 per cent. in the number of individuals prosecuted, either for exceeding the speed limit or for allowing overcrowding of buses. Nobody, not even the Minister for Justice himself, could suggest that the number of motor buses plying for hire to-day is three times what it was twelve months ago. Therefore there must be a growing disregard on the part of the bus drivers or owners for the existing traffic laws. As to the question of speeding, we are aware that a regulation was recently issued by, I think, the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, under which the speed limit was increased from twelve to twenty miles per hour. I do not think that even that has had the desired effect. I will quote a couple of cases that were brought under the notice of the Courts recently. The most recent case that I have brought to my notice is a case in the Booterstown-Blackrock area, the same area in which those two citizens have recently been killed by buses. This case was tried in the District Court on last Wednesday. I quote from the "Evening Herald" of the same date:

In the Dublin District Court to-day, before Mr. Little, James O'Brien, 33 Moss St., was charged with having driven a Red Car bus at a speed dangerous to the public on the road between Booterstown and Blackrock.

Edward O'Carroll, 75 Lr. Mount St., was charged with a similar offence at the same time and place when he was driving a General bus.

Sergeant Lynch, 25F, who, with Guard Hanrahan, 30F, proved the cases, told the Court that the buses were doing over thirty-two miles an hour and were apparently racing. (That is the point that I want to bring to the Minister's notice.) Each defendant was fined £3, which was reduced to £2 in the case of O'Carroll, who said he had already been fined £2.

Now, here is an individual who is brought up before the District Court and on the first offence is fined £3. The other individual is brought before the Court on a second offence, and when he points that out to the District Justice the fine is immediately reduced to £2. In the Kilmainham District Court about three months ago I noticed another case published in the papers where a bus driver was charged with having fourteen passengers in his bus in excess of its registered carrying capacity. The District Justice fined the driver the sum of 10/-. I understand that the bus was a long-distance one, belonging to the Irish Omnibus Company, and it would only take about two fares to make up that very small fine. On the same day I understand that the Great Southern Railways Company was prosecuted and fined £20 for having one pig in a waggon in excess of the number allowed under the regulations of the Department of Agriculture. Of course, I could quote these cases until 11 o'clock to-morrow night if I wanted to, but I do not want to trouble the Minister.

Keep on till 11 o'clock to-night.

With regard to my own area, I read in the "National and Leinster Times", where the driver of an omnibus was prosecuted. His evidence was that he got a puncture, and that in order to make up the time lost in repairing it he was driving fast. He admitted that he was doing at the rate of thirty-five miles an hour along a certain portion of the road. The Justice said: "Have you ever been up before me before?" and he said that he had not. The Justice then said: "Have you ever been up before me in the Roscrea Court"—he thought he recognised the driver—but the man said no. He was fined 10/-. I submit that these fines, averaging 10/- and 13/8, which have been imposed in the years 1927 and 1928 upon a very large and growing number of drivers who have been endangering the public, will not meet the case and will not bring these road pirates within the limits of the law.

As to overcrowding, I happened on two or three occasions to witness buses leaving Aston Quay and Burgh Quay overcrowded and with people standing in the middle of the buses. I want to know if there are at the points mentioned any police, either in uniform or detectives, responsible for seeing that buses are not overcrowded at the starting point. I looked around on the couple of occasions when I was there, and I certainly could not see any policeman in uniform. I think a policeman in uniform would inspire more fear in the driver than a man in civilian clothes. At any rate, if there is no supervision in connection with the overcrowding of buses at the starting point, I seriously suggest to the Minister that it would be very difficult for a member of the Civic Guard to count the number of passengers in a bus when that bus is travelling at thirty-five or forty miles an hour.

In regard to the whole question of prosecutions, I think it is an absolute disgrace that the driver of the bus, who has instructions to get from one point to another within a certain time, should be prosecuted, and that the owner, who employs that driver and gives him instructions to work to a time-table, should be allowed to go scot free. Imagine a publican in the city of Dublin who allowed liquor to be consumed on his premises after hours being dealt with by having the assistant who served the drink prosecuted, instead of prosecuting the publican who allowed it to be done! I seriously suggest that it is absolutely wrong, from the point of view of good administration, to prosecute and fine the driver and altogether ignore the bus owner, who arranges a certain time-table to be worked to, and who will sack the driver unless he keeps up to it.

The Minister for Justice will say that no case has been proved. I ask him to send one of his office boys down to Eason's, in O'Connell Street, to purchase the time-table of all the buses now plying for hire. If he made a careful examination of that, if he considers the times allowed for travelling to Ballina, Cavan and Limerick, for instance, making allowance for all the official stopping places but disregarding the unofficial stopping places, he would find that they could not complete their journeys in time without doing twenty-five to thirty miles an hour. If a driver does not turn up to time at Limerick, Ballina or Cavan he is probably dismissed. In some cases he is dismissed. What happens to the bus driver who is fined £3 or £4 for exceeding the speed limit or for allowing overcrowding? I can produce facts to the Minister, if he wants them, to show that the bus drivers who are prosecuted and fined are obliged to pay these fines from their miserable weekly wages, and the bus owners are allowed to go scot tree.

I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to a thing that every Deputy who has been watching this matter can see for himself, namely, that buses, plying for public hire in and around the city and suburbs, are allowed to stop in the middle of a busy thoroughfare to pick up and let down passengers without being in any way interfered with by the police. I want to know why the police do not force these people to go into the foot-path before they take up or let down passengers. The Minister for Justice, or any of his officials, could see that for themselves any day of the week in busy thoroughfares in and around Dublin. The Minister, I understand, is the licensing authority in so far as he is the person responsible for issuing licences and for seeing to it that the drivers are capable and competent to drive buses. I understand that the test is not by any means a reliable one, and I would like the Minister to look into that aspect of the case. But my real reason for raising this matter is this: No doubt the Inter-Departmental Committee that was set up a long time ago to inquire into this whole question of the revising of the existing traffic regulations, will report this year, or next year, or sometime or other. Whenever that report is available I assume legislation will follow as a result of their recommendations. I suggest to the Minister that if bus owners are going to be allowed to ply for public hire, the safety of the travelling public should be taken into consideration. If the safety of the travelling public is to be taken into consideration the bus owners should be compelled to insure against damage to person or property. What is going to happen, or who is going to provide money for the widow and the four children of Mr. Nolan, who was killed on Merrion Road last week, or for the dependents of Mr. Egan? Nobody.

If action is taken by the widow against the bus owner responsible for the killing of her husband, no doubt a Dublin jury will award her £1,000, but where will it come from?

From the owner of the bus.

If you inquire you will find that the bus owner has not paid for the bus, to say nothing about paying for the life that has been lost. I suggest that third party insurance should be insisted upon, but I dare say the Minister will say that that is an aspect of the question that will not be dealt with by his Department. I suggest that the minimum fine should be increased, and that there should be more police supervision over over-crowding, instead of asking vigilant members of the Guards to count passengers when a bus is travelling at the rate of thirty or forty miles an hour.

I do not want to take away from the time at the Minister's disposal, but can he say if a magistrate has power to commit to prison a bus driver who is proved to be a danger to the public? I think one magistrate stated the other day that he regretted that he had no such power.

Perhaps the Minister would also state whether it is not a fact that bus traffic in the Free State has been extremely free from accidents? I think bus owners do not want over-crowding, so that whatever regulations the Minister may make will be quite acceptable to them. As a matter of fact, care is taken by drivers to secure that the passengers are conveyed with safety. That is proved by the fact that bus travelling in the Free State has been freer from accident than in any other country in the world.

This is a very large question which has been opened up, and I am asked to deal with it in the very short period of six minutes, which I think is rather unfair. However, I will endeavour to get over as much ground as I possibly can in that time. Deputy Davin started off with an attack on my Department. He said it was over-lenient in enforcing regulations, and he quoted as proof of that the average sum payable in fines for the last six months as working out at 13/8.

I do not know whether Deputy Davin is quite serious in making that charge against my Department. As far as this matter is concerned, my Department is the Courts. What can the Guards do except bring prosecutions? They have brought prosecutions. They brought 1,104 prosecutions for speeding, and succeeded in 913. They brought 401 cases of over-crowding, and they succeeded in 353. They come into court and the magistrate fixes the fine which he considers to be right. I have no power to increase that fine which the magistrate fixes.

You have power to make laws fixing the minimum fine.

There is no such law at the present time, and I have no power to make regulations fixing a minimum fine. I have no power to make laws. The Dáil makes them. The Deputy, as a matter of fact, started by saying that he was simply going to deal with the efficiency in administering the existing law by my Department. My Department has nothing whatever to do with the amount of the fines. The only way in which I am in the slightest bit interested in the amount of the fines is if a petition is brought before me—and petitions have been brought before me by motor drivers and by motor owners or by persons who considered themselves aggrieved—then I can exercise the prerogative of mercy and reduce the fine. I have got absolutely no power to increase any fine which has been imposed, and when Deputy Davin attacks the Guards and attacks the way in which they are administering the law, he attacks them upon the ground——

There was no attack on the Guards.

—that the fines are light, then I submit to the Deputy that that is not a fair method of attack. I am perfectly sure that the Deputy would not attack the Guards intentionally.

I did not do it.

What is he attacking? He says the law is not being enforced.

Effectively.

That is not an attack on the Guards.

I am endeavouring to establish the proposition that the law is being enforced by the Guards and being enforced effectively, and it is not fair criticism of them to say that the fines are too low, because fines are matters which are entirely within the purview of the magistrate. No one else can deal with the fines except the magistrate. Deputy Davin also said that the large number of convictions showed that there was a growing disregard for existing traffic laws. There may be. It might be that competition amongst drivers and bus owners is forcing them into disregard of existing traffic laws. I think it is highly probable—I do not want in any way to pre-judge what may be found by this Committee when it reports— but I think I can go this length and say that it is open to argument, at any rate, that in certain places there are more buses in competition than the traffic can justify, and that possibly—I will not go any further—competition is forcing persons into a disregard of the existing law, and that that is why the number of prosecutions have been increased five times within the last quarter, as compared with the corresponding period last year. I would ask Deputy Davin if there was not another conclusion to be drawn and if the conclusion is not this: that the Guards are doing their work very well and very effectively. There will be, and must be. cases of speeding which pass undetected. There are other cases which are detected and the number of detections show that this matter is receiving careful consideration, and that it is also being competently and effectively dealt with at present. Of course, the whole question of the supervision of road traffic regulations requires to be amended. This bus traffic is an entirely new problem and must be dealt with as such. But I would like to point out to Deputy Davin that I have received a great number of complaints from bus drivers. that they are unduly harassed and prosecuted. If I find the bus drivers say-find Deputy Davin attacking the prosecutions as being unduly lenient I think that probably the truth lies between the two, and I would ask the House to believe that the Guards are coping with this difficult problem in as careful and skilful a manner as they possibly can. Deputy Davin went on to talk of the over-crowding of buses when starting. I cannot answer him on that particular question. He said that on two occasions he saw buses starting from O'Connell bridge over-crowded. I do not think that would be a normal arrangement because I know that the question of traffic from O'Connell Bridge was carefully gone into. One of the District Justices was kind enough when certain cases came before him to offer himself, as it were, as an arbitrator between the various bus companies which start from there, and between themselves the bus companies made an arrangement by which they would start at different times so that that class of competition would be obviated.

It being now 11 p.m. the Dáil adjourned until 3 o'clock on Wednesday, 18th July, 1928.

Barr
Roinn