Before the Minister concludes, I want to make some brief remarks concerning one of his responsibilities—the administration of the Road Traffic Act. The Minister need not be perturbed; I think he will get his Estimate this evening. Some weeks ago, there was a private member's motion dealing with road traffic tables which stated:
"That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that, in view of the increasing congestion of traffic on the roads and of the large number of fatal and serious accidents, the Government should without delay bring before the Dáil comprehensive proposals for dealing with the problem."
That motion was tabled following a discussion in our Party on the position regarding road traffic, and when the announcement was made that the Estimate for the Department of Local Government was to be discussed, a request was made to the Minister, through the Whips, that the motion should be taken in conjunction with the Estimate. The Minister could not see his way to do that, and I can understand his reluctance in view of the variety of matters that arise on the Estimate.
It is the view of my Party that the matter should not be allowed to rest until the motion would be taken in the normal course of Dáil business. That might not be for a year hence and the debate on the Estimate for Local Government gives us the only opportunity we have of expressing our concern about the position and our view as to the urgency of the need to do something about it. The existing Road Traffic Act was passed in 1933 and, since then, there has been an enormous increase in the number of vehicles on the roads. The speeds of motor vehicles have also increased considerably since then.
The problem is growing year after year and it is clear it cannot be allowed to go any longer, without receiving the very serious attention of the Government of the day. In other matters Deputies opposite occasionally ask, when proposals are made from this side of the House, why action in the matters mentioned was not taken by the previous Government. That argument does not arise here. It is a growing problem. It is difficult to say at what stage this road traffic problem reached the dimensions which called for early action. It is one that is growing continuously and one that will grow still further as time goes on.
This motion, which was tabled at the instance of the Fianna Fáil Party, refers to comprehensive proposals. We realise that, in dealing with this matter of road traffic problems, new legislation alone is not sufficient. The problems associated with road traffic arise under the head of legislation, under the head of administraiton, under the head of enforcement of regulations and, to some extent, under the head of roads policy. The Minister is not concerned with many of these matters, but he is with some of them. We must face the fact that the number of motor vehicles on our roads has increased for many years past at the rate of 10 per cent. per year. According to the Budget Estimate, the Minister for Finance is assuming an even greater rate of increase this year, because he has based his expectation of revenue for the Road Fund on the assumption of an increase of up to 15 per cent.
Whether that expectation will be realised in face of the circumstances that have since developed is another question, but it is obvious the problem will not diminish. Apart altogether from the continuing and substantial increase in the number of motor vehicles, a very special problem has been raised by the much more spectacular increase in the number of motor cycles. Their number is increasing by 100 per cent. per year and that creates a special problem of its own. The Minister has announced his intention to introduce proposals for legislation to amend the Road Traffic Act of 1933. However, I do not know how serious that intention is. There is no sign of the action on the part of the Government which would normally be expected, if that intention were serious, to arouse public interest in this problem and to provoke public debate on the provisions which should be embodied in the new Bill.
No doubt the public are very much concerned about the position. They note the steady increase in road accidents; the number of fatal and nonfatal accidents is increasing in almost direct proportion to the increases in the number of vehicles. The public are aware of the increasing congestion of traffic in city streets, but they have not yet begun to debate in a public way among themselves the course of action which should be taken in regard to these matters or the type of legislation most suitable. Public debate in advance of the introduction of legislation can only be helpful to the Minister. It is probably true to say, as has been said, that the enforcement of regulations is even more important than the changing or extension of the regulations.
I said earlier to-day in another debate that the Government is always moved by political motives. Perhaps in this matter they do not see political advantage. I want to say that if they think that they are very much mistaken. I believe there is a tremendous amount of public goodwill to be secured by any Government that goes out rigorously to enforce the traffic regulations and to secure the added safety and greater degree of order in the streets which rigorous enforcement of the regulations would secure. We know that although the number of motor vehicles on the road has increased at this 10 per cent. per annum rate the number of Gardaí has not increased at all, and the number of Gardaí on traffic duties is not much larger to-day than it was many years ago when the number of motor vehicles and the dimensions of the traffic problems were a great deal less.
The Minister for Local Government is not responsible for the activities of the Gardaí, and perhaps something can be said on that aspect of the problem in the debate for the Department of Justice, but he is in this position, that under the Road Traffic Act he makes a number of regulations and is, therefore, indirectly responsible for ensuring that those regulations are, in fact, enforced. There is no sense in making them if they are not going to be enforced.
The Minister authorises local authorities to erect traffic lights and other road traffic signs, and these things are very valuable. They are observed and obeyed by the great majority of road users in their own interests. But it would not be an exaggeration to say that in the City of Dublin those traffic lights and signs are ignored and the regulations relatting to them disobeyed a thousand times an hour without the offenders being detected or punished, and that is because of inadequate Garda supervision. Indeed, there is reason to suspect that in recent times there has been a falling off in the effort to enforce the Road Traffic Acts. There is a very striking contrast between the statistics of the number of motor vehicles on the road, and the number of prosecutions for road traffic offences. Although the number of vehicles has increased, and is increasing, at the rate of 10 per cent. per year, and the number of fatal and nonfatal accidents is increasing at the same rate, the number of prosecutions for road traffic offences is falling. Figures have only been published up to 1954. In 1952, there were 78,800 prosecutions for offences under the Road Traffic Act. In 1953 there were 75,020, and in 1954 there were only 58,653. That is to say that although between 1952 and 1954 there was a 10 per cent. increase in the congestion of the traffic on the roads and the number of vehicles in use, and in the number of accidents, the number of prosecutions, cases taken to court, for offences against the regulations fell by 25 per cent.
It may be of assistance to the Minister in this matter to get from the representative of the Party in Opposition an indication of the things we think should be done in order to bring about improvement in the situation. First of all, there is the question of driving tests. We have come to the conclusion that it is wrong to allow a situation to continue in which any person can get a licence to take a motor vehicle on the road without being subjected to some test—first of all a test of his competency to control the vehicle, and secondly, a test of his knowledge of the Road Traffic Regulations. That matter of the institution of a driving test was, of course, considered 25 years ago when the present legislation was being considered, and there was a great deal of argument pro and con. Ultimately the decision was against it. But the change in circumstances since, the considerable expansion in the number of vehicles on the road and the considerable increase in the speeds and sizes of some vehicles, do, in our view, justify the reopening of the issue.
I think it is true to say that the operation of the system of driving tests by other countries has tended to minimise traffic accidents and to secure better conduct on the road. It is recognised that there are, of course, a very large number of motor drivers, some of them perhaps not very competent, who have licences already, and it would probably be impracticable from an administrative point of view to apply a driving test to everybody seeking a renewal of a licence. A driving test should, however, in our view be made a condition of the issue of a new licence, and the Gardaí should, we think, have a right to require any licensed driver, whose competence they have reason to suspect, to submit himself to a test.
In that connection, perhaps not quite relevant but nevertheless associated with the problem, there is the question of the duration of driving licences. At the present time a licence is issued annually, and every driver must renew his licence annually. We note that in Britain under recent legislation it is possible to get a licence for three years. I think there is something to be said for permitting that to happen here, for giving to approved persons, qualified to receive a licence, a licence for a three year period. It probably would reduce considerably the administrative expenses involved in the issue of licences.
The next suggestion we have to make concerns the publication in some way, so that they will be brought to the notice of all licensed drivers, of the road traffic regulations. The Minister has made, under the Road Traffic Act of 1933, a series of regulations governing the conduct of people and vehicles on the roads. I think it is probably true to say that not one driver in a hundred has ever seen those regulations in print, and a very high percentage of them appear not to know that there are regulations there at all. We think that there should be published a suitable handbook, equivalent to the Highway Code in Britain, which would be brought to the attention of all persons receiving driving licences, and that the test for receiving a licence should include, not merely competence in the control of a vehicle but knowledge of the highway code. A handbook of that kind, a code of rules governing conduct on the road, could not be given the exact force of a statute, but it could be provided in the legislation that evidence of a breach of the rules prescribed would be regarded as prima facie evidence of dangerous driving or driving without due consideration to other road users.
That is particularly needed, I think, in the case of motor-cycle owners. One of the complications of our road traffic problems is the very rapid increase in the number of motor-cycles, the 100 per cent. per year extension in that aspect of the problem. It is true to say that the great majority of those who operate motor-cycles are younger people. It is a mode of conveyance that does not recommend itself to people after they have passed a certain period of life, and traditionally those who are younger are more inclined to take chances, to their own risk as well as to the risk of pedestrians and other road users. It is, I think, particularly necessary to bring to the notice of those people the rules that should govern their conduct on the roads.
There is also in the City of Dublin and most Irish cities a special problem relating to pedal cyclists. It is, I think, generally believed that the Gardaí have more or less abandoned the effort to impose order upon pedal cyclists particularly at the rush hours in the city. Mark you, the great majority of cyclists are very well behaved on the road and exercise extreme discretion and caution because they are the most likely sufferers in any traffic accident. Some 26 per cent. of the people who have been killed or injured on the roads in recent years have been pedal cyclists. It is also true to say that there is a minority who act without due consideration and it is, I think, to be emphasised that some 20 per cent. of the pedestrians who are killed or injured on the road are killed or injured by pedal cyclists and not in accidents involving motor cars at all.
There is need to consider the regulations that should govern the operation of pedal cyclists in the city and to consider also the machinery of enforcement which will prove effective in ensuring that inconsiderate or dangerous conduct will be checked. It is also desirable in our view to bring in some system of testing the mechanical efficiency of vehicles. It should be possible to provide for the recognition of garages throughout the country where suitable testing apparatus would be maintained and where the proprietors would be authorised to issue licences of mechanical efficiency. Every motor vehicle should after a period—what the period might be is a matter for consideration—be subjected to test of mechanical efficiency and the Gardaí should have power to require any vehicle they thought suspect to be submitted to a test of mechanical efficiency. They have that power at present so far as public service vehicles are concerned; but, in our view, the power should be taken also to cover vehicles of all kinds and particularly vehicles which are in constant use for commercial purposes.
One of the main problems which has been discussed in the Dáil on previous occasions and which is, indeed, often a matter of public debate is the problem of "drunk driving"; in that regard I think the Minister should give very serious consideration to the wording of the statute. The present statute makes it an offence for a person to be in control of a car when, through drink, he is in such a condition that he is incapable of exercising effective control over such vehicle while in motion. Now that word "incapable" has, as the Minister knows and as Deputies are aware, been frequently used as a means of escape when persons are charged with being drunk in charge of a car. It is desirable that we should seek to amend that phrase so as to make it an offence for a person to be in charge of a car when he has, through drink, put himself in the condition that he cannot exercise due care in its operation. We think that the existing phraseology is too tight and it does not deal with all the problems associated with the control of motor vehicles operated by drivers when under the influence of drink.
In the legislation of some countries it is provided that conviction for drunk driving involves automatic imprisonment. It is, I believe, contrary to legal principles here to provide for minimum penalties and there probably is good reason for that viewpoint. The existing law does provide for the automatic cancellation of driving licences on conviction for drunk driving. Probably it is not desirable to go further than that. But the Minister might consider whether it is not practicable to depart from the normal practice in this case and provide for automatic minimum penalties, including imprisonment, where conviction for drunkenness in charge of a car has been secured.
The next point I want to mention is that of speed limits. Again, the question of imposing maximum speed limits was debated very fully here when the Road Traffic. Act, 1933, was before the House. At that time there was a body of opinion which felt that the provisions of the existing law at the time, which provided for maximum speeds for motor vehicles, should be retained even if the prescribed speeds were amended. There was another body of opinion which held that speed in itself was not dangerous: it was speed in relation to all the surrounding circumstances, and the law was framed on the basis of that view and does not provide for maximum speeds for ordinary motor vehicles. There are maximum speeds, which are perhaps out of date, prescribed under the law for public service and other commercial vehicles; and a local authority can, through a process, secure the prescription of maximum speeds for certain roads or in certain districts.
In our view there should be maximum speeds prescribed for all types of motor traffic in built-up areas. Now the term "built-up areas" is used in Britain and it is not perhaps altogether the most suitable for our circumstances here because our traffic congestion is not yet as great as it is in Britain. But in the centre city streets and particularly in those which are not so wide maximum speeds are undoubtedly a contribution to safety and are likely to facilitate movement of traffic as well, even though they may not be prescribed for some other streets or roads which are also technically perhaps within a built-up area. Whether the speed limits are confined to built-up areas as a whole or whether different speeds are prescribed for different highways in the built-up areas is a matter upon which we have no fixed view. Our view is, however, that the time has come when it is desirable to prescribe maximum speeds for motor vehicles in centre city areas at least.
In many cities in Europe legislation has already been enacted prohibiting the sound of motor horns in towns at any time or after midnight. Deputies who have travelled abroad will, I think, agree with me that on the whole the prohibition of the sounding of motor horns has contributed to safety. The elimination of the driver who depended upon his horn rather than his brake has meant that greater caution is exercised but, apart altogether from the safety element, there is a feeling that the sounding of motor horns in the city area after midnight should be prohibited. There is another observation I might make in that regard.
There is power, I think, for the Minister to prescribe or make regulations controlling the noise of motor vehicles. I do not know what the scope of these regulations are or how they are enforced but I think it is certainly all wrong that a single individual on a motor bicycle can go roaring through the City of Dublin at 2 o'clock in the morning and wake up 250,000 people. There should either be a revision of the regulations, if they are not strict enough, or an enforcement of the regulations, if they are, in order to prevent undue disturbance of the public at night in that way.
Another suggestion we would put forward for consideration is that the registered owner of a motor vehicle should be legally responsible for the manner in which the vehicle is operated. It is a problem for the Gardaí when they are trying to enforce the regulations that they have to prove not merely that the regulations were broken but that the individual charged was responsible for the operation of the car at the time that the breach occurred. One will see a Garda on duty, controlling parking in the city, waiting beside a car until the person who drove it into the parking area in contravention of the parking regulations turns up, so that he can be identified by name. That need not be necessary. I think the law could be amended to provide that the Garda can note the offence merely by recording the registration number of the car, and the owner of the car should be made legally responsible for the way it is controlled, so that prosecution can follow merely by the Garda giving evidence that the car with that registration number was involved in the offence.
As regards road policy, there are a few suggestions which we have been debating. In Britain, in the less frequented streets they had installed what are known as zebra crossings— places where the pedestrian has the right to cross the road and where all traffic must stop to enable the pedestrian to cross the road. There may be need to consider the whole basis of our law in that regard. As I understand it, our existing law provides that the pedestrian has prior right on the roadways and can, in theory, cross the road when, where and how he likes. Many of them do not choose to exercise that right, because they are rather apprehensive of the consequences. Perhaps we might reconsider that problem, in relation to the busier streets on the one hand to ensure there is not unnecessary interruption of traffic as well as the safety of pedestrians and in the less busy streets of the city by giving the pedestrian the right which I mention, the right to stop the traffic to cross the road at specified places.
In continental cities, the practice has been established that the pedestrian is controlled by traffic lights. Here he is not. There the pedestrian has to obey the lights and I may say that I myself was once very nearly arrested for not doing so not so very long ago. As any Dublin citizen would, I exercised my right to step off when I thought fit and I very nearly found myself in the lock-up. In some places, they have special pedestrian crossing lights where the pedestrian is shown by the lights the time he can cross the road. Whether that is practicable or desirable in Dublin is another question. Consideration should be given to the basis of our law prescribing pedestrian rights on the road and to the giving of the facilities which are extended in Britain at zebra crossings to ensure that the pedestrian can cross in the prescribed places and that the traffic will stop. It is true in Britain that there was a number of casualties when these zebra crossings were introduced first but the courts imposed such severe penalties for a breach of that regulation that there is now very little risk in Britain when a pedestrian exercises his right in that way.
There is also probably need to revise the system of one-way streets and to increase considerably the number of one-way streets, particularly in the centre of Dublin, where many of the main and busiest streets are. I presume that the Minister and his Department are giving consideration to the problem of parking facilities. It is quite obvious we are reaching a stage in Dublin in which either the provision of some special parking facilities in the middle of the city will have to be considered, or, alternatively, people will have to be prohibited from parking their cars at all in many of the narrower city streets and the enforcement of that regulation taken in hand. I suppose that at the busy time of the day one would hardly see a "no waiting" sign in Dublin without a car parked under it. Progress through many streets is, therefore, considerably curtailed. That is a matter for the local authorities, but the Minister should consider whether the provisions of the Act require amendment so as to extend the powers of the local authorities in that regard.
As regards roads outside Dublin, I think it is true to say that the great majority of our main roads are quite good enough for the traffic on them at the present time, but I think we must assume that the traffic will continue to increase, and, in the planning of our road policy ahead, we must allow for that increase. In one respect, that is not true. For about ten miles outside Dublin, the traffic congestion on most of the main roads is such that they are now inadequate to enable that traffic to move freely and without undue risk. I gather there is a plan for double-carriage roadways on these main traffic routes outside Dublin and there was a statement made by the county manager of Kildare last week in that connection.
The need for these roads may have been a matter of some controversy some years ago, but I think few Deputies who have put the matter to the test will not agree that the continuing increase in road traffic is now making it a necessity to provide for dual carriage-way roads on all our main traffic arteries outside Dublin for a distance of ten or 15 miles. Beyond that, most of our main roads are quite good enough for the amount of traffic they have to carry at the moment. The only obligation resting on the Minister in that respect is to take into account that at the present rate of progress the number of cars will have multiplied by 50 per cent. in five years and at that stage some revision of our roads programme to meet the increase in traffic may be necessary.
These are the matters which, in the view of the Party in Opposition, the Government should consider when framing this legislation, and we want to urge that the legislation should not be delayed. As far as we are concerned, we are prepared to give the Government every facility in securing its enactment and to co-operate wholeheartedly with them in ensuring that the proposals they bring to the Dáil will be effective to their purpose and generally agreed as far as the Parties in this House are concerned.
