Fergus O'Dowd
Ceist:7 Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Transport if additional public expenditure is requested or planned for the Dublin Port tunnel; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32959/08]
Priority Questions.
Road Network.
I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in regard to the national roads programme element of Transport 21. However, under the Roads Act 1993, the implementation of individual national road projects and the allocation of funding for the construction or maintenance of such projects are matters for the National Roads Authority, NRA, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned.
The construction of the Dublin Port tunnel project was procured by Dublin City Council and funded through the NRA. I understand from the NRA that the estimated final outturn cost of the tunnel remains at €751 million. The twofold purpose of the port tunnel and the heavy goods vehicles, HGV, management strategy which goes with it is to improve the flow of goods to and from Dublin Port and to remove heavy goods vehicles from the streets of the city. To date, good progress has been made on both of these objectives.
There is serious concern regarding the cost of the port tunnel project in view of the several significant changes that have been made by the NRA. These changes have not been identified individually to me but there are clearly cost implications. They arise as a consequence of an internal report compiled by the port tunnel operators, EGIS, which indicated the existence of serious issues regarding the safety performance of the tunnel, relating specifically to the Scada system. Has the architecture of the Scada system been redesigned and replaced? Have unsuitable computer components been replaced? Has the capacity of the Scada system to respond in a safe and correct manner to emergencies been reconfigured and, if so, what has been the cost of this change? The fundamental issue is safety. I understand the Minister has responsibility to issue a safety audit directly to the European Union.
I have responsibility to report to the European Commission in regard to the safety of this and other tunnels. I have not taken over any safety functions in regard to the tunnel itself other than to make that report. The most recent of these reports was submitted to the EU on 25 or 26 September.
The issues to which the Deputy refers were the subject of publicity in the recent past. They are a matter for the NRA and the companies concerned. The Deputy is correct that the Scada system had to be repaired and replaced. Most of the work identified as necessary in the EGIS report has been completed and the safety system is working well. I am assured by the NRA that it will at no time allow the safety of tunnel users to be compromised in any way. That is its paramount concern. Whenever a safety issue arises, the first recourse is to ensure there is nobody in the tunnel and that it is blocked off. Deputy O'Dowd and I have made that discovery from time to time.
In regard to the specifics of what is happening with the Scada system, I understand it is a contractual matter. I am not aware of any request for additional public expenditure on that basis.
Did the report to which the Minister referred involve an independent audit or was it an in-house report? Will he publish it or offer us a brief summary of its findings? Is he absolutely satisfied there are no safety issues in regard to the operation of the tunnel, particularly in terms of the Scada system? That system cost €30 million to install and the evidence of the internal report suggests it is entirely unsuitable for the operation of a tunnel system.
The report, which was completed last March or April, identified improvements needed to the Scada system. My understanding is that almost all the problems highlighted have been dealt with on the basis of the report as part of the upgrading of the system. In regard to the report submitted by my Department to the European Commission, it is a matter for the latter as to whether it is published. I presume that will happen at some stage.
Will the Minister make the report available to the House?
I cannot do so. It is for the Commission to decide whether it is published.
Will he provide a summary of the findings?
The main point is that the port tunnel is deemed to be safe, as is the Jack Lynch tunnel. The report also provides a summary of all incidents and how they were handled.
Rail Services.
Thomas P. Broughan
Ceist:8 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Transport the estimated completion date for metro north; if he has been informed of or has been in discussions on potential substantial changes to the design plans for metro north, including the proposed underground sections; the impact such changes will have on the current tendering and planning processes for metro north; if he has been briefed by the Railway Procurement Agency on this matter; if other changes are planned for critical Transport 21 investment in 2009 and 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32685/08]
There have been no substantial changes to the design plans for metro north, nor are any under consideration by the Government. The Railway Procurement Agency, RPA, placed copies of the railway order application on display on 17 September in accordance with the six-week statutory public notice requirement pursuant to section 37 of the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act 2001. This application defines all the principal elements of the project, including the proposed alignment, underground sections and station locations.
The Railway Procurement Agency continues to make good progress on the public private partnership, PPP, tender process for metro north. The initial phase of the PPP public procurement process was conducted in 2007, resulting in the formation of four pre-qualified consortia for the purpose of tendering for the project. Tender documentation was formally issued to the four pre-qualified consortia on 12 May 2008. Since then the RPA has held a number of meetings with the consortia. Following on from a request from some of the consortia, the RPA recently agreed to extend the closing date for submission of tenders by two months. Receipt of tenders is now required by 6 February 2009.
The target date for the completion of metro north is 2013 but that is dependent on the outcome of the planning and procurement processes. A final decision on the project will be taken by the Government once the planning and procurement processes are complete. The Government remains committed to the implementation of the metro north project, which is contained in the Transport 21 strategy to transform the public transport system in the greater Dublin area.
With regard to the wider Transport 21 investment, several national road and public transport projects that are currently under construction will be completed in the next two years. The start and completion dates of projects that have not yet commenced will be determined by the funding allocation available during the current difficult economic climate. The commencement dates for these projects will also be influenced by the time taken for public consultation, the relevant statutory process and the procurement and contract award processes.
Constituents in north County Dublin will be concerned by the Minister's statement that "no substantial changes" to the metro north plan are envisaged. The Minister for Finance's comments during the summer on the importance of assessing value for money have given rise to grave concerns. There is a general understanding of the need to assess the costs of all infrastructural projects, but comments by the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, suggested he was less than committed to the project.
Will the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, offer a categorical guarantee that the railway order, as publicly presented, for a metro line of 18 km running from north of Swords to St. Stephen's Green will go ahead as planned and as close as possible to the timetable? That is the assurance people seek. The Minister has said there will be no substantial changes to the project. Can he offer an assurance that the plan will not be altered so that instead of a metro system, we are given a right rail system, super busway or something else? Can the Minister guarantee there will be no scaling back in this regard?
What costs have been expended in 2008 in regard to the metro project? What will happen in 2009 and into 2010 and 2011 in regard to planning costs? As I understand it, the four applicants who now have until 21 February 2009 to submit the first tenders have all budgeted on the basis the "big dig" will start in late 2011. Has the Minister discussed this project with his Green Party colleagues? Has he had a specific discussion with the Minister for Finance? Has the Minister called on the Railway Procurement Agency to discuss any possible changes to the metro north project?
The word substantial in the reply was directed at answering the concerns raised by the article to which the Deputy, rightly, adverts, whereby someone decided that the metro project was going to turn into some kind of light rail project or something else. There is no truth to any of this and I can give the assurance the Deputy seeks. The project will go ahead as per the Railway Order with whatever changes are made by An Bord Pleanála, subject at all times to a cost-benefit analysis that will, necessarily, be done at the end. This happens with all major projects. If the Deputy is asking would I settle for a half-baked Luas or rapid bus transit system instead of the metro, the answer is "No". Such a system would be a waste of taxpayers' money. It would not be a waste of as much taxpayers' money perhaps, but it would be a waste nonetheless. The reason a metro was chosen and the reason the underground proposal was originally chosen for the metro system was to ensure we could get up to 20,000 passengers per hour travelling in either direction at peak times. That is what is required as the population of the north Dublin area could reach 500,000 or 600,000 by 2020.
Does the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, agree that the kind of speculation and alleged leaks regarding serious changes to, or the termination of, the project are damaging to the process? As the Minister is aware, by the time the number of bidders is reduced to two tenders, very significant spending will have taken place. The Minister has given no indication of RPA spending in this area throughout the tendering process, which is a key factor. Already, State expenditure is underway.
Has the Minister discussed the matters outlined in the environmental impact statement, EIS, with Dublin City Manager, Mr. John Tierney, who, the Minister says, is the man in charge of the "big dig"? The EIS, which can be studied in Fingal Council and Dublin City Hall, includes such issues as the removal of Dan O'Connell's statue and various other changes necessary for the "big dig" to take place. Has the Minister spoken to the city manager and asked for a scoping programme through the digging?
I will go through the various questions. Deputy Broughan asked in the previous set of supplementary questions about the Green Party. My Green Party colleagues have been most supportive of this project. The have strongly expressed the need to move forward with this project, which I appreciate.
Regarding speculation, the Deputy raised a similar question before the summer. In our exchange then I said speculation could damage the tendering prospects. I agree that speculation and the kind of stories that have been fed, from whatever source, could damage the tendering process, especially at this sensitive time. Spending is ongoing and provision will be made in the Estimates for what the RPA believes is necessary to spend on this project in 2009.
On the final point, as recently as this week and on a quarterly basis I engage with all the agencies, including the CIE companies, the Garda, Dublin City Council, Dublin City Business Association and the Dublin Chamber of Commerce on the roll-out of the plan to ensure the city is kept going.
Public Transport.
Fergus O'Dowd
Ceist:9 Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Transport the action he is taking to open the Dublin bus market to further competition and to increase bus capacity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32957/08]
In accordance with the programme for Government commitment, the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 was enacted in July 2008 and provides for the establishment of the Dublin Transport Authority, DTA. For the first time, we have a law in place to ensure that a single body will be in charge of surface transport in the greater Dublin area.
The Act gives the new Dublin Transport Authority the power to procure public passenger transport services through the making of public transport services contracts. Under section 48 of the Act, the DTA may enter into contracts following open tendering in respect of public bus passenger services, as well as metro and light rail services. It also provides that public bus and rail services can be secured by means of direct award contracts. Section 52 provides that direct award contracts will only apply to the continued provision of the services currently being provided by Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann.
Accordingly, the future growth in the market for subvented public bus services will be pursued by way of open tendering in accordance with the new EU Regulation No. 1370/2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road, which will become mandatory from December 2009. All contracts will be framed against the background of this EU law and will set strict standards of operational performance and customer service and will contain penalties for non-performance.
For the time being, the Road Transport Act 1932 will continue to be the basis for the licensing of commercial bus services provided by private operators. The programme for Government does, however, include a commitment to improving bus services under Transport 21 by reforming the bus licensing provisions of the Road Transport Act 1932.
It is my intention that proposals for a new bus licensing regime will follow in a public transport regulation Bill which will deal with the replacement of the Road Transport Act 1932 and the provisions of the Transport Act 1958 that relate to the provision of bus services by the State bus companies. It is envisaged that the new licensing structure will apply in respect of all commercial bus services, including those provided by Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann and will encompass provisions relating to the subvented bus market outside the greater Dublin area that are consistent with the new EU public service obligation regulation.
I welcome the Minister's commitment to reforming the 1932 Act. This matter was raised during the DTA debate. When will this legislation be before the House? Will it be this term?
The second issue I wish to raise concerns Dublin Bus abusing its dominant position in the marketplace. The Circle Line company went out of business under the present system. One of the reasons for this was that Dublin Bus travelled in convoy before and after the Circle Line buses. Some of the bus stops were obstructed by parked Dublin Bus vehicles at taxpayers' expense to ensure that Circle Line buses could not stop there. The Department produced a report as recently as 2007, indicating that during the previous two years it carried out seven separate monitoring services. It found that Dublin Bus's operating services on the 25x route were well in excess of the approved levels, that the company operated the 25A service in a way that bears no resemblance to the timetable and that its buses were travelling in convoy. There was a private operator with a licence operating a route with three Dublin Bus vehicles travelling before and after its vehicles, and at the bus stops there were Dublin Bus vehicles parked as well. That is an absolute abuse of the company's privileged and dominant position in the marketplace and it is being done with taxpayers' money. Will the Minister prosecute Dublin Bus in this area? Will he hold the company to account for its abuse of taxpayers money and, most of all, for depriving commuters of a choice which the Minister and the Department seek?
I confirm to the Deputy that it is my intention to legislate in this area. We are working on the heads of the Bill for the reform of the 1932 Act. We had several very good discussions on the DTA Bill. Deputy O'Dowd made several points on the 1932 Act and regulation. I have taken those into consideration in this reform and in the Bill we are bringing forward. The heads are nearly prepared and within a few weeks I should be able to circulate the heads of the Bill to the Government. I am not sure I will be able to publish the Bill during the current session. It depends on the difficulties with drafting. As I said all along, it is my intention, and I gave the Deputy that commitment, that we will proceed as quickly as we can. Much work has been done on that Bill.
I do not want to say too much about the case the Deputy has referred to because of ongoing court cases in that regard, but it is a perfect illustration of the reason we need to change the 1932 Act. I do not disagree with the Deputy's contention in that regard. The powers in the Act are weak. For some time Dublin Bus argued the case that it felt it was doing nothing wrong and there was some legal doubt as to whether that was the case. Even if it is prosecuted successfully, the levels of fines and so on in the Act are ridiculous and from that point of view the Deputy and myself are ad idem. We may have differences in terms of the actual Bill but we are——
I acknowledge what the Minister is saying but I do not accept that he cannot take action against Dublin Bus. Even if the action results in a court fine, whatever that is, the Minister and the Government must say to Dublin Bus that it will not get away with abusing the rights of consumers to have a choice, the rights of private operators to run these buses and the right of people to stand at a bus stop and get on a bus of their choice. The Minister and his Department must defend them and bring Dublin Bus to court.
It is not the Department that takes it to court; it is the Garda. It is a prosecution.
The Minister put the statutory powers in place.
The Deputy appears to have got much of the information through a freedom of information request. He acknowledged that the Department sent out inspectors.
It did, but there has been no action.
They engaged in correspondence. Dublin Bus is on notice since then that in future I will not be issuing letters to it on this matter. I will be issuing directives and directions if it comes to my attention that it is engaged in that kind of behaviour.
In the first instance.
In the first instance, yes.
Road Network.
Thomas P. Broughan
Ceist:10 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Transport the contacts he has had with the National Roads Authority on the recent introduction of barrier free tolling on the M50; if he will direct the NRA, under section 41 of the Roads Act 1993, to review the operation of the barrier free tolling system, particularly in relation to the issuing of inaccurate fines and serious resulting problems for commuters and transport companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32510/08]
I have overall responsibility for policy and funding in respect of the national roads. The implementation of any individual road project is a matter for the National Roads Authority under the Roads Acts.
In addition, the statutory power to levy tolls on national roads, make toll by-laws and enter into toll agreements with private investors in respect of national roads is vested in the NRA under Part V of the Roads Act 1993, as amended by the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the Roads Act 2007.
I understand from the NRA that, in common with similar such systems around the world, there have inevitably been some initial difficulties with the M50 system. These include difficulties getting through to the customer service call centre and errors where the wrong person has been billed for a toll.
However, it is important to put these problems into context. The volume of calls to the call centre has far exceeded all predictions and the number of billing errors is less than one half of one per cent of all traffic. The NRA and its toll operator, eFlow, are working hard to put in place measures that will correct these problems.
With the system in operation for only a short period, it is still too early to comment with any degree of certainty on many aspects of its implementation. However, early indications are that overall it is operating successfully. Take-up on the electronic registration system has exceeded expectations and traffic flow has improved significantly on the route, thus making a positive contribution towards the easing of congestion for all road users.
I am assured by the NRA that the initial difficulties are being addressed and that within a matter of weeks the NRA expects these difficulties to have been, if not entirely eliminated — which would be somewhat of a miracle — substantially alleviated. My officials will continue to monitor the situation as we have done since it started operation.
In those circumstances, I do not propose to use my powers under section 41 of the Roads Act 1993 to make a direction to the NRA in this matter.
The first question I asked was the number of motorists who have been inaccurately charged or fined. Is the Minister saying it is 500 a day? Is that the Minister's information? A report in today's newspapers indicates that approximately 10,000 motorists a day are being inaccurately recorded or pursued for a fine. From the volume of letters and e-mails I get, it appears the situation is chaotic for many motorists. I have an e-mail from an angry motorist who was at home asleep in bed at 6 o'clock when his mother's car was recorded on the M50 and incurred a toll. It is a car he occasionally drives but on that occasion it was parked in the front yard. I have correspondence from many others in the same situation, including somebody who went through with a tag but then got a letter saying he had not paid. He rang the customer care call centre and was told they would get back to him within 48 hours. They did not get back to him. For a significant number of drivers — 200 a day or even 500 a day, which the company is saying to some of the media — that is outrageous.
There is also the ongoing chaos that transport companies and many other firms are having to endure. We hear of companies who have had to put a number of their staff working on problems to do with the M50 toll and nothing else. The cost-benefit of this system would appear to be quite bad for some business in some respects. The barrier should not have been put there in the first place. It should have been lifted, particularly given the dark history of the setting up of the toll.
Has the Minister spoken to Fred Barry and the National Roads Authority about this matter? How many people have been put through such grave inconvenience and are the many horror stories coming to myself and other public representatives and spokespersons not the norm for many people using the system?
Does the Minister understand the sense of injustice people feel that at least 5%, and possibly a much higher number, of the 100,000 users per day will not be able to be fined or charged because they are foreign drivers, due to the difficulty of tracing them? We know that from the penalty points system, where one third of penalty points are issued to foreigners. Is this not a mess and is it not time the Minister called in the NRA representatives and reported in detail to this House on the way the M50 toll is operating?
There is no use hiding behind this nonsense and saying he cannot report on huge elements in a transport portfolio. The same response was given to the last question put by my Fine Gael colleague. It is complete nonsense. The Deputy is the Minister for Transport and he should be able to give us the full details of any major transport development, including this important road for the whole of the central Leinster region.
Hear, hear.
There is nothing to stop the Deputy, who is a member of the Joint Committee on Transport, from inviting——
Will the Minister give me a break? The Chairman is Deputy Frank Fahey.
——in Fred Barry or the NRA. I am sure they would be delighted to come in.
I have done that.
To inform the Deputy, 2.8 million journeys have now been transacted through that barrier free tolling system. It has cut half an hour off the southbound journey for motorists, which is a major plus. Approximately 95,000 to 105,000 vehicles per day use the system. A total of 66% of the journeys are by registered vehicles with either a tag or a video account. One third of the journeys in the system are "pay as you go". The read inaccuracy figure is 0.2% according to the NRA. Therefore, it is achieving a read rate of 99.8%.
Is the Minister saying 200 drivers——
There is a difficulty in terms of people not having their tags fitted properly or having damaged registration plates and so on. There is also a difficulty where people have not updated their registration numbers on to the eFlow or other systems in place. The NRA has engaged with all the companies and cross-checking is being carried out. Some people's cars have not been updated on the national vehicle and driver file, NVDF, for one reason or another. I know of one instance where a car that was scrapped apparently went through the system because there was a problem with the garage completion certificate.
There are problems. In fairness to the NRA, it made it clear at the outset that there would be teething problems with the system. The initial problems with the call centre caused the public the greatest amount of aggravation. People had to wait for a long time to talk to someone — some people had to hang up and try again — because a substantial number of calls were being received. The call centre was handling approximately 12,000 calls a day. I understand that the response rate has been improved to the extent that 71% of calls are now answered within 20 seconds. Just 2.4% of calls are not answered.
My colleague, Senator Hannigan, has suggested that the Minister should introduce a regulation whereby a fine of €50 is imposed on the NRA and the relevant tag company every time a mistake of this nature is made. Does the Minister agree that drivers and businesses which are treated badly should be able to avail of some form of recompense? Does he agree that the imposition of a fine of €50 on the NRA in such circumstances would be appropriate?
I understand that the total revenue from the toll is approximately €80 million a year. In that context, does the Minister agree with Mr. Conor Faughnan of the AA that up to one third of that revenue will be used to meet the costs associated with the frenetic activity needed to try to get the tags through? The staff in the back office will have to be paid, for example. Will almost €30 million be spent on running the system? If that is the case, barely €50 million will be left over as a result of the shabby deal that was done with NTR when the toll was bought out.
I do not agree with the proposal to impose a fine of €50 when a mistake is made. In many cases, people are sent letters informing them they owe money because the tag on their car has been fitted incorrectly. It would be grossly unfair to blame the operator for people's inability to follow the instructions which are supplied with all tags. I agree we need to minimise the number of misreads. People can help themselves by ensuring that the information they give the various companies is accurate and up to date. They should ensure that their car number plates are clean and the system is up to date. An appeals system is available and people should use it if necessary. I agree with the Deputy that action is needed in this regard.
What is the cost of administration?
I do not have that figure to hand. If the €50 million figure is accurate, I will not turn my nose up at it. In the current climate, I would be delighted to get it.
Driver Licensing Regulations.
Shane McEntee
Ceist:11 Deputy Shane McEntee asked the Minister for Transport his views on the large number of learner drivers being caught without an accompanying driver; the contact he has had with the Road Safety Authority to explore policy proposals in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32958/08]
The driver licensing regulations, which were made in October 2007, represented the first step in the fundamental reform of the arrangements for the formation and licensing of learner drivers. The replacement of the provisional licence with the learner permit was designed to emphasise the fact that extra caution and supervision are required when drivers are in the learning phase of driving. The regulations apply consistent rules to learner drivers in so far as all such drivers must now be accompanied by holders of full licences while driving. Since 30 June last, all learner drivers must be accompanied by a person who has held a full driving licence for at least two years. Prior to that, holders of a second provisional licence were in the unique position of being allowed to drive unaccompanied. Provisional licence holders on their first, third and subsequent licences had to be accompanied by a person with a full driving licence, with no minimum period specified. The reform of the accompanying rule for learner drivers is an important element of the 2007-12 road safety strategy. The enforcement of the accompanying rule, like all road safety regulations, is a matter for the Garda Síochána. In recent weeks, the force has indicated that the rule is being actively enforced. I have not discussed this issue with the Road Safety Authority recently. I do not have any additional policy proposals on the matter.
The recent changes which were made to the learner driver licensing rules are beneficial for road safety. I am pleased that the law is being enforced and that the number of road deaths is continuing to fall. There have been 219 fatalities so far this year, sadly. That figure is 32 lower than the figure for the first nine months of last year, however. The number of fatalities in the three months since I introduced the new provisions is 74, which represents a dramatic decrease. There were 87 fatalities in the corresponding period last year.
In the period between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2007, there was just one month in which the number of road fatalities was lower than 20. There have already been four such months in 2008. As Fine Gael's spokesman on road safety, I congratulate everyone, including the Ministers and Ministers of State and the officials from the Road Safety Authority, who contributed to this decrease. Long may it continue. I hope there will be fewer than 20 road fatalities every month by the time the Minister for Transport leaves office. I am sure he is not going to Europe and that he will stay with us for the next four years. I do not believe what I see in the newspapers in that regard. I congratulate everyone involved in the welcome decline in road deaths throughout the country. It has not happened by chance. Decisions had to be made and laws had to be implemented. While the figures are decreasing, there is further room for improvement.
There were 18 fatalities on our roads in September. I visited the home of one of those victims before I came to the House this morning and it brought me back down to earth after last night's events. A 23 year old man, Mr. Galligan, was killed. His two week old child was sitting beside his coffin before it left the house. That brought me down to earth and back to my own brief. I am not too worried about other things.
I reiterate that while we are moving in the right direction, there is room for improvement. I would like the Minister to consider a few proposals. The Joint Committee on Transport is proposing a joint approach in this regard. It has asked Mr. Noel Brett of the Road Safety Authority to pursue the possibility of developing off-road training centres throughout the country. As Fine Gael's spokesman on road safety, I brought this idea to the schools three years ago and it has become a reality in County Kildare. I have met Mr. Brett and several other people from counties like Kerry, Wexford and Galway, and some of them do not seem to want to take the steps necessary to develop this idea. Motorcyclists and lorry drivers are legally required to go to training centres, but ordinary motorists do not have to do so, for some unknown reason. I ask the Minister and the Ministers of State to attend the meeting of the joint committee at which this matter will be discussed.
I thank Deputy McEntee for his favourable comments. I am sure those in the Road Safety Authority and the Department who have been dealing with this matter for some years will be heartened by the Deputy's comments. While a single fatality is one too many, the reduction of 32 in this year's number of fatalities is great. We would like to think we could achieve a similar reduction every year, but we know that these figures tend to go up and down. The important thing is to try to secure a consistent trend. As I have not been in the Department a wet day, I cannot claim any of the credit for the recent improvement in this area.
The Minister of State has been asleep for a few weeks.
Having said that, I am heartened by Deputy McEntee's comments. I agree that there is still huge room for improvement in the number of fatalities. As the five-year strategy is implemented, I hope we can meet our target of having fewer than 20 fatalities every month. I accept that the Deputy wishes to raise certain issue with Mr. Noel Brett. Perhaps it will be appropriate to do so when Mr. Brett attends a meeting of the joint committee.
Full-time road safety officers have been appointed in just four or five counties. The appointment of more officers would be helpful. I am sure the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, will agree that the appointment of Mr. Michael Finnegan as the road safety officer for County Meath has had a serious impact throughout the county. He has made it his business to visit every school throughout the county and he has changed the speed limits outside them. Traffic calming measures have been put in place and if possible lights have also been put in place. Will the Government make it a priority to insist that in every county a person is appointed full time and not part time as a road safety officer?
We will encourage local authorities to do so. I agree that education is a major part of the strategy dealing with young people. It may not do much for short-term figures but if young people can be reached and made aware of the dangers it is beneficial. I support all of Deputy McEntee's suggestions.