Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 13 Dec 2017

Vol. 963 No. 2

Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I call Deputy Michael Healy-Rae who has 20 minutes.

Before we start to debate this very important amendment the Minister has brought before the House, I want to place on record my sympathy to every person who had a loved one who lost his or her life on the road. I am very sorry for them. Many friends of mine lost their lives or were seriously injured in different types of accidents on our roads. I was with a very close friend of mine the day he died. Myself and my father were with him earlier that morning. I was to meet him again that evening but, unfortunately, I never got to meet him again because he passed away in a tragic accident. I know at first hand what it is like to lose people we care about on our roads. I want to acknowledge that and put it on the record of the House.

I want to address the Bill the Minister has brought before the House. As he is well aware, I oppose the Bill and I will elaborate on the reason why.

I want to remind the Minister of a way of life. The way of life that I grew up with could be said to have been different from what people have today, but it certainly was not a bad way of life. I believe that the people who were there at that time were very sound, very good, hard-working and nice, honest-to-God people. This has nothing to do with people drinking or drinking to excess or anything like that. It is the complete and absolute opposite. In the parish I grew up in, at one time virtually every person was a milk supplier. They went to the creamery. At that time a lot of milking was done by hand, and perhaps people who were a bit more advanced had milking machines. The people would do a bit of shopping after going to the creamery. There was no such thing as tanks or lorries coming into the yard to take the milk away. People had to carry the milk. One of the things that might have happened on the way home was a trip to the local pub - pubs were open during the day at that time - and having a drink. There was nothing wrong with it. It was a sociable outlet. It involved meeting people. It had nothing to do with anybody drinking to excess.

Over the years there have been changes. The Minister knows that the Department of Health's slogan was "Two will do". That was the limit at the time. The Department was encouraging people back then, telling them that if they were going to have a drink then two drinks was enough. We have to compare like with like. The areas that I am talking about and the places that I represent do not have the public transport systems we have in Dublin. If we go down the street, which was a road before, we can get on the Luas. There are many excellent facilities here in this town. What about the places that I represent? What about the people above in Glencar tonight, where there are two pubs and a small hotel? What about places like the Black Valley, Lauragh, Tuosist, all around the Ring of Kerry, and down into Ballinskelligs, Portmagee, Valentia Island, Chapelstown and Knightstown? These are all places which do not have public transport systems.

I thank and acknowledge the service provided by the rural link bus. There are great operators in County Kerry and we have excellent bus drivers, but it is a physical impossibility for those people to provide a service to all of the areas I am talking about. The type of people I am here to talk for tonight are what I would call terrible sound people. They are people who want to go out, socialise and interact with people. Again, it has nothing to do with drinking or drinking to excess. It is people going out to meet their friends and neighbours to discuss politics or the recent football or hurling game. Unfortunately and sadly, we have lost many of these fine people over the years because they have become elderly and died, and we are very sorry to see them go. In the parish that I come from there are people whom I grew up with who I adored, and they are gone to their eternal reward.

It might be thought strange nowadays and there would probably be all types of objections if anyone was doing it, but I used to run from the national school to the public house that my brother now runs in an excellent fashion and that was started by my father and go in behind the counter and serve customers. That was my job for a few hours every evening. It was better than going to any university. I did not get to go to university. I listened to the people, however. They were forestry workers who worked very hard in forestry at a time when terms and conditions were bad, when the amount of work they were doing was measured, and if they were short a few sods, or if their drains were short a few yards, their week's pay was cut. There was wet time and dry time. Their wages would be cut in wet time. These people came into the pub in the evening. It had nothing to do with drink. They came in, perished with the cold. Yes, they had a pint or two, then they went home and had their supper. They were damn tired when they went home. The next crowd to come in were the council workers. There were many council workers at that time. Unfortunately now we do not have any forestry men and very few council workers because almost everything has been privatised. I learned an awful lot from those people. They were fine, sensible people. Yes, they liked going to the pub, but it was not necessarily anything to do with drink.

The Minister might ask what point I am making and what my argument is against what he is proposing. I am saying that the system that was in place was working perfectly well and did not need to be changed. That is why I am opposing it, and I really believe that.

I want to talk now about the very sensitive subject of deaths on our roads, and address the situation in the place I can talk best about, which is the county I represent. Every person we lose on our roads, in my county or in any other part of the country, is to be deeply regretted. Unfortunately, as recently as ten days ago, we had a very sad case in the parish of Glenflesk where, tragically, a lovely young lady lost her life on our roads. However, it had nothing to do with the subject we are talking about here tonight. Umpteen cyclists in the county that I represent have been killed on our roads. Again, those deaths had nothing to do with alcohol. There are other issues concerning road safety. I have said this to the Minister in private and in public. When the Minister looked at this issue, the big mistake he made was not looking at the range of reasons we are losing people on our roads. In the past, the cars were completely different. Nowadays cars have life-saving devices such as airbags and crumple zones, providing extra protection in the car. People should not be dying in the way they are on our roads. However, they are not necessarily dying in motorcars or drink related accidents.

The Minister seems to think those deaths are more common than I believe them to be. I believe that people are dying on our roads because more people are walking, running and cycling. It is good that people are out doing exercise. However, those things bring about a danger in their lives. I believe the reason that so many cyclists and pedestrians, tragically, are being knocked down and killed is because of the fact that there are so many of them on our roads. They are entitled to be on our roads. I have a bicycle here myself. I laugh when I think back on the first time I cycled here in Dublin. I thought I would not be able at all because I got such a fright from the buses and the way they would pass so close. The more cycle lanes we have for the safety of our cyclists, the better. Every effort should be made to provide cycling lanes on every road that is realigned or that money is invested in. There should be places where our pedestrians can be on our roads and be safe and out of harm's way. It is an unfortunate risk that comes with so many people being on the road in that way. Their lives are in danger, and again it has nothing to do with drink.

I have tremendous respect for the publicans of Ireland. I obviously have to declare my interest in that my brother owns and operates a pub, and I have an off-licence of my own. I would far prefer the system of the public house as compared with the off-licence because the people behind public houses are responsible people. Every publican I know is what I would call a responsible person. I probably go into 40 or 50 pubs every month doing my clinics.

Every publican I know is the salt of the earth. They are intelligent and respectable people. In many instances, their pubs have been in the family for generations and they want to pass them on to the next generation with their good names and reputations intact, rightly so. They pay their taxes and are fully compliant. I like the system of the public house more than anything else because of the simple fact that there is a boss or a person in charge. Whether it is the man or the woman of the house or an employee, he or she is in charge. When I say he or she is in charge, I mean that he or she is entitled to refuse to serve a person a drink. If the person in charge thinks someone has had enough to drink or is not behaving properly, he or she can say he or she is sorry but that he or she will not serve the person any more drink that night.

There is also the matter of measures. as surely the Minister has seen. Many of the deaths and fights which occur happen at weekends, late at night, in many cases in private houses. Why is that the case? In many instances, it is because people drink to excess. Why do they do this? It is because they can pour from the bottle without using a measure. When they are in a public house, they are given a measure of alcohol. They cannot pour and drink to excess as they could in an uncontrolled environment. That is why I want to express my support for publicans.

I was very glad when the Minister went to County Kerry and met publicans there. My only disappointment is that when they made a very good case to him on why what he was proposing to do was wrong and the gave the reasons they were against it, he, unfortunately, decided to keep going with the Bill, as he is perfectly entitled to do. I would have preferred if he had listened more to the voice of publicans. It is not a matter of a vested interest trying to look after itself, rather it is about a group of people who have provided a service during the years which they want to continue into the future.

Many of the public houses to which we used to travel in our run when I started to attend clinics many years ago with our late father, Jackie Healy-Rae, have sadly closed and it is with great sadness that I have seen them close. I do not want to start naming any of them, but I must name one - the Shebeen in Lauragh. It was open for many years. Unfortunately, circumstances change and the changes which have been made by Governments during the years have led to a situation where pubs such as the Shebeen and many others have disappeared. It is so sad to pass a place in which people once sang songs, played music and cards, came together to have debates about politics, football and life in general. Again, they were all great people. The doors are now closed and the lights have been turned off. It is an attack on rural Ireland.

The idea behind the Bill constitutes a provoked attack on rural Ireland. It will further decimate communities. I passionately believe this, which is why I wanted to have this opportunity. I would have gone through steel and fire to come here to speak about this matter because I feel so strongly about it and I would not say it unless I truly believed it. I say in a very special way to every publican in the country that Deputies will have an opportunity to either vote with the Minister or with the people of rural Ireland. In the intervening period before votes are cast I ask publicans to ask their Deputies, of whatever party, if any, if they are for rural Ireland or the Minister's proposal. It is as simple as that. That is the divide and on what we will be asked to vote.

The Bill is a retrograde step and I truthfully do not believe it will lead to one life being saved. I could talk about what I believe the Minister's motivations are for doing this. He believes he will save lives, but he is wrong. I am entitled to my opinion and he is entitled to his, but I truthfully believe he is not looking at the issue of road safety from an overall perspective. He is just homing in on one single issue. That is regrettable because there are so many other good things he could be doing in his Department. He could save lives in so many other ways. He should be asking why it is that many roads are so much better than they were in the past and why vehicles are so much better. We have gardaí who are doing their job to the very best of their ability. I compliment them on the work they are doing, even though they are often criticised both inside and outside of this House.

Coming back to why we are debating the Bill, the Minister is focusing on the wrong issue. The Bill is creating a cloud and people are misreading or exaggerating the contributory factor of drink in accidents. That is wrong. If there was a breakdown and in-depth study was carried out of the reasons people are dying on the roads, it would be found that people being over the limit was the least significant issue. The people about whom we are talking are never involved in accidents. They actually do not have accidents. In the case of the public houses I know very closely and the publicans running them, there have never been situations where people left them and caused or been involved in any accident. I could stand over this any day of the week. Of course, we hear horror stories about people who drink to excess or take drugs and then get into a car and cause carnage or chaos. These cases are highlighted on radio and in the media, but they are not the people about whom I am talking. The people about whom I am talking are country people who go to a public house, have a drink or two and snail away home on country roads. They are never involved in accidents or hurt anybody. The Minister has to differentiate. I know that he might say he cannot do so, but he can. He can differentiate by abandoning this proposal which is wrong. It is a retrograde step.

When we were together during the 70 days in which the programme for Government was negotiated, it was stated all policies should be rural-proofed. The Minister supported that suggestion at the time. Any policy brought forward by the Government should be rural-proofed. This Bill has not been rural-proofed. If it had been, it would have been blown out of the window as being completely anti-rural and discriminatory against people living in country areas. As I said, any person leaving the Dáil Chamber tonight has many options. There are taxis, buses and the Luas if one puts up one's hand. What options do the people living in Glencar have to get home apart from their motor car? That is it. They cannot walk home as it would be too far and they would be in the height of danger. I ask the Minister to take on board my views and those of the other like-minded people who have spoken and will speak about this issue.

I do not condone drink-driving. Nearly every Member of this Dáil does not condone it. The laws in place should be strongly enforced by the Garda and the judicial system. Of course,any death on the roads is one too many. This point is particularly true when one considers the lives lost as a result of drink-driving. The Minister was before the the Joint Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport for days when it was considering the Bill. I will read a section of its report:

"Based on the evidence presented to date, some Members of the Joint Committee believe that the proposed amendment to the penalties applicable to drink driving could possibly be regarded as disproportionate," - the word "disproportionate" is very important - "particularly so in rural areas of the country where access to public transport services is limited.

That is one thing the Minister never took on board. I am a rural Deputy and, as such, represent the people of rural Ireland. This measure is disproportionate. The laws in place until now, if implemented, were sufficient to stop anything from happening.

It is illegal to drink and drive under the current legislation. Fianna Fáil introduced mandatory testing and supported legislation that decreased alcohol limits to among the lowest in Europe. The Bill seeks to introduce an automatic three-month disqualification for those found driving with a blood alcohol level of 50 mg to 80 mg. The offence is currently punishable with three penalty points, provided the offender is not a learner or professional driver and has not previously been found guilty of the offence within the preceding three years. That covers a lot. The Minister has portrayed the legislation as a catch-all Bill that will prevent more people from drinking and driving. Fianna Fáil does not condone drink-driving, as I said, nor are we prisoners to the Vintner's Federation of Ireland, as the Minister wrongly alleged. I refute that charge. I speak for those in rural Ireland who I represent. I refute that I am a spokesman for the Licensed Vintners Association, as if I were on its payroll. I hate to be branded as a person who speaks for vintners-----

-----just because I express my opinion on behalf of those I represent in Kilkenny and rural Ireland. Stronger enforcement of the existing laws is needed, along with ways to address all causes of road deaths. That was highlighted by the "Prime Time" programme broadcast on RTÉ last Monday night, which concluded that current legislation governing drink-driving is not consistently enforced. It was worth watching and proved a point. I happened to be at home to see it although I often miss such programmes.

As regards social isolation in rural Ireland, the Government does not understand how rural Ireland operates nor the damage this legislation could do there. The Minister is from Dublin and is urbanised and he does not understand what the Bill would mean for rural Ireland. Deputies from rural constituencies have to listen to their constituents. I do not condone drink-driving. I have to keep saying that. However, the proposals the Government is bringing forward in the Bill would make it impossible for people to go to a rural pub. For many people, that is their only social outlet. That is an important point. Such people may have always gone to the pub as a social outlet on a Friday having travelled four or five miles down lanes from their homes in rural Ireland. They may collect their pensions and do some shopping and the husband or wife may go in to have a drink, meet people and have a chat and then go home without doing any harm to anyone. The rule that the Minister is trying to bring in will stop all of that. Such people may have to get behind the wheel of a car to go to work the next morning but the new focus on testing in the morning time will make it impossible for anyone to do so. Even if people do everything right, such as getting a taxi home if there is one available, and then try to go to work the morning after and the Garda has set up a checkpoint, they will be caught out. That is another issue that is very important for rural Ireland. It would be ideal if people in very remote parts of rural Ireland could rely on public transport to get to work but they cannot. People in rural Ireland cannot rely on the Luas, the DART, regular buses going by their door or even taxis in some cases. Even in the bigger provincial towns around the country, if one is out late one must rely on a good taxi man to take one home without charging a fortune. If the Government is serious about rural regeneration it will not enforce laws that will confine older people to their homes and put small rural pubs and bars out of business. Such businesses are one of the few remaining employers of young people, who would also be driven out of rural communities if they could not work or socialise after 6 p.m.

There are no proposals from the Government about increasing the number of Garda checkpoints. Given the recent breathalyser test debacle, of which all Members know, the public need to know that the Government is serious about Garda presence on our roads to prevent and detect drink-driving and decrease speeding. I watched the debate on this issue in the House yesterday morning and was shocked by issues read into the record by my colleague, Deputy Eugene Murphy. He said that he came across a figure while researching the issue that showed that the number of gardaí in the traffic corps this year was 663, a decrease of 400 gardaí. That issue should be looked at. Deputy Eugene Murphy is correct in what he said about speed vans. Some people say we do not need checkpoints if there are sufficient speed vans. However, speed vans do not detect drunken drivers. Most fatal collisions in which alcohol is a contributory factor involve drivers whose blood alcohol content is higher than 100 mg. The Bill will affect a country person who goes to the pub and has one drink or, as we used to call it, a half and a small bottle, perhaps a bottle of stout. That is completely different to drunk drivers who are plastered and should not be behind the wheel. No law will stop that unless it is enforced by the Garda. Those are the drivers who should face much higher sanctions. Evidence suggests that closing loopholes and strengthening provisions would be a far more effective means of saving lives than the measures proposed in the Bill.

In the United Kingdom it is mandatory for high-risk offenders, including those found with a blood alcohol content of greater than 200 mg and repeat offenders, to pass a medical examination before getting their licence back. Perhaps that should be considered rather than passing the Bill. A study by the European Road Safety Observatory highlighted that alcohol ignition interlocks, which prevent a person from starting a car when they are over the legal limit, are 40% to 95% more effective in preventing drink-driving than traditional measures such as licence withdrawal or fines. Fianna Fáil will be bringing forward legislation to have alcohol ignition locks installed in the cars of severe first-time offenders and all second-time offenders.

Punishments mean little to people if they do not believe that they will be caught. There must be more Garda checkpoints to enforce the existing law. Given the sorry state of Ireland’s enforcement mechanisms in respect of drink-driving, that is hardly a surprise. Recent controversies over falsified breathalyser tests have revealed the hollow nature of Government rhetoric on alcohol-related road offences. While the final figure has yet to be confirmed, it is possible that more than 1 million breathalyser tests were faked, as has been addressed. Where is the credibility in any regime involving that level of falsification? Even when convictions occur, the risk of losing one’s licence is meaningless if a person is already disqualified or knows that the punishment will not be enforced. Of 206 drivers involved in a fatal alcohol-related collision, 41 were disqualified at the time of the incident. That represents almost a fifth of the cases covered. There is a gap between deterrents on paper and in the real world. No amount of automatic disqualification will deter people if they do not believe the punishments will be enforced. Although disqualified drivers are obliged to return their licence to the Road Safety Authority, 98% of them do not do so. Drivers are disqualified in court but 98% of those drivers do not have their licence taken from them. That is an incredible statistic. How can something be enforced when the courts do not take away the licence of disqualified drivers? It is a disgrace. It is no wonder that there are so many disqualified drivers on the road when one considers that the overwhelming majority of them do not have their licence confiscated.

We support increasing the maximum prison sentence for driving while disqualified from 6 months to 2 years and the maximum fine from €5,000 to €15,000 for repeat offenders. That would ensure appropriate punishment for repeat offenders. We also support allocating increased resources to the Road Safety Authority, RSA, for the management of the system and to increase enforcement.

I cannot understand why the Minister has not addressed the funding imbalance that favours urban bus services over rural bus services nor why he has not modernised bus services in rural Ireland. If all these laws are to be enforced, why is a service not being provided to look after people? That would be step one if the Minister really wanted to provide a better quality of life for people in rural communities. The Government has not been active on policy for that area. It is not a matter for the National Transport Authority, NTA, or Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, but, rather, for the Minister and the Government. If there were adequate public transport services in rural Ireland, people would have the option to put their car keys in the drawer and make use of an alternative mode of transport to get home or to go to work the morning after having a few drinks. The rural link transport network is currently available during the day. We should urgently seek to investigate the viability of enhancing the network and making it available at peak times on weekday and weekend nights. The social fabric of rural Ireland is currently very strained. I view the expansion of the rural link transport network as a socially positive policy and I ask the Minister to strongly consider it.

Education is also needed. Between 2008 and 2012, 39% of drivers involved in fatal collisions where alcohol was a factor were aged between 15 and 24.

This statistic is very alarming too. This means that we continue to fail our young people and that we are not getting through to them on the dangers of drink-driving. During Question Time in February 2017 the Minister admitted that the education piece of road safety has not been as effective as we might have hoped, yet he has failed to address this. We do not have a mandatory driver safety programme that covers the dangers of drink-driving. While this is an optional module for transition year students, it is far from universal; only 70% of students are enrolled in transition year, and it is up to schools whether to feature a driver safety programme. The RSA has also highlighted that young people need to be educated about drink-driving from a younger age than that of transition year students; young people typically begin to drink when they are about 14 or 15 years of age. We should educate them at that stage. We should make it mandatory for transition year students to receive a course on road safety, drink-driving, etc.

Fianna Fáil will table a number of amendments to provide for this. We propose that the current penalty point sanction of three points be increased to five and that the fine be doubled to €500. I think this would be a sufficient deterrent for anyone found driving with between 50 mg and 80 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood. We also support increased penalties for those found driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of 100 mg as these drivers are responsible for eight in ten fatal road collisions involving alcohol. We also support an increase in the penalties for those breaking a driving disqualification, who account for approximately a fifth of fatalities involving road collisions. To show our good faith and intentions on this issue, Fianna Fáil believes the Minister should accept the compromise we have suggested, that is, that five penalty points be given to a person found driving with a blood alcohol level of between 50 mg and 80 mg per 100 ml of blood.

I have not even spoken about rural Ireland and the mental problems and isolation out there. These are important matters as well, and we never consider them. As I said, people in rural homes have no outlet but to go to the local town or village and meet people. They are afraid. Rural isolation is already an issue. Suicide is a problem in rural Ireland. With all these laws we are introducing we are becoming a nanny state. We are dictating how people should live their lives and telling them what they can and cannot do. We are frightening people in every way of life. These draconian measures do not necessarily mean anything. I know the Minister does not understand this because he is not from a rural area. He should visit a rural area and see what happens every day to people living four or five miles from the nearest town. They sometimes have the opportunity to come into a town, meet people, socialise and have a drink if they so wish - one or two drinks. I know people who go into towns and have a flutter of drinking and then try to drive home. I am talking about people who come in for the social aspect. We are not taking this on board. We are also not taking on board the morning after, when people have done the right thing the night before and got their taxis home and then try to get to work to make a living and keep going. Perhaps it is a little late in the day now, but I ask the Minister to take all this on board and reconsider where we are with the Bill.

Another issue is the condition of the roads. We can talk about the various problems in rural areas. I spoke about the need for a rural bus service. I know we cannot have a bus service that will go up every lane and boreen in rural Ireland but we can have some kind of bus service from village to village that would help alleviate people's problems. I do not think this legislation has been thought out or worked through enough. Will the Minister again reconsider what we are asking and take all this on board? I do not like voting against legislation on drink-driving. I do not like to support anyone drinking and then driving a car, but I am talking about the minimum that we need. The law we had that Fianna Fáil introduced is adequate to look after anyone with a blood alcohol content of between 50 mg and 80 mg, and I ask the Minister to consider that. Do I have a minute left?

The Deputy has only one minute.

I have asked already about crime in rural Ireland and I have spoken about this on several occasions. I am always speaking about CCTV cameras. I know this is moving away from drinking and driving but it is another issue in rural Ireland. I refer to thieves coming from the big cities and frightening people in rural areas. We saw robbery in Tipperary last month. In my area, Kilkenny, we saw people coming out of view of CCTV cameras. I have asked several times that they be looked at again in order to keep people safe in their homes and give them credibility.

Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 14 December 2017.
Barr
Roinn