I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. I welcome the kind comments of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, on section 24, in which he gave me and my party credit for the two Bills I introduced into the House in 2000 and 2002, following our campaign on car theft and "joyriding" crime, which has resulted in so much tragedy and death. While section 24 will address these issues, it is regrettable that the scope of the section is so narrow and that the penalties to be imposed on "joyriding" criminals and those who supply them with vehicles are not more severe. However, it is a step forward for which I commend the Minister and I again thank him for his kind comments, which are deeply appreciated on this side of the House by the Labour Party.
Like many Members I have concerns about implementing the metric system. Yesterday we heard very interesting contributions from all sides of the House on the new metric speed limits. Given that the motor industry has not prepared for this change, we may be entering a dangerous period. My colleague, Deputy Shortall, will try to amend some of the safeguards in the legislation. While I welcome section 11 on exceeding speed limits, the provisions therein require considerable development.
There is general agreement on all sides of the House that the holocaust of death on our roads over the past ten or 15 years, with 4,000 or 5,000 people dead and 4,000 or 5,000 families devastated for years and decades afterwards, is utterly unacceptable. Given the death toll perhaps the Minister should have introduced a much more comprehensive and far-reaching Bill particularly addressing what happens after a fatal road accident. We do not give sufficient attention to the investigation of a death crash. We do not follow up treating the crash as a serious criminal incident, which has taken the life of one of our citizens. In the past I asked questions of the Minister then responsible, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and others as to whether we should have a much more determined system of investigation. The approach seems to be almost apologetic largely due to the tragedy that has befallen the families concerned.
A recent court case resulted in a lengthy sentence for the driver of the vehicle involved in a horrific crash in my constituency in which three young men died, and three families and the whole district of Donaghmede was devastated. While that case stands out, as it was so horrific, many other tragedies also occur. The public feels there is insufficient examination and while I know the Garda makes a report on all serious accidents, which may be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions, we do not have a regime to take these cases sufficiently seriously.
This has been a disastrously disappointing year. Following the massive tragedies last weekend, we are again reflecting and asking how we can bring these to an end. We a need much more far-reaching Bill than this one. We need the involvement of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to try to cope with the weekend mayhem — most of these tragedies occur at weekends. We are again approaching 400 deaths this year.
When we look back at the terrible events in Northern Ireland from 1970 and the number of fatalities and the destruction that horrific war caused to the nation and the people of the island, we can reflect that in the past 15 years or so we have had an even worse holocaust on the roads of Ireland. Government has a grave responsibility to address this matter. In so far as the Road Traffic Bill begins to introduce a more coherent system of signage and sanctions, I welcome it as a step forward.
I welcome the Minister's comments on section 24. When I introduced anti-joyriding Bills in 2000 and 2002, I was told their two main elements were unnecessary and that the 1968 and 1995 Road Traffic Acts adequately covered the problem. They do not and, year after year, joyriding has continued.
Looking back at my Bill in its final incarnation in the run-up to the 2002 general election, key differences between it and this Bill are apparent. In section 3 of my Bill, on summary conviction, a person who sold a vehicle to a minor would be fined €2,000 or given a 12 month jail sentence, with a fine not exceeding €32,000 or a term of imprisonment not exceeding seven years on indictment. The criminals who give or sell cars to children must be severely dealt with. Will the Minister examine the penalty in section 24 and make it more resolute, including punishment on indictment and a prison term for those responsible?
The other major difference is that the Bill sponsored by the Labour Party provided for the offences of supplying or offering to supply a vehicle to an under age driver and of organising, directing or participation in the unlawful taking of a mechanically propelled vehicle for the purpose of dangerous driving in a public place. I had hoped the Government would define the crime of joyriding. This crime should not have such a title, however. It should be called death-riding or grief-riding, as local Dublin newspapers have referred to it. In section 2 of the 2002 Bill, I set out equally severe penalties for those who took part in the crime, defining organising, directing or participating in the taking of a mechanically propelled vehicle as an offence. Deputy Shortall might revisit this on Committee Stage to extend section 24. Death by dangerous driving or serious driving offences do not encompass the disgusting anti-social crime of joyriding.
The Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs comes from the south west of the city and is familiar with this crime. The parks of the south west, just like those of the north and west of the city, are littered with the remains of burnt out vehicles. The Bill should be strengthened because joyriding has not died out, it still exists. In the run-up to Hallowe'en, there were repeated episodes in one area of my constituency. I arrived on a Monday morning for a constituency clinic and saw the remains of five burnt out vehicles, some of them close to households where tormented families had to endure this behaviour during the night.
The Garda has been responsive and brave in pursuing these miscreants and Dublin City Council has also improved the physical infrastructure of the north fringe of the constituency, which has improved the situation on some roads that had been overtaken by development. The problem of joyriding, however, continues. It has not died out and the opportunity is lost in this Bill to introduce a more severe and powerful sanction against people who perpetrate this crime.
The Labour Party understands the nature of the problem. In the lifetime of the previous Dáil, I made 30 contributions on joyriding and raised it with the Taoiseach on many occasions. The sanctions under the Road Traffic Acts are not sufficient and we need a new approach. I was surprised, however, to hear that some of the funding available to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for the youth diversion programme for 2004 has not been spent and money remains for youth diversion and support for youth workers who do such great work in some of these areas. The Labour Party published a ten point programme, of which the Bill I introduced was one aspect, to encourage youth diversion and to combat this problem.
A common feature when dealing with the horrendous death and injury toll on the roads, joyriding and even traffic management is the role of the motor industry. It has been disgraceful. In the run-up to the budget, we will receive glossy brochures from organisations such as the Society for the Irish Motor Industry. It will sell 150,000 vehicles this year but it has not addressed our concerns on a range of issues. Why are cars being sold without a wiper on the back windscreen? Why are cars allowed into the State that have blinding headlights? There are problems with mirrors that cannot be adjusted.
Section 2 of the Bill, however, demonstrates that the previous and current Ministers have not had any negotiations with the motor industry. Speed limit signs will be metric from 1 January 2005 but the imperial speedometer will still be used by the majority of people. The metric speedometer is tiny compared with it. Someone in my family has a car registered in 2004 and even it still has an imperial speedometer. The motor industry should address this issue but it has never been called to account for its lack of action in this area. Some of the wealthiest families in this State owned important motor car marques here for a generation and became extremely wealthy but they have not taken action on these matters. From the start of 2006 we will have the European speedometer with the metric dial to the fore but most of us do not drive brand new cars and we will have to use the imperial measure for many years. There has not been any discussion of this or other safety issues.
With the honourable exception of Mr. Conor Faughnan of the Automobile Association who addressed some of these matters, the Irish motor industry has never taken responsibility for what happens to cars when they become old bangers at 13 or 14 years old.
Four years ago, I asked for an end-of-life, or a death, certificate for cars. A constituent who traded in a 16 or 17 year old car was told it would be brought to Hammond Lane and destroyed. She traded in the vehicle and a week later she was rambling around a shopping centre when she saw her old car being driven around the carpark. There is a grotesque lack of responsibility in the car industry and I would like that addressed by the Minister as a key issue. There is quite a large market for automobiles. A beautiful, glossy presentation from SIMI refers to 150,000 units. The market has been a bit flat this year and only 150,000 units — new cars, etc. — were sold. It is a huge market and some people have become massively wealthy as a result. While I accept the industry has provided much employment, I do not accept the motor industry has taken responsibly for its own products.
Unfortunately, we have had no indigenous car industry since Ford's in Cork. We had an industry on the northside in Santry during Mr. Haughey's time in the early 1980s but we have had no indigenous industry for the past 15 or 20 years.
Despite the fact this is a smaller market, we should insist on standards. In the context of this Bill, will the Minister take strong measures, if necessary, to get the car industry to take safety seriously? Deputy Andrews made a very salient point yesterday when he said there are vehicles which can travel at speeds of 150 miles per hour plus. One would only drive at such speeds in Mondello Park if one was into motor sport. However, I fail to see the necessity for cars to be able to travel at such speeds.
The former Minister, Deputy Brennan, had a run in with the city council over what I called the famous Keegan signs. These crazy signs were put up by the director of traffic with arrows going right and left — in fact, there were arrows going upwards, so one could have taken off on some streets. I thought he wanted areas of the city to be known as J4 and J3 and one would move from J3 to J4. We might be in J1. The signs were chaotic and the Minister rightly put his foot down. We need some coherence in regard to traffic signs.
The most effective signs in my constituency are the 30 mile per hour signs on the actual road. As one drives along, one sees massive signs. I asked for such signs to be painted on the Grange Road heading out to the M50 and I am delighted the city council did so. We need more coherence and we should lay down standards for local government in regard to signage. One only needs to go outside the gates of the House to see the chaos. The director of traffic in Dublin needs to take cognisance of that.