I welcome everyone to the meeting. Those wondering why we called this meeting will recall that we spoke to people about road safety but many of them felt they had not spoken to each other. Though they had been working in the same area there had never been a round table discussion on road safety and we decided to initiate one. As there are many speakers I ask everyone to keep to the timeframe we have agreed. I will remind people if they go over time. This will be followed by a question and answer session involving members. I will not introduce everyone as there are so many people here but I will do so as we come to each speaker.
Road Safety: Presentations.
I thank the chairman for inviting me and I welcome everyone else who is involved in road safety. A copy of my speech has been circulated and I will refer to it from time to time.
By the end of the road strategy 1998 to 2002, the 20% reduction in deaths had been achieved. There were 377 road deaths in 2002 compared to 472 in 1997, the base year for the strategy. We agree that all road deaths are tragic but the 2002 figure is a welcome improvement on the figures for the previous three years, which had been running between 411 and 415. Taking the figures up to 11 June - unfortunately there were more over the weekend - we had 147 road deaths, compared to 164 for the same period last year. That takes May into account, which was a bad month for road deaths but May has tended to be like that. In 2002 we had 20 road deaths in May while in May 2001 we had 40; 29 in May 2000 and in May 1999 we had 35. For some reason May tends to fluctuate and as a result of that figures are not as low as we want them to be.
The supporting targets for speeding, drink driving and seatbelt wearing have been the subject of increased enforcement by the gardai. The National Roads Authority recently published a speed and seatbelt survey which gauged the progress of the strategy and thankfully it has shown that since the introduction of the strategy front seatbelt use has increased by up to 72%. However, the speeding survey carried out before the introduction of penalty points shows scope for improvement.
The number of fatal accidents occurring between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m., the hours most associated with drink driving, has decreased by 26% between 1997 and 2001; again, this figure exceeded the target set by the strategy. The target to introduce specific road accident reduction measures at 400 locations on the national road network was also surpassed, with 418 schemes completed by 2002.
Almost all actions outlined in the road safety strategy have been progressed over the lifetime of that strategy. The agencies present will present details from their areas of expertise. I will briefly outline the measures taken onto the strategy both by the Department of Transport and the other implementing agencies. The National Safety Council has developed hard-hitting campaigns targeted at the key areas of the strategy and has developed primary and secondary school resource programmes. Enforcement levels have increased, with the levels of speeding detections in 2002 being 370% higher than the levels in 1997. Looking at the speeding figures alone, there were 130,000 offences in 1998 and that has risen to 338,000 speeding offences in 2002. The level of enforcement of drink driving legislation has increased significantly and we have introduced on-the-spot fines for those not wearing seatbelts.
The fixed speed cameras, piloted on certain routes, have been the subject of debate in recent months. The gardai have undertaken a major programme for the deployment of a range of speed enforcement assets over the lifetime of the strategy. A programme of mixed speed enforcement will be continued in the next strategy based on the report from Australian experts on speed enforcement strategies. Newspaper stories stated that three speed cameras were in operation on a particular road but in 2003 the number of GATSO vans for the detection of speed was six. The gardaí have 368 mobile speed detection units - 34 in-car camera systems; two unmarked motorcycles with onboard cameras; 20 high-visibility patrol vehicles and 34 marked motorcycles. This is not just about cameras, we are pursuing other lines as well.
The Minister for Transport met the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and senior gardai on the engagement of the private sector in operating speed cameras. This operation can and should be given out to the private sector - the gardai are here to talk about that if necessary - as it is not necessarily a law enforcement matter. This suggestion should be examined but it is entirely a matter for the gardai and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
In terms of engineering measures, 418 accident reduction schemes were carried out by 2002. In black spot areas it is not just a matter of having cameras, detection and enforcement. The NRA also has a role in trying to improve junctions and turns and 418 of them were addressed in 2002. These are important works which improve those black spots. Funding of €2.28 million was provided for this work in 2002 and €2.57 million is in place for the present year. The National Car Test is also important and it will be strengthened so that fail-advisory items will become fail-refusal items. Many accidents are caused by faulty headlights, for example, and faulty headlights will become a matter of fail-refusal from September 2003.
Regarding learner drivers and driver training, the Government strategy acknowledged the importance of driver testing and training but recognised that these could not be expected to yield road safety benefits on the scale of measures aimed at speeding, drinking and seatbelt use. We must recognise that those three areas take precedence, as is the case in every country in Europe. When I addressed driving instructors in Clare two weeks ago, driver education, the introduction of the driver theory test and the driver instructor register were discussed. I made it clear in Clare that there would be only one register of instructors, otherwise we could have three or four different groups. We are trying to get one set of standards to apply to them all. Otherwise instructors might join different groups because they would be perceived as easier.
The provisions of the Road Traffic Act which provide for the penalty points system have been enacted and penalty points for speeding have been operational since October 2002, while penalty points for driving without insurance have been introduced from the beginning of this month. The Minister is consulting with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on the application of penalty points to seat belt wearing offences. It is hoped that the penalty points system can be introduced in that regard by the end of July. It had been anticipated that it would be introduced by 1 July but we were still in negotiations with the Garda.
The Act also provides for an extension of situations where a garda can request a preliminary breath sample where an accident has occurred or where the garda considers a traffic offence has been committed. The commencement of this section is currently being considered in consultation with the Garda, the Medical Bureau of Road Safety and the Attorney General. In other words, we will give powers to the gardaí to take breath tests not just because the driver is suspected of having drink taken but also for other offences. The debate on this, and it is a matter for questions later, will be whether the garda can take a sample from somebody with a broken tail light and whether that is more important or should it be balanced with dealing with the driver who has driven through a red light. These are issues for debate and they are matters of genuine concern for the gardaí.
Further strategies are involved. In the meantime, work is progressing in a number of areas relating to road safety. We will look at speed limit policy. Speed limits at present range from 30 to 70 miles per hour. During a recent debate in the Seanad it was suggested that the limits should be changed in certain areas. We hope to do this by the middle of 2004 but before that we must move from the imperial system of miles per hour to the metric system of kilometres per hour. On the Continent one will see limits of 100 and 120 kilometres per hour. A large amount of time in early 2004 will have to be devoted to public consultation to ensure people are aware of the different measurements. It is hoped to introduce the new system by mid-2004, provided we are satisfied with the response of the gardaí and the local authorities and with the public consultation process.
The next speaker is Mr. Tony Hickey, Assistant Commissioner, An Garda Síochána.
Assistant Commissioner Tony Hickey
As my submission has been circulated to the members of the committee I will not go through it in detail. The paper outlines the historical background, dating back to the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and the diverse functions performed by the Garda Síochána. These include crime prevention and detection, traffic, State security, public order, emergency services and the various administrative roles we fill. A uniformed garda on foot patrol can fulfil many of these roles and he or she also plays a preventative role in relation to crime, traffic violations and public disorder. That, in turn, gives rise to constant demands for more police on the streets and more visibility. Surveys prove this and we hear as much all the time from the public.
Like all public services, Garda human resources and budgets are finite. Policing has, as society becomes more affluent, become more specialised and policing skills have become more technical and specific. We have dedicated traffic units. Traffic policing dates back to 1875 when the Dublin Metropolitan Police were dealing with furious driving on the part of Dublin jarvies, the joyriding of the time. In 1972, 640 people were killed on the roads, the highest yearly rate ever. The Garda has formed specialist traffic units to deal with this. We have moved away from the term "traffic corps". Today there are almost 500 personnel attached to the various units throughout the country. In 1996 the Garda Siochána was restructured on a regional basis and that was enhanced by the appointment of regional traffic inspectors who co-ordinate the activities of the divisional traffic units on a regional rather than a divisional or district basis. The Garda national traffic bureau, established in Garda headquarters in 1998, co-ordinates activity nationwide.
Traffic policing has become more specialised. At the same time every member of the Garda on the street has a function in relation to road traffic law enforcement and prosecution and, by their presence, improves performance by drivers on the roads. Our commitment to traffic policing is based on the twin concepts of traffic management and road safety. Our corporate strategy has, as one of its strategic goals, "contributing to the reduction of road deaths and casualties". We have contributed to the road safety programme.
The primary targets of reducing road deaths and serious injuries were met, while substantial progress was made on the secondary targets relating to speeding, non-wearing of seat belts, driving while drunk and so forth. The death of 376 road users in 2002, with more than 1,000 people badly injured, allied to the immense grief, pain and trauma suffered by the families, friends and communities of those killed or injured is unacceptable. Nevertheless, we welcome the improvement in this regard. It is stark to talk in statistics about the number of people losing their lives on the roads. There were 472 deaths in 1997 so the situation has improved.
Together with other road safety professionals, we believe that many fatalities are preventable. We have moved away from using the term "accident" in favour of the term "collision", which is defined in my submission. According to international research, the average driver will be involved in a collision every 61,000 miles. In the course of a two mile journey, a driver will make 400 observations, 40 decisions and one error. This error will result in a near collision every 500 miles. There is much trust involved that people will take effective action to counteract errors other drivers make.
The three pillars on which road safety strategies are built are education, engineering and enforcement. The submission outlines what is involved in traffic law enforcement. It means dealing with surveillance, patrols, on-the-spot fines, summonses, cautions, prosecutions, directing traffic, responding to various situations, preparing files for the law officers and coroners and identifying collision prone locations or black spots on the roads. Contrary to what people say, we have personnel on rolling checkpoints at locations which are prone to fatal accidents. We maintain a database and co-operate with other agencies.
As part of the "The Road to Safety 1998 - 2002", the Garda Commissioner instigated "operation lifesaver" which focused on speeding, non-wearing of seat belts and driving while drunk. Together with operations such as "freeflow", "taisteal" on holiday weeks-ends and operations for special events, there have been tangible results with more than a 300% increase in detections for speeding, an increase in the wearing of seat belts from 55% in 1999 to 72% last year and a 50% increase in arrests for section 49 offences.
Since 1968, the gardaí have had the power to breath test for alcohol in relation to incidents where the garda was of the opinion that alcohol had been consumed by the driver. This is somewhat restrictive and we welcome the legislative moves to extend the power to breath test to additional circumstances. The introduction of penalty points has been a dramatic success. Approximately 2,700 drivers have been assigned penalty points and more are in the pipeline. The development of the fixed charge processing system and the automated rollout of the system next year will lead to more effective detection and processing of traffic violations, which we welcome. It will free up operational personnel and reduce the time spent by operational gardaí on paperwork instead of being outdoors.
The Garda press office and the national traffic bureau engage in publicity through the national and local media. The Garda is committed to enhancing its role in road safety in the future.
I now call on Mr. Kemp from the Irish Insurance Federation to make his presentation. It was the federation's idea that we convene this meeting.
Mr. Mike Kemp
I thank the Chairman and the committee for the opportunity to present our submission, which has been circulated to the members. I will not go through it in detail but deal with the three main points we wish to stress. We certainly agree that the previous national road safety strategy has been a success in meeting its targets and we are anxious to make sure that we can build on that and maintain the momentum. The three matters we are stressing in our submission are: first, the need for early adoption of a new national road safety strategy to build on the last one; second, the pre-eminent role of law enforcement in improving our road safety record; and, third, the importance of Government in seeing road safety as an investment in the community's future, rather than simply as a drain on resources through the various budgetary areas where expense is currently incurred.
As regards the first point, we have already made our submission to the Department of Transport about what we think should be in the new national road safety strategy, and I am aware that a number of other organisations have also. I have a more detailed summary of our submission if the committee wishes to see it. It covers the main points in the existing paper, which committee members already have.
We are somewhat disappointed that, nearly six months into the year, we do not have a new strategy in place. We would like to see that as soon as possible because we are concerned that some of the progress that has been made may be eroded if there is any perception that we are not active in getting the new strategy in place.
By and large, we feel the new strategy should follow what was in the previous one and that, therefore, the targets should concentrate on drink driving, speeding and wearing seat-belts. As in the previous strategy, we believe there should be specific concrete targets for the reduction of fatalities and serious injury, and increased compliance with seat-belt use. Levels of enforcement activity should be more measurable and should be reviewed from time to time. Obviously, we also need to improve the chances of detection and punishment of those who offend in the main areas - speeding and contravention of the drink driving laws. Overall, we want to reduce the average speed on the roads, which, unfortunately, has been creeping up, notwithstanding improvements in other areas.
We very much hope that, in addition, the new strategy will provide for the establishment of a dedicated, ring-fenced road traffic corps, which is provided for in the existing Programme for Government. I was encouraged to hear the Minister speaking positively about consideration being given to the commencement of section 10 of the Road Traffic Act, to increase the powers of the Garda Síochána to carry out random breath tests on drivers. We would certainly like to see an expansion of the speed camera programme, involving both mobile and fixed cameras, as well as a review of speed limits and signage improvements, which was also mentioned by the Minister.
The second point concerns the level of enforcement and the role it plays in the overall national strategy. The engineering measures have been very successful, and the educational and promotional efforts of the National Safety Council are very important. The effectiveness of the educational messages tends to be long-term. From what we see as insurers, the level of enforcement activity and the way in which enforcement resources are deployed are the most important short-term determinants to the success of the strategy. Therefore, we feel it is important to increase drivers' perception of the chances of being detected and of sanctions being applied to them. The information we have had from recent consultants' reports shows that the chances of being detected for speeding or drink driving are relatively low compared to other countries, and the perception of road users in this regard is very low and needs to be increased. Therefore, we would like to see more accurate measurement of the level of enforcement activity, a review of the way in which resources are deployed, and additional resources being provided to the Garda Síochána. We certainly believe they do a very good job within the limits under which they labour but there is quite a lot of scope for improvement. Recent opinion research suggests that 80% of people believe enforcement levels are too low, while everyone believes the number of breath tests needs to be increased and 90% believe there should be additional funding for law enforcement.
It is important for us as a community to see road safety as an investment. At present there seems to be a paradigm whereby the cost of providing enforcement, educational programmes and road engineering activities is regarded as a drain on the Exchequer. Research that has been undertaken, however, suggests there is a high level of financial payback to the community in terms of reduced insurance premiums, quite apart from the overriding objective which is to save lives and prevent injury. The impact of road accidents in human terms is devastating but it is also very expensive to the community. Savings of up to €8 for every €1 of investment can be obtained through road safety measures. We want to see road safety investment regarded as a unitary part of the Government's budgetary measures as well as of policy formulation, with everything being brought together.
Mr. Eddie Shaw
I thank you, Chairman, for giving me the opportunity to represent the National Safety Council and I compliment you and your committee on the idea of having this wide-scale debate, which is most useful.
I have circulated two papers to the committee: one with text and the other containing some background charts, which are for information. I will refer to some of them as I go through the main points. I wish to make five points, the first of which is to illustrate the scale of the issue we are dealing with in talking about death and serious injuries on the roads. The second is the relative position of Ireland in Europe and the international community on road safety. The third is what I call best practice in road safety, which is well established both here now and in other countries that are ahead of us. The fourth point concerns key behaviours on the road which cause death and serious injury, while the final point is a comment on the relationship of a cost-benefit analysis and what not to do.
The point of scale is well made. In recent years, the numbers used to illustrate this issue in the 15 countries of the European Union include 44,000 deaths per annum and 3.6 million injuries, of which 1.2 million are hospitalised. The realisation of those numbers has caused some change in attitude to road safety at EU level. Here in Ireland, for ordinary people - irrespective of their employment - the most dangerous thing they do is take their car to drive to work or drive their children to school each day. Simply driving on our roads is one of the most dangerous things that ordinary people do.
The definition of serious injury is loose but as a rule of thumb, one can take it that for every person killed, some four or five are seriously injured. That means that last year, for instance, between 1,800 and 2,300 members of our community were killed or seriously injured on our roads. Those numbers have been declining over the past number of years. The point is, however, that as a scale level in terms of ranking serious incidents - whether one is talking about murders, fire-related deaths, rape, armed robbery or aggravated burglary - death and serious injury from road crashes rank at the top level of incidents causing damage to our community and cost to the Exchequer.
Analyses of road safety investment carried out here - by Bacon in 1999 - and abroad rank the cost-benefit of road safety at the top of any competing project for scarce public funds. That is an important point which has already been referred to: road safety is an investment programme that generates returns way beyond the expenditure involved.
Our relative position has improved in Europe, where we are about 10% ahead of the average, ranking alongside Italy. The worst in Europe are usually quoted as the Portuguese, the Greeks and, peculiarly enough, Luxembourg. The best are Sweden, Finland, Holland and particularly parts of the UK. Our relative position is important because it tells us that we can make considerable progress in avoiding needless death and serious injury on our roads, and we can do so to a considerable scale. Despite the fact that we have made substantial improvements, it means we can save an additional 150 lives every year and can prevent a further 600 to 750 serious injuries. In other words, expressing the figures in terms of those killed or seriously injured, we can save 750 to 900 tragedies every year. By any measure, that is extraordinary. If we were talking about this in respect of rail or air transport, it would amount to preventing a major catastrophe.
There is room for great relative improvement, however. How have the aforementioned countries done so well in achieving road safety? It is fairly clear. There is a general acceptance that despite the differences that may happen between different countries, a combination of enforcement, education, engineering and, very importantly, evaluation can take place. It is what is called a programme of the "four Es". Much research has been done on this and I have attached a bibliography to my submission which outlines some of the papers that are available.
Enforcement, which has been described, means appropriate, continuous, high volume enforcement of road traffic laws. It especially means using advanced computer based technology, which makes the process efficient. It also requires a seamless process that connects the incidence of enforcement through to the judicial process. That is important. I will often mention the terms seamless and integrated process because road safety is about a chain of events. If a single link is missing in the chain it will not work. Enforcement is a most important part of that.
Education is wide-ranging and is part of the responsibility of the National Safety Council. We have a clear aim, which is to reduce death and injury on the roads. We participate in the Government's road safety programme and we do so proudly. We consider it to be a good programme and it is, and has worked well. Members of the committee will be familiar with some of our work. Our high profile advertising is well known. What is not as well known is the programmes of resource material in primary and secondary schools.
There is great progress to be made. It is a programme that gives tremendous return financially to the Government, and in terms of the pain and suffering avoided to the community. We all realise in this programme that there is much to be done.
Thank you. The next speaker is Professor Denis Cusack, director, Medical Bureau of Road Safety.
Professor Denis Cusack
Thank you, Chairman, and members of the committee. Like Mr. Shaw, I thank you for extending me the opportunity to attend the meeting. Members of the committee have my paper and a supporting paper from a journal. I will summarise what the Medical Bureau of Road Safety is about and how it plays its role in terms of road safety. The bureau is responsible for the testing of intoxicants, including alcohol and/or drugs or combinations of both. It is a statutory body, established in 1968, and is now under the aegis of the Minister for Transport.
The functions of the bureau are laid down in statute and regulations and they include receipt and analysis of specimens of blood and urine; issuing of certificates of analysis; providing equipment for the taking of specimens; the approval, supply and testing of equipment and the apparatus for indicating the presence of alcohol in the breath and, more recently, the approval, supply and testing of equipment or apparatus for determining the evidential concentration of alcohol in the breath. An area of increasing importance is the research on drinking and drugs in relation to driving, including the methods of determining them.
In essence, the bureau provides expert forensic evidence. This must be accurate, reliable and must be fair to both the prosecution and the defence. We are honest brokers and have no direct interest in the outcome of a prosecution, save that it is fair and accurate and that it helps in the administration of justice. This is probably the most challenged area in the criminal law today.
The bureau has links with forensic medicine at University College Dublin, indeed the staff are seconded from there to the bureau. It has given the bureau an independent standing in scientific terms. Although not directly related to the bureau, the accompanying editorial article I wrote was, more or less, in that capacity. I will return to that a little later because we must all understand that despite the impact of the agencies here, safety on the roads comes down to the responsibility of each and every person. Every agency can do its best in terms of its functions, but, ultimately, it comes down to individual responsibility.
Our activities can be grouped into the following categories: blood and urine alcohol analysis; breath alcohol analysis and assisting in the training of gardaí; blood and urine drug analysis; research on driving under the influence of drugs; and, increasingly, professional expert services and court attendance. With regard to drugs and driving, I have the pleasure of leaving Dublin at 5 a.m. tomorrow to go to Strasbourg to participate in a pan-European Pompidou group at the Council of Europe, which will spend two and a half days discussing drugs and driving. This is important in ensuring that Ireland remains to the fore, both in our research and in keeping up with the knowledge that is available through sharing with other people.
In 2002, almost 13,000 blood, urine and breath samples were tested for alcohol and drugs. At present, the drugs aspect totals 388, still a small number, but increased from eight in 1995, when under 5,000 samples were tested. It is now, if we link into the number of specimens submitted by the Garda, over 13,000.
We may think we have intoxicated driving licked or that the public has turned the corner. There is a difference in attitude, but not in behaviour. In 2002, the mean alcohol level for blood was 174 milligrams per 100 mls of blood. The legal limit is 80. We are finding that over 60% of drivers are more than twice over the limit while over 90% for blood are over the limit. Behaviour has not changed.
During 2002, the bureau completed the installation of a further 20 evidential instruments to Garda stations nation-wide. This was in accordance with the implementation of the Government's strategy for road safety to have a total of 60 instruments in operation by the end of 2002. The classification of drugs would include amphetamines, methamphetamines, which would include ecstasy; benzodiazepines, which would be valium like drugs or minor tranquillisers; cannaboides, cannabis being among the most common we find; cocaine; methadone, which is becoming increasingly prevalent in terms of drug replacement in public health, and other opiates. We play our role as an independent forensic service, but, as part of that role and the high level group, we continue to note that personal responsibility must be put as the highest priority to get across in terms of education.
Thank you. The next speaker is Mr. Conor Faughan, Public Affairs Manager of the Automobile Association.
Mr. Conor Faughan
Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you for affording me the opportunity to address you today. The AA is Ireland's motoring organisation and a representative group for motorists' interests. It has always been active in the area of road safety, which we see as a central part of our duty. Road safety is a complicated area. No one factor explains our poor accident record and no one solution promises to solve it. It is a collage of issues, ranging across enforcement levels, the way we administer our laws, train and test drivers, build and maintain roads, look after vehicles and, above all, the way we behave as citizens. Social values and tolerance are recurrent themes which are essential to understanding the root causes of Irish accidents and what we must do to change. We must become a society where careless road use is socially unacceptable. We must come to view practices like speeding or road carelessness as being repugnant, morally bankrupt acts of recklessness which we tolerate too much.
Addressing this will take time but at least there is more public acceptance of the need to improve road safety. Following the work of bodies such as the National Safety Council, people are willing to accept a tougher regime. The AA is also happy to place on record our pubic commendation of the work of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan. We are not political and we disagree with aspects of current transport policy, but in the area of road safety, the Minister has been active, decisive and effective. We are encouraged to see the issue get the attention it deserves.
However, these efforts must be backed up with resources. For example, the initial reaction by the public to the introduction of the penalty points system was everything we could have hoped for, and more. Drivers slowed down everywhere and accident rates fell significantly. However, the programme was not backed up. Garda enforcement cannot solely exist in television advertising. It must be present on the road network week in, week out. One cannot cry "wolf" with enforcement because short-term gains will disappear and the old habits will reassert themselves. Unfortunately, in the last couple of months it seems that is what is happening. The AA takes no pleasure in being able to say, "we told you so".
In this brief paper I will present three small ideas which I hope will be a contribution and which would be included on an AA wish list for improving road safety. First, the AA would like to see the establishment of a dedicated Garda traffic corps. We have been saying this for years, but we simply must put traffic policing on a proper, professional footing. At present, each Garda division has a traffic unit, but in fact this is a resource which gets used for a range of policing functions. It is nominally a traffic corps, but it actually gets used for duties like cash escorts and crowd control at football matches - a range of legitimate and important policing functions which dilute the traffic resource.
When we say we need a Garda traffic corps, we do not mean an auxiliary force or some sort of quasi-traffic warden arrangement of the type being discussed for Dublin in the context of bus lanes and yellow boxes. That might be useful in its own right for traffic flow, but it has nothing to do with a dedicated Garda traffic corps. What we have in mind would be analogous to the motorway police in the UK or the highway patrols in the US. We simply must have a specialist, professional unit trained in all aspects of traffic policing and devoting its time to traffic policing and to nothing else. That is of paramount importance.
I wish to draw the committee's attention to a project in which we are engaged, under the heading of engineering, on the quality of the Irish road network. Much of the Irish road network is single carriageway, which is inherently more dangerous than dual carriageway or motorway. However, there are things we can do to make single carriageway roads safer. In Sweden, for example, they have been using a two plus one lane layout system which seems to be having positive results. The AA is involved in a pan-European organisation called the European road assessment programme, basically looking to benchmark good practice in road design around Europe and see what works best. The NRA is working with us on that and I am hopeful that that might deliver positive results in the relatively near future.
It has been well rehearsed in recent years that the way in which we train and test drivers is a shambles. There are more than 300,000 drivers on provisional licences, which is a farcical 20% of all motorists. The laws relating to provisional licence use have been so neglected for so long that almost no one can even tell you what they are. In the meantime, the delay for a driving test has reached ridiculous proportions over the years, although I concede it has improved a little recently.
We would like to make a number of specific recommendations to improve this. First, place driving instructors on a statutory register. I know that there is Government commitment to this but it has not been happening quickly enough in our view. The driving professionals support this and it should happen without delay. Once that is in place, we can then set a curriculum whereby learner drivers would need to take a set number of lessons with a registered driving instructor and they would have to complete those lessons satisfactorily. Only then could applicants progress to do the driving test.
At present the driving test pass rate is only 55%. This means that although we conduct 175,000 tests per annum, because of the failure rate we are only getting 100,000 new driving licences. If we improve the way in which people are taught and prepared for the test, we will get far greater efficiencies and much more productivity out of driving testers. As a small secondary note, we also need to better monitor the variation in standards from one test centre to another which is another of those metrics in driving testing which is clearly indicating a problem to us.
I make those three specific recommendations to the committee. There are many issues involved in road safety and there is a good deal more detail. The AA has policies on most of them and would be entirely happy to meet and discuss our views with members of the committee.
Improving road safety is about engineering a long lasting social change. It is about changing key social values and behaviours in our society and making those changes stick. Improving road safety is not a decision; it is a process. It requires sustained, prolonged and consistent actions by Government and by everybody else involved. If we fail to do that, if we fail to live up to our rhetoric, then the best we can achieve, despite all our efforts, will be short-term and transient improvements.
The next speaker is James Doorley from the National Youth Council of Ireland
Mr. James Doorley
I thank you, Chairman, and the committee for the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this serious and important issue. Public debate on road safety policy is all too infrequent and, in particular, since we are not members of the high level group on road safety, we very much welcome the opportunity given to us by the committee.
It is not possible to cover everything which we have outlined in our document, but I will try to go through the main points. The National Youth Council of Ireland - NYCI - recognises the progress made in recent years to reduce the carnage on our roads. In particular, we congratulate the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, for his persistence in making the penalty points system operational at last.
We also support the concept of an integrated and multi-agency road safety strategy. However, we believe that the outcomes of "The Road to Safety Strategy, 1998 - 2002", were largely disappointing. That is echoed in the review conducted by Mr. Wegman for the Department.
We support the development of a new road safety strategy. While it should progress existing policies and measures, we believe that a new strategy must be radical and must embrace new ideas, new approaches and new technology, and be properly funded.
Of course, as Professor Cusack said, each road user is primarily responsible for his or her own safety and that of others on the road, but the Government can make a difference and we have seen that with the penalty points system. We are very much in favour of the penalty points system because we believe those who are a danger to themselves, whether 21, 41 or 61 years old, should be confronted, deterred and, if necessary, punished. We have seen positive evidence of that, but we would be anxious that we do not fall into the trap and get complacent.
I include in my document a speech by the then Minister for the Environment, Mr. Pádraig Flynn, in 1991, in which he referred to the great work which had been done and the fact that, compared to 1990, road fatalities had been reduced by 24% in the first half of that year. That was a false dawn. We do not want another false dawn and that is why we are calling on the Government to ensure that we do not repeat history. The only way to do that is to adopt a radical and comprehensive road safety strategy.
We acknowledge the work, effort and sincerity of all those engaged in developing the existing strategy. However, road safety, in our view, is too serious an issue for us to overlook the fact that the road safety strategy was flawed from the beginning, was underfunded and, in the final analysis, did not make significant progress in reducing road accidents and deaths over the five-year period. This is no reflection on the people and agencies involved; it just reflects the shortcomings of the strategy that we hope will not be repeated.
Those shortcomings include: insufficient funding; the fact that issues like drink driving, which is a major contributory factor in road accidents, was not addressed. The reference year in the strategy, 1997, was one of the worst years for road deaths and accidents in the 1990s and to reference progress against the worst year was not the best idea. Funding for road safety is ridiculously low. The Government takes in about €4 billion each year in various taxes and the national safety council gets a budget of €2.5 million.
In addition, there was a lack of research. Mr. Wegman pointed this out in his report, where he stated, "First of all, it is striking that data were not available for all subjects of the supporting targets for the reference year."
We agree with much of what has been said here today such as the rolling out of the penalty points system, increased resources for the Garda and reducing the waiting time for driving tests, but we want to see a radical new approach. We want a ten-year strategy that is developed in full consultation with the public and all interested parties based on solid research, and we want it fully costed. We would like to see a road safety agency, with executive power, remit and resources, dedicated to road safety. The National Safety Council does a good job but does not have the remit, the power or the resources. We would like to see the drink driving limit reduced to 20mg because there is a strong link between alcohol and the carnage on our roads. We need to remove the ambiguity about drinking a pint or two and driving home.
We would like to see the establishment of a road accident investigation unit. Such dedicated accident investigation units exist for marine, air and rail accidents, despite the fact that, thankfully, so few people die in those areas. For example, there is an on-the-spot accident research unit in the United Kingdom which is despatched to the scene of a road accident and works alongside the police. We are not impinging on the role of the Garda. The gardaí do an excellent job but they do not have the resources.
My document makes reference to a road safety research programme, the use of satellite and intelligence systems, road safety audits, the review of the provisional driving licence system and the employment of full-time road safety officers. I would be more than willing to answer questions for the committee, but we are looking for a radical approach to address the issue of road deaths and accidents in Ireland.
The next speaker is Mr. Shay McGovern from the Department of Health and Children.
Mr. Shay McGovern
As our document has been circulated, I will simply make the main points given the time constraints. I have responsibility for the development of alcohol policy, and colleagues responsible for ambulance and emergency services are available to address any of those related issues.
The Minister for Health and Children established a strategic task force on alcohol last year to identify evidence-based measures effective in preventing alcohol-related harm and to make specific recommendations based on this review. The task force is widely representative of other Departments and agencies and the terms of reference stated that any recommendations of the task force must be evidence-based.
The task force undertook an extensive review of the substantial evidence available on the effectiveness of different alcohol policy measures. In evaluating this evidence, the policy measures of proven high effectiveness or moderately strong effectiveness were shown to relate to regulating the availability of alcohol, taxation and drink driving counter-measures.
Reference has already been made to much of the statistical evidence available. Alcohol is estimated to be associated with at least 30% of all road accidents and 40% of all fatal accidents. Reference has been made to attitudes to drink driving. While attitudes have changed, behaviour has not. The national health and lifestyle survey undertaken on behalf of the Department reported that the habit of driving after two alcoholic drinks was common among 25 to 54 year-old males with one-third reporting this behaviour.
At European level, Ireland has endorsed and participated in the drafting of the World Health Organisation's European charter on alcohol, the European alcohol action plan and the declaration on young people and alcohol. These documents have provided goals and principles for advancing alcohol policy and a template of strategies for action.
The recommendations of the task force were therefore framed on six of the ten strategy areas outlined in the World Health Organisation's European charter on alcohol. One of the ten strategies relates to discouraging drink driving. The recommendations of the task force are to introduce random breath testing, provide high visibility enforcement, lower the blood alcohol limit in line with most other European countries and lower the limit for provisional drivers to zero.
Many of the 24 recommendations made by the task force have implications for other Departments. An interdepartmental group has been established to co-ordinate the responses of the Departments to the recommendations of the task force. It is expected that the interdepartmental group will report to Government in September or October of this year.
The ambulance service also has an important role in providing a front line pre-hospital emergency response in the event of a road traffic accident. Policy on the development of ambulance services has been set out most recently in a number of documents, including the health strategy, Quality and Fairness: A Health System For You; the Strategic Review of Ambulance Services 2001 and the 1999 cardiovascular health strategy. There has been significant investment in the development of ambulance services over the past ten years since the publication of the 1993 report of the review group on ambulance services. Approximately €26 million in additional funding has been provided for the implementation of the report's recommendations, bringing the level of investment to €77 million, and that investment will continue. The Department is also contributing to the review of road safety expenditure undertaken by the Department of Transport.
The next speaker is Mr. Ken O'Leary from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Mr. Ken O’Leary
As a statement containing our views has been circulated, I will therefore make a few brief comments.
The Department's role is to support the activities of the Garda Síochána, which were outlined earlier by the Assistant Commissioner, Mr. Hickey. Among other matters, it entails trying to secure adequate resources for road traffic enforcement. While we must all live within budgets, it is fair to say that this area has been given a high priority in recent years and this has paid off. I could use a number of statistics but I will confine myself to two simple ones. Provisional figures indicate that more than 330,000 speeding notices were issued in 2002 and this represented an increase of approximately 300% on 1997. The number of arrests for drink driving in 2002 was almost 11,500, which represents an increase of more than 50% on 1997.
One specific issue which I bring to the attention of the committee is penalty points. It is fair to say that we would all be much happier if a fully computerised system were in place to enable all offences relating to penalty points to be listed and to have an efficient system in operation in this regard. There is not much point going over the history of this project, but, as it stands, substantial progress has been made on the fixed charge processing system. It is proceeding as a matter of priority and it is expected that implementation of the system will commence in the second quarter of next year with its progressive extension to cater for all penalty point offences taking place as quickly as possible. The Courts Service is enhancing what is called its criminal case tracking system which will enable it to deal efficiently in a short period with the penalty points system.
We welcome the type of initiatives referred to by the Minister of State, Deputy McDaid, and we are consulting and co-operating with the Department of Transport on those initiatives that directly involve the Garda and the Department. We agree that some good results have been achieved under the previous road strategy but fully accept that much more can and should be done. We look forward to working with our colleagues in both the private and public sectors to achieve this. We will be happy to take into account any points arising from this meeting. The work of the committee in bringing these groups together has been very useful.
The next speaker is Mr. Michael Manley from the Department of Finance.
Mr. Michael Manley
I will be brief. We have circulated a short note that outlines the role of the Department of Finance, which is essentially to advise the Minister and Government on aggregate expenditure policy and global programme level. Many of these programmes relate to activities which pertain to issues of road safety. We cite the example of road infrastructure development.
While the Department of Finance has no direct executive role in road safety, we would however be conscious of the role of Departments and Ministers in prioritising allocations in various areas for road safety. We have circulated a short tabular statement which gives some indication of the growth in expenditure in recent years. Funding for organisations such as the Medical Bureau of Road Safety and the National Safety Council is two and a half times what it was in 1998, and it is three and a half times in the case of national roads.
The Department is also part of the interdepartmental group, chaired by the Department of Transport, which is conducting an expenditure review on road safety. We will participate constructively within that. The group will evaluate the effectiveness of expenditure, examine the impact of road safety performance in areas that are not direct recipients of road safety funding and, if necessary, can recommend re-prioritisation.
Our final speaker, Mr. MartinCondon, is from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Mr. Martin Condon
I will try to be equally brief. I will read a statement on the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's responsibility for road safety in terms of the non-national road network which is in its remit.
In 2000, the Department introduced a system of low cost safety improvement works on the non-national road network. This was an extension of the scheme that had been in operation for some time on national roads under the auspices of the National Roads Authority. Schemes approved for funding under this programme are selected in consultation with the National Roads Authority's regional design offices which maintain up to date information on road accident data on all public roads on an ongoing basis.
When examining the list of sites submitted by local authorities for grant aid, preference is given to locations with accident records, but in certain situations consideration is also given to locations where a hazard can be clearly demonstrated. The safety methods carried out under this programme include road signage, road lining, marking works, surface works, including high friction surfaces, and works for improved vision at junctions.
Since the introduction of this programme in 2000, just under €5 million in funding has been provided. This has allowed specific accident reduction measures to be carried out at more than 360 locations. The 2003 provision of €2.6 million for the programme will enable improvement works to be carried out at a further 160 locations in 2003.
The Department recently invited applications from local authorities for funding under the low cost safety programme in 2004 which are due to be submitted to the Department before 30 June. The Department also provided funding for the first time in 2000 for a regional traffic management grant scheme. While this scheme is primarily meant to assist urban traffic management schemes by the city councils of Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford, eligible works under this category, which will include road safety, include the provision of traffic calming measures in residential areas, improved cycle facilities and the provision of pedestrian crossings. A total of €5.627 million in funding has been provided in regional traffic management grants since 2000 and this has enabled 200 schemes to be completed. More than €2 million has been allocated to this grant category in 2003 and this will allow a further 19 schemes to be carried out.
That concludes the presentations and we will throw open the meeting to questions from members, though questions may be asked of other groups also. As the Insurance Federation said, people did not ask each other questions about various aspects of their recommendations.
I welcome those present. It is great to have this debate though at the end of it we will probably regret not having more time.
To give an idea of the scale of this situation we must use the 2001 statistics, as those are the only figures available with a breakdown. In 2001 there was a road accident every 19 minutes and someone killed on the roads every 22 hours. It is a significant problem and thankfully the Government's road safety strategy in 2002 reduced those figures. We hope that continues. That is everyone's objective. One point that came through the presentations is the issue of enforcement. That is vital if we are to achieve future targets.
I congratulate Mr. Eddie Shaw and the National Safety Council. They have done an excellent job and shown their commitment to delivering on the strategy, which has happened to a large extent. I am sure they will ensure the next strategy is also delivered on. Different Departments and agencies are responsible for various parts of the strategy, which lapsed at the end of last year, and there are still targets to be met in relation to implementation measures. When will those be met and will the Minister tell us when we will see the publication of the new strategy?
The Assistant Commissioner, Mr. Hickey, made a very good point when he said that 125 gardai on duty at any one time are dedicated solely to road traffic enforcement. When one takes gardai on administrative duty out of that the number is reduced even further, so it is a credit to the gardai to have achieved what they have with limited resources. If one speaks to gardai, the one criticism they have of the penalty points system is the lack of resources. Those resources have been reduced in the past 12 months because of cutbacks in overtime and manpower, in addition to retirements.
The Deputy has not asked any questions.
I have.
The idea behind this is for people to engage with each other, not to make political speeches. That is what the Deputy is doing.
I am dealing with delivery of the strategy. There is a perception that people will not be caught. It is pointless dealing with this area unless that perception is dealt with.
The National Traffic Bureau was established in 1998. Can Mr. O'Leary give us the number of units that were in place in 1998 compared to now and the number of gardai dedicated to those units in 1998 compared to today? There has been a 20% reduction in road deaths and both the penalty points system and theory test have been introduced. The national car test and the Personal Injuries Assessment Board have also been introduced. Can Mr. Kemp tell me why there has been no reduction in insurance costs in tandem with that? Insurance has increased in the same period.
Will the Minister tell us when we will see the register of driving instructors? There was a commitment to that in last year's legislation but a statutory register is not in place. Given there is a 50% failure rate for the driving test, and a variation of 20% in test centres around the country, it is crucially important that the register is put in place. When will the speed limits be overhauled? One has a crazy situation where there is a 40 mph limit on some dual carriageways while the speed limit is 60 mph outside some schools.
On the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government presentation on the database of road accidents, is that solely based on accidents reported to the gardai? Does it include all material damage accidents, which may not be reported to the gardai?
Other European countries have better statistics on road accidents. Will Mr. Shaw tell us how their road conditions compare to ours? Can the gardai tell me if the public service vehicle inspectors can be used for road accident investigations? They have the expertise so it is a matter of commitment.
It is estimated that 40% of accidents are caused by drink driving. Is it not the coroner's responsibility to decide whether to test bodies for blood alcohol levels or not? Are accurate statistics available? The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been unable to provide such statistics in reply to parliamentary questions. Those questions are for Mr. McGovern and Mr. Shaw.
Regarding the Medical Bureau of Road Safety, what is the frequency of people being intoxicated with drugs? If someone's sample is clear of alcohol, is that sample automatically tested for drugs? How frequently are positive samples found?
There are only three fixed speed cameras around the country and while the gardai have the resources they are limited in terms of manpower. What commitment can the Minister make to ensure the gardai are given sufficient resources to deliver on the new penalty points system?
I congratulate the Chairman on coming up with the idea of this forum. It is a very worthwhile exercise. Clearly all the participants have a role to play in road safety and all are putting forward proposals, some of which were made several years ago but clearly have not been listened to. There seems to be a distinct absence of any joined-up thinking among the different players on road safety and I put it to the Minister that he might consider building on the success of this session by putting together a standing forum, made up of the players here, to develop the new strategy and to oversee its implementation. I seek a specific response on that.
I congratulate the National Safety Council on its work and Mr. Shaw in particular. This organisation is particularly outspoken and courageous and is always to the fore in terms of what members of the public and politicians need to do to improve road safety. I congratulate the council on its latest television advertisement, which is very hard-hitting. We hope it will be effective.
I have specific questions for the Minister of State, as he has political responsibility for road safety. What was the total funding allocated to the 1997-2002 strategy? The next strategy is meant to cover 2003 to 2008 but, midway through 2003, there is little sign the strategy will be available in the foreseeable future. Why do we not have the strategy at the beginning of the five year period and when will the Minister be in a position to publish it?
It has been acknowledged that the penalty points system has been reasonably successful and that it has the potential to make a dramatic impact on the level of road deaths and injuries. It is regrettable, therefore, that the system was introduced only in the past two months of a five year strategy. Given that it was part of a five year strategy, why was the necessary infrastructure not put in place to make the system work properly? It beyond belief that the Department would introduce a system when the computer technology is not in place to operate it successfully. Not only is there no national computer system, but a basic office computer system was not available to the Garda up to recently. Therefore, we had the farcical situation of gardaí recording offences in a ledger. Will the Minister of State indicate the state of play in regard to the promised computer system, why is it taking so long to introduce it and when can we expect it to be operational?
I agree with Conor Faughnan's point that the penalty points system started very successfully. Everyone was very aware of their responsibilities, nervous about getting penalty points and so on, and there was a dramatic change in people's driving behaviour. There is no doubt, however, that over recent months many people have reverted to their old habits and there is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support this view. The reason for the change in attitude is that there is a public perception that the system is not functioning properly and there is not adequate enforcement. Will the Minister of State clarify the position in relation to the recent question raised about the system, that is, the legal loophole in respect of cars picked up on camera and the requirement on the owners to identify who was driving when the cars were caught speeding. I would welcome a statement from the Minister of State on whether that legal loophole has been closed.
In regard to alcohol, the recommendations of the task force set up under the Department of Health and Children in regard to drink driving appear to have been ignored completely by the Minister. I am referring to the specific recommendation that the blood alcohol limit should be reduced to 50 mls for full drivers and to zero mls for provisional drivers. Why has the Minister not taken these recommendations on board? Is it not a waste of time and energy if one arm of the State makes recommendations, having carried out the necessary research, while another arm completely ignores the recommendations? What are the Minister's intentions in this regard?
I welcome Assistant Commissioner Hickey's views on the issue of random breath testing. Reference was made to extending the grounds on which gardaí may do a random test in certain circumstances. Anyone with two eyes in their head can see at closing time outside almost any pub in the country where there are large car parks that a great number of people who clearly have been drinking for some time are driving off in their cars. Is there not a case for some kind of spot-check and random breath-testing in these situations? It will take something fairly dramatic to break the old habits all of us have in respect of feeling that we can go out, have a few drinks, get into a car and drive home without being detected.
During the Christmas period there are high profile, short-term, sporadic policing campaigns. It does not exactly inspire confidence to have advertisements indicating that the gardaí will enforce the law. The message that often comes across is that the gardaí will enforce the law over bank holiday week-ends. Many people ask, why is the law not being enforced all the time? A special effort is made at particular times of the year but there is a perception that it is only during those special periods that there will be any serious enforcement of the law. I would welcome the Minister's views on the idea of random breath testing.
There is a fair deal of confusion in regard to the traffic corps. The programme for Government promised the establishment of a dedicated traffic corps within six months. We have now gone past the six month and 12 month stage and there is no sign of a traffic corps. Will the Minister of State indicate precisely the views of the Department and his senior Minister in this regard because only the other day the Minister, Deputy Brennan, issued another press release about having a traffic corps in place within weeks. He said previously that a special traffic corps would require legislation. As there is no indication that the legislation is in the pipeline, will the Minister of State outline precisely what he intends doing? I would like to ask Assistant Commissioner Hickey for his views on the proposed traffic corps. There has been reference to two different services, one dealing with traffic flow problems in Dublin and another dealing with enforcing traffic legislation throughout the country. What does the Assistant Commissioner believe is the best way to go in terms of a dedicated traffic corps?
May I ask also about recent media reports to the effect that a number of gardaí on duty during evening peak times in Dublin must return to headquarters at 5.30 p.m. because of some difficulty about paying overtime. May I have clarification on that issue? Media reports indicated that the city of Dublin is left with two motor cycle gardaí at that time because of an administrative problem. I would welcome clarification on the matter.
I have two questions for Mr. O'Leary regarding the difficulty in instituting proceedings against people who may be on social welfare, Those who may not be in a position to pay fines, and those on greater incomes who refuse to pay fines. What is the position in regard to introducing attachment of earnings legislation in order to streamline this aspect because it seems unduly bureaucratic at present?
Finally, I would like to ask Professor Cusack about the safety strategy which recommended 60 testing instruments. Are all these instruments currently in place and is that number adequate? On his comments on methadone, the committee will be aware that large numbers of people in the Dublin area are on methadone maintenance programmes, and that part of the recovery programme from drug use is to get people back into the work force. Therefore, many people may depend on having a car to take up employment but what is the legal position in relation to the presence of methadone in the blood stream?
I would like to welcome those who made presentation. This has been a very useful exercise for everybody. I have a number of questions, particularly for Mr. Kemp, relating to the huge insurance charges for young drivers. Insurance charges for people under the age of 25 who have not had an accident are huge. I am aware of one person with a clean record who included the children on the policy resulting in the cost of insurance increasing from €1,700 to €3,700. That is the sort of thing that gives the insurance industry a bad name and it does not encourage people to be careful when it comes to using our roads.
Does Mr. Shaw consider the current television advertising campaign to be extremely severe? We are all horrified when we see the scenes. Perhaps it helps to concentrate minds but some parents with young children feel it is too severe to show a very crude accident scene. While all accident scenes are harrowing, perhaps this kind of advertising should be shown after 10 p.m. This matter has been brought to my notice.
With regard to the type of breath testing equipment available, will Professor Cusack inform us what training the Medical Bureau of Road Safety provides to members of the Garda Síochána? How many gardaí have been trained in operating the alcoliser, the new machine into which drivers taken into a Garda station are asked to blow, which provides two or three samples? Fortunately, I have not yet had the pleasure of using it. The device is causing difficulty among the public and has been the reason for a number of challenges to the legislation.
With regard to prosecutions, are all alcoliser failures prosecuted or is there a tolerance level? For instance, would a person who is one milligram over the limit be prosecuted in the same way as a person who is ten milligrams over the limit? This question has arisen previously.
What problems does the Garda envisage will arise from the transfer of responsibility for the operation of speed monitors to the private sector? Does it envisage less co-operation? To be fair to the Garda, it is doing an excellent job in monitoring speeding. I understand a speed of one or two miles per hour above the limit is tolerated with regard to prosecutions.
The question of road speed limits was raised. One encounters this problem on certain sections of the N4 coming into Dublin. Some parts of the road have 30 mile per hour speed limits which appear ridiculous when class three roads in the countryside have speed limits of 60 miles per hour. This issue needs to be co-ordinated between the Department and the Garda Síochána.
The enforcement of drugs regulations was raised with regard to prosecutions of those found to be driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. What is being done in this regard?
Michael Kemp discussed the new strategy as well as enforcement and budgeting from the point of view of the Irish Insurance Federation, while a number of others, including Deputies Naughten and Shortall, referred to the new strategy. The strategy is under discussion and is well advanced. We are waiting for the high level group to issue us with a draft copy, probably in July, after which I will decide whether to begin public consultation. As the delegation noted, no decision has been taken on whether to have a public consultation on the new strategy. Had we not introduced the first strategy in 1998, current road deaths would be averaging 550 per annum as compared to 370. The previous strategy has, therefore, been successful.
The National Youth Council raised the possibility of establishing a road safety agency. The Government established a dedicated Department of Transport to address the areas of transport and safety. The high level group addressing safety has responsibility for bringing together the various groups present to day and has already done so.
Mr. Faughnan and Deputy Naughten raised the important issue of driver training. I hope to hold a final meeting on the issue of driving instructors and registers in the final week of June. I have told these groups it is essential that they agree standards and they have indicated for some time this would occur. Once agreement on standards has been achieved, we will proceed rapidly to establish a single driving instructors register.
Professor Cusack raised the issue of the National Safety Council. The question was asked as to which counties are performing well and which not. Deputy Naughten raised the issue of strategy and indicated there is a public perception that the penalty points system is not working. I do not want this meeting to send out such a message. We all agree the system has been working although there have been problems in the area of enforcement. If one examines the statistical analysis of enforcement, an issue I raised previously, one finds that in the area of speeding - the reason we introduced penalty points - some 130,000 offences were detected in 1998-99. The latest annual figure for detections available to me is 340,000. There are 1.8 million vehicles on Irish roads, of which 1.38 million are cars. With 340,000 speeding offences detected, the addition of the number of other offences detected by the Garda, including drunk driving and mechanical faults, gives one a figure of around 400,000 motoring offences detected. I estimate, therefore, that the chance of being detected, whether through one's own fault or due to a vehicle fault, is roughly one in four or one in five. While I agree with some of the comments on the issue of enforcement, one should note that offenders have a one in four or one or five chance of being detected, according to the figures.
Deputy Shortall raised the issue of a loophole, to which my colleagues will respond. I am not aware, however, of any loophole. One should not believe everything one reads in newspapers. We should allow the Garda to deal with the matter.
The Deputy also referred to the task force on alcohol, which is considering reducing the alcohol limit from 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood or urine to 50 milligrams and zero for provisional drivers. This is being considered in the context of the next road safety strategy. Members will recall what happened when we tried to introduce a similar measure in the past. Four countries, Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Italy, currently apply the 80 milligram limit. The European Union is working on a road safety strategy and it would be natural that this area would be harmonised.
As regards the issue of establishing a dedicated Garda traffic corps, we all look forward to the setting up of such a unit. However, such a unit would require enormous resources. I agree with other speakers that it is difficult to focus on resources in the context of the number of lives that can be saved. According to Eddie Shaw of the National Safety Council we can reduce the number of road deaths by as much as 150 per year.
What is the reason for the delay?
As I said, a traffic corps would place enormous demands on resources. All of this has been dealt with within the ongoing discussions within the Garda. I have been looking at the possibility of removing speed cameras from the context of Garda resources. There may also be other areas that can be dealt with by the private sector, which would alleviate pressure on public finances.
Can the Minister of State confirm that legislation is required to establish a traffic corps?
I think it can be done by way of regulation. I will get back to the Deputy on that matter. It will depend on the duties that are assigned to the traffic corps. The only person who can legally stop a car at present is a member of the Garda. The introduction of a civilian traffic corps would undoubtedly require changes to be made to the legislation.
We have looked at other countries where a dedicated traffic corps is in place and from what we have seen, one cannot assume that by so doing all of our problems would be over. There is a dedicated traffic corps in Spain. The Spanish traffic corps, for example, can only deal with one particular aspect of a road accident, if it involves a bank robber. This can lead to all manner of complications in the courts. We are all agreed, however, on the fundamental issue that there should be a dedicated traffic corps. Perhaps the Garda will also make that point.
With regard to the speed limit, I mentioned that it is intended to have a consultation process before the speed limit is converted to kilometres. On the Continent it is currently 100 kph, 110 kph and 120 kph. A prolonged consultative process is required in order to involve the public and make people aware of it. I hope that will commence at the beginning of 2004, with a view to having the system up and running by mid-2004. That is the estimated timescale but it will depend on the progress of the consultative process.
I will return to any of these points if a committee member wishes, but there is one other point on which I wish to focus - guidelines for driving instructors. It was the opinion of James Doorley that a road safety agency should be set up and that there is a need for more research as to the cause of traffic accidents. The NRA has produced statistics on road safety for 2000-01. It also produced statistics on accidents among young drivers in 2000. Some startling facts emerge from these publications. In 2001, 407 people were killed on the roads and of these, 304 were male and 103 were female. Some 74 of the males were aged between 25-34, as opposed to 16 females. Some 42 males were aged between 21-24. In regard to accidents involving young drivers, the balance is 58% of provisional licence holders as opposed to 54% of full licence holders. Although we tend to blame provisional licence holders, this is not borne out by the facts. With regard to young female drivers who are involved in accidents, the percentage of provisional licence holders is 51% as opposed to 37% with a full licence. I am not pointing the finger at females because, in general, they are involved in fewer accidents than males. I compliment the NRA for the detailed level of research that has gone into these publications.
In the context of research, as a member of the medical profession I think it would be an interesting exercise to collate the coroners' reports on accidents in recent years, as a great deal of knowledge could also be gleaned from them. If I have left anything out the Chairman can come back to me.
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
As I understand it, Deputy Naughten's question asked why public service vehicle inspectors who are sergeants at divisional level and who, in the normal course of their work examine, test and certify public service vehicles, are not involved in the investigation of fatal accidents. They are, in fact, because as a matter of routine they examine and provide reports in regard to the vehicles involved. We are moving increasingly towards getting experienced detectives involved with the investigation of fatal accidents because they are rightly regarded with a similar degree of seriousness as a murder investigation. We increasingly encourage our people to involve experienced investigators and detectives in fatal traffic accidents. Up to three officers in the Dublin metropolitan regional unit in Dublin Castle have gone abroad for specialised training on the investigation of fatal accidents. We will expand on that training. They are being used, not only in Dublin, but throughout the country where their expertise is required.
In relation to Deputy Shortall's question, the Minister of State has already addressed the loophole referred to. As our press officer stated, there is not, in fact, any loophole. Section 11 of the 2002 Act places an obligation on the registered owner of a car to nominate who was driving on a particular date and, in the absence of that, sanctions are applied. This issue was a misunderstanding by whoever reported on it but that has since been clarified.
On the reference to random tests, we do target places where young people congregate, pubs, car parks and so on, as the Deputy said. We welcome the expansion of the circumstances in which we can breathalyse people. A further point was made about the Christmas campaigns and the various weekend operations. We always make the point that this is a stepping up of what we do in the normal course. Operation Lifesaver is just one of our operations and all our operational people, as part of their roles, have a responsibility in regard to traffic law enforcement. It is given some added impetus at Christmas and week-ends. It has already been mentioned by some speaker here that these operations have changed attitudes but not behaviour, certainly in relation to section 49. I would not like anybody to have the impression - we try to counteract this with the various statements we make in the media - that these operations are carried out only at certain times. We are stepping up the activities we carry out every day of the week.
Is it not the case that one rarely sees a checkpoint at pub closing time outside those special periods?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
I do not accept that. We have checkpoints all over the place and schedules are made out for the operational people as a result of what we know, including complaints from the public and information about accident-prone locations. We use rolling checkpoints because, as the members know, a checkpoint in one location loses its effectiveness after a while as people start flashing lights and ringing each other on their mobile phones. That in itself is a deterrent and it slows people down. We do not mind if there is an effect, provided people are not flashing their lights at bank robbers or rapists escaping from scenes. That happens in every country in the world. I have been in Irish bars in New York that have a list of police checkpoints posted on the door. People ring the pub on their mobile phones. That is human nature. The same happens here. I do not accept that one never sees checkpoints. The statistics have been trotted out by the various Departments and agencies and it can be seen that there is room for improvement, but we have certainly improved our performance and the facts and figures are there to prove it in relation to prosecutions.
The suggestion of establishing a special traffic corps has already been covered by the Minister of State. Last year we completed a fairly comprehensive strategic study on traffic law enforcement and policing in which all aspects were considered. The file is with the Commissioner, who is studying it. It is a matter of resources and balance. Our preference would be for a national traffic unit or the traffic units we have to be expanded. A balance will have to be struck between this and all the other things we have to do. For example, my portfolio includes the Criminal Assets Bureau, the national bureau of criminal investigation, the national immigration bureau and the national drugs unit. It might surprise members to hear the relatively small number of people involved in some of those units, which are nevertheless effective. There is always a demand for people on the street; people want gardaí outside their shops. To balance that, we have had an increase in specialised units, as I have already outlined, particularly since 1996. Everybody wants more police, but we have to be realistic.
Mention was made of the four motorcyclists. Again, it is a matter of publicity. Subsistence budgets were being reviewed. On a particular day it may well have been the case that there were four motorcyclists from Dublin Castle available at rush hour in Dublin - I am not denying that - but the report was out of context. In the Dublin region there are six other traffic units in the other divisions. They are assigned 30 motorcyclists, who were out that day. In Dublin Castle there are 50 motorcycles. Every day, 18 are dedicated to traffic management, quality bus corridors and so on around the city. The others have various other things to do. I would accept there were four at one particular time. The report did not mention the reality that there were motorcyclists in other divisions who were also dedicated to traffic.
What about the review Assistant Commissioner Hickey mentioned? Does that have any implications for the level of service?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
It will be counteracted. Things change so rapidly. For example, it might have been traditional for cyclists and motorcyclists to finish at a particular time - that has changed now. With late-night shopping, rush hour continues later. The rush hour in Dublin has changed; Thursday evening rather than Friday evening is the big evening for traffic. It has not made any significant difference. There is no lack of motorcycles due to any subsistence review.
Chief Superintendent Fitzpatrick might cover the questions asked by Deputy Ellis.
In relation to the tolerance level of speed cameras, there is a force instruction going back to 1998 to allow for a tolerance level, usually 5% or ten miles. That is to allow for inaccuracies in equipment. All our equipment is calibrated annually so there should not be any inaccuracies on our side, but at times there is a limited tolerance level and that is the one that is used.
Is there a tolerance level for the breathalyser? I do not know the technical term for it.
In relation to the readings from the Medical Bureau of Road Safety, if it is so close as to warrant a decision that is not made locally, it is usually the practice that the superintendent will refer the case to the Director of Public Prosecutions if he is of the view that there should be no prosecution.
What is the tolerance?
There is no specific tolerance level of which I know.
At what level will something like that be referred to the DPP? If it is marginal - which is a dangerous concept - at what level will it be referred to the DPP by the local superintendent?
I do not have the instructions with me, but I can send the information to the Deputy, if those instructions exist.
I thank Chief Superintendent Fitzpatrick. We are not trying to nit-pick, but some people out there are wondering why certain cases have never been prosecuted.
I am not sure whether we are at cross-purposes here, but Professor Cusack informed me that there was a 6% margin of error for blood and urine samples. For evidential breath testing, he said, it was 17.5%. In other words, if a person receives a result of 35 in a breath test, he or she could be way over the limit if the margin of error is added.
Professor Cusack
Deputy Ellis and I are talking about two different things. One is the scientific tolerance. Exactly, as the Minister of State just said, it is important to make sure. The presumption of innocence is a very important principle and nobody should be deprived of his or her licence or punished unless the evidence is very clear, because it is a very serious matter. We must allow for that.
To speak as a medical doctor, when one goes into hospital the result of every single blood test is appended with a plus or minus value because we must allow for variation. It is the same for any forensic scientific measurement. For blood and urine, the margin of error is 6%. This means that when someone receives a value of 94, it could actually be a little over 100. For evidential breath testing the margin is 17.5% because there are many more variables. That is scientific tolerance and it operates in favour of the accused driver. In fact, one aspect of this matter has been dealt with in the superior courts - whether or not it is proper for a judge to take that into consideration.
Prosecution tolerance is a different matter and one about which the Chief Superintendent is better equipped to explain. We provide the evidence honestly and fairly. What happens with that evidence is a matter for the Garda and the prosecuting authorities. I was not sure to which tolerance the Deputy was referring.
Mr. Kemp
Deputy Naughten referred to the reduction in fatalities that has occurred since the introduction of penalty points and a number of other measures which are either in place or on the way, and asked why there had not been a reduction in insurance costs. In fact, in recent months there have been a number of reductions, although it is up to each company to price its own products and make its own rating decisions. There has been publicity around a number of companies that have reduced rates in the past few months. This has been largely to do with the perceived early effect of the system of penalty points. As many have said, there is a concern that perhaps the initial reduction was a blip and we are returning to our pre-penalty points bad habits. That may explain why some companies have been reluctant to pass on the reductions at this stage. If the frequency of accidents continues to reduce prices will probably stabilise and hopefully fall over the next year or so. While accident frequency is the major determinant of insurance costs, it is not the only one. We have to look at average costs per claim which involves compensation in the courts, the cost of repairing damage to vehicles, delivery costs and legal fees which make up the total claims bill. I am reasonably hopeful that reductions we have seen over recent months will continue.
Will other companies follow suit?
Mr. Kemp
It is a competitive marketplace and we cannot dictate to our members who have to make their own decisions but they are looking at their own experience and at the pricing policies of their competitors. The case of the young driver mentioned by Deputy Ellis seems to be an extreme example of an increase in price and it would not be typical of what has been happening in the past year or so.
What happens——
Mr. Kemp
It is atypical but it is the case that young drivers have a worse record for causing accidents and, for the average cost, that is reflected in the premiums.
I am not referring to those who are unfortunate enough to have accidents, but to those who have clean records and are being hit as hard as those who have been involved in accidents. Is there not a need for the insurance industry to bring in a bonus system to help young people who maintain their standard of driving, and are accident free? A person at 25 is as mature as somebody at 45 with regard to driving ability, and if that person has had a clean record for eight years, from the age of 17 to 25, it is very unfair to penalised that driver. That is the case because the initial charge is so high that even if the driver were to get a 50% no claim bonus, the premium remains high. A 17 year-old can be charged €3,500 or €4,000 for the first year and even with a 50% no claim bonus that driver is still asked to pay a premium of €1,700 to €2,000 in the second year.
Mr. Kemp
It depends on how one looks at that. The value of the bonus is proportionately higher if one starts with a higher gross charge in the first place. It is a genuine problem for insurers in rating risks because, as with any sector of the insuring population, there are good and bad risks. We are often accused of tarring everybody with the same brush. The difficulty is that when a person presents for insurance for the first time one does not have enough information about the risk. Access to the information on conviction and penalty points through the national driver file would be a great bonus and we have been talking to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government about that. As a category, and it depends on how one slices it, there are above average risks but within that we would like to be able to do more to distinguish the good from the bad in advance.
Some of the initiatives launched in the past couple of years seek to do that by giving special training or allowing more discounts if people put extra technology into the car to monitor their compliance with speed limits. Ways of doing that are becoming available to us.
Until we get information on a person's record, either as it develops once he or she is insured, or if we have access to information on convictions and accident history, it is difficult to distinguish. It is a question of building up that information. The Minister's comments on the responsibility rates and the differences between provisional and full licences are worth bearing in mind. The difficulty is that when insurers are rating they are looking at individual factors and how they interact so there are differences between men and women, between full and provisional licence holders and between responsibility rates as opposed to involvement rates. We have to look at each factor separately, gender, age and the provisional licences.
Let us not get into the price of insurance. Mr. Shaw do you wish to respond?
Mr. Shaw
I will take the questions in reverse order and begin with Deputy Ellis's comment on the advertisements. While I appreciate the point, his words were harsh. We regard the advertisements as disturbing, they are designed to be so, and to impact on a target audience which considers itself immune from the laws of the road and the laws of physics. There is no other way that we know to get through to target groups like this. They are not too severe, unlike the Mint Productions documentary, Crash, that was screened a few weeks ago. That showed reality and what the emergency services, and members of the Garda have to face on the road when they deal with the consequences of a crash.
We looked around the world before we set out on this programme of advertising and we found that in other countries there are advertisements which could be described as extremely severe. We decided not to adopt that approach. The advertisments carry a watershed of 9 p.m. on our local television stations but when they are screened by Sky no watershed applies. It is possible that children can see those advertisements but they see much worse on TV than those ads. We monitor the advertisements, pre and post-screening and we do certain testing on them. We want to make sure they do their job and begin the change of attitude that is required and is displayed in the change of behaviour that is delivered by the level of enforcement.
To take Deputy Naughten's question, there are substantial differences between the European countries which have better road safety records than ours. There are people better qualified than I to say what the kilometre measures of road systems are. Suffice to say that from the point of view of the National Safety Council, which looks at behaviour in other jurisdictions, we take account of the fact that there are differences not just in road infrastructure but in culture and behaviour. However, it is clear that the primary cause of death and injury on the roads of all European countries is the individual behaviour of drivers and road users. In my view, there is no such thing as a dangerous road, simply an inappropriate speed. The road network here is improving and that is contributing to the reduction in risk and in deaths and injuries.
The second question was about the statistics for drink driving. I will defer to Professor Cusack on the specifics of the Coroner's Court. The Deputy correctly observed that we use the statistic that alcohol is a factor, not a primary cause, in 30% of all road crashes and in 40% of fatal crashes. Beyond that we do not go. Our suspicion, if we compare the rate to other countries, is that alcohol plus drug abuse, and the two related, are now probably at the top, along with speed, of the primary causes of death and injuries on our roads. One of the appendices in my report is a comparison of the level of enforcement that takes place in other jurisdictions where they carry out either random or near random breath testing. One of the side-effects of that level of enforcement is that it enables a much better statistical view to be developed on the incidence of either excess drinking or excess drug-taking among the driving population.
I would be very cautious about interpreting the result of enforcement under existing legislation here, which means the gardaí have to form a view because all that one can say, as Professor Cusack has pointed out, is that the incidence of exceeding the limit is in the nineties for the number of samples that are taken. That simply shows that the gardaí are effective and experienced at forming a view before they test someone.
Professor Cusack
I will take the questions in the order in which they came and deal with Deputy Naughten's first, about the frequency of those intoxicated with drugs. We carried out a survey in 2000-2001 of 2,000 samples, one of the largest surveys in Europe. Of those, 1,000 were under the limit for alcohol, the balance were over the limit. Of those under the limit, 326 were positive for drugs and of those over the limit about 14% were positive for drugs. We are still looking at those figures. We have prosecutions from last year——
What are the statistics out of the 2,000 then?
Professor Cusack
Out of the 2,000, 467 were confirmed for drugs.
Out of 2,000?
Professor Cusack
However, they broke down into two subgroups: half of those taken at random were over the alcohol limit; half of them were under the limit.
It is "polydrug use"?
Professor Cusack
From memory, nearly half had more than one drug other than alcohol on board. We have to look at this matter seriously.
Are these all cases of people involved in accidents?
Professor Cusack
No. Mr. Shaw has referred to this. In forensic research there are different groups: people involved in accidents; people taken at random who volunteer for blood and urine tests, which is a difficult thing to do and those taken in, following the opinion formed by a garda that they were intoxicated. These were people arrested on suspicion of intoxicated driving. We took the samples to examine. If people were behaving in an intoxicated manner, their driving was impaired and they were not over the alcohol limit, the question arises, if it is not alcohol, what is it? We would, therefore, expect more of those cases to be positive for drugs and that is what we found.
Drivers under the alcohol limit are now automatically checked. We introduced a policy since 1 January of last year that every sample of blood and urine sent to us under the alcohol limit is automatically tested for drugs. We have been at this for 18 months. In addition to this, there are a small number of requests. The one way we can improve that is with the evidential breath-testing instruments. If somebody is taken into a garda station, undergoes an evidential breath-test and it turns out with low or no alcohol, the question arises what is it? That is perhaps where there might be some more samples fed into the medical bureau for blood and urine testing. Last year, we only got three; this year it is four so far. That is an area where we can improve on our samples.
Can the equipment be programmed to analyse for drugs?
Professor Cusack
No, that will be an entire session, I believe, from the Pompidou group. Roadside testing has not yet been successful as one has to look for saliva tests. Also, if one wants to test the urine, to protect the privacy and decency of the individual it requires a much greater system. There is great scramble among all the testing companies to provide these instruments. Whoever comes up with an easy, usual roadside testing for drugs will be a profitable company.
In reality, with the intoxicating test based in the garda stations, people could be let off because they are passing the alcohol test but not being checked for intoxicating drugs as there is no blood or urine sample taken?
Professor Cusack
That is a matter for the gardaí. I presume if the opinion has been formed that the person is intoxicated not through alcohol then it is something else. Occasionally, we must be aware that people may be on prescribed medication, may not have had a meal or be diabetic. I believe the Garda are well-trained in spotting medical conditions that may give rise to an apparent intoxication.
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
I understand there is a provision that in the circumstances outlined where the gardai have formed such an opinion they would call in a doctor to do a blood and urine test. This is other than the case where it was obvious that the person was on medication.
If they are not found to be over the alcohol limit, the Garda can call in a medical professional to take a blood and urine sample?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
That is correct. Legislation provides for it.
Under the law, the individual is legally obliged to stay at the station until the sample is taken?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
That is correct.
Is there an automatic test carrried out for levels of drugs in the blood system?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
That is the purpose of calling in the doctor.
That is for alcohol, is it?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
No, for any intoxicant.
Is there any data on that?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
I have no figures offhand. We can check up on it.
Professor Cusack
The numbers so far are small. However, in consultation with the Garda it is hoped that will increase now that we have the drug analysis programme up and running. The coroners' system in this State is the forensic system that investigates deaths. In the 48 coroners' districts, every single fatality in a road-traffic crash must come before a coroner's hearing. It is my understanding that the PSV inspectors - who are Garda sergeants - provide the evidence for the coroner's court. This is a system that could provide more information. There was a report published by the Government and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 7 December 2000. There is a meeting scheduled between the Coroners' Society and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 20 July at 3.30 p.m. on the implementation of this report. Suffice to say, one of the report's recommendations was that a national database be provided to pool together this information to understand fully the factors that are causing road crashes. We believe we know, but the data is dispersed in 48 coroner's districts. We need to put all that information together. It is all there so why invent something else and go to great expense when we already have this information. It does involve resources and legislative reform, but that is not a matter we need to go into now.
Deputy Shortall inquired about our 60 instruments. I do not say with any satisfaction but we did get 60 instruments nation wide in on target a few days before Christmas. It is a matter of geography and in close consultation with the Garda as there is a limit. Under law the sample must be taken within three hours of being in charge of the vehicle. There is room for another few. It was originally envisaged that it might be in the 70s or 80s. We have plugged many of the gaps. I must be careful with Deputies from around the State being present but every important part of Ireland is covered.
Deputy Shortall also asked about reducing the limit to 50 mg. The Minister of State for Transport, Deputy McDaid, has dealt with that. We are one of the few countries that has not brought it down to 50 mg. The risk of a traffic collision doubles at 50 mg. It is about fivefold at 80 mg. Until we actually bring down the average from 174 mg we will not see a change in behaviour. To a great extent, bringing it down to 50 mg may not make a huge difference. What we really need to do, from a general forensic viewpoint, is to enforce the rule. People will not change their behaviour until the fear of being caught is there.
With regard to methadone replacement therapy, it was an excellent question and I wish I had the answer. This is a therapeutic and rehabilitation measure and not a punitive measure, aimed at bringing people off the more destructive heroin and back into society and work. There are currently about 600 registered users, mainly in the Dublin area. Like any other drug, this is not a matter of legal or illegal substances. Without being politically correct, if my grandmother, on a sleeping tablet, is impaired in her driving, then under road safety is she safe or impaired? It is not, if she is using an illegal drug. We do not look at the legality of the substances. This is another issue that will be debated over the next few days. It is a medical decision. Dr. Ide Delargy of the Irish College of General Practitioners, issued a recent report on methadone users. I wrote to her last week asking if the college issued guidelines for doctors about looking after patients on methadone replacement and driving. If it has not, it is an area we should look at. We need to look at how doctors assess drivers for safety. They are out of date. Dr. Tim Carter from the UK told me recently that after looking at our regulations he came to the conclusion they should be updated. That is something that is being looked at.
Are there limits for methadone or illegal drugs?
Professor Cusack
It must be remembered that drugs can be legally used. Valium is legal, but if one uses it without a prescription or gets a supply on the black market, that becomes illegal. In this case the drug is not legal or illegal, although cannabis is illegal no matter what. There are no relevant levels; the issue is the presence of a drug causing impairment or incapacity to drive. Several European countries, such as Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Sweden, have zero tolerance. If one is found with those substances in one's blood as a driver, that is an offence. Here, we need a garda's opinion and, perhaps, medical evidence of impairment through the presence of the drug, which is what we provide by analysing samples. We need to examine expert programmes of drug recognition.
The figure for people on the methadone maintenance programme is not 600 but over 6,000 in Dublin City.
Professor Cusack
Those are the registered users for GPs, of which there are over 200.
The question that Deputy Shortall is asking is what the medical expertise says about someone who is driving under the influence of methadone. In my previous life as the Minister of State with responsibility for drugs, we could never get an answer on that.
Professor Cusack
I am pursuing that. Currently, as with any other prescribed drugs, the decision to advise that someone is impaired is medical. For example, with someone on valium during the day for post-traumatic stress disorder or a grieving process, the question to answer, in consultation with the person's doctor, is whether he or she is fit to drive. When I get the ICGP guidelines, I shall send them to the Chairman and Deputy Shortall. I am trying to pin this down too. Should we have specific guidelines to help patients decide when they should or should not drive, or should there be a blanket ban on such people driving until they have been stabilised or have got down to a certain level?
You are talking about medical guidelines, but the law is silent on the issue.
Professor Cusack
The law treats it like any other drug. The issue is the presence of an intoxicant causing impairment leading to incapacity to drive. The question for methadone is the same as for any other drug. If we confirm the presence of methadone and the garda has formed the opinion that that person is intoxicated and incapable of driving, my understanding is that it is an offence under present laws.
Have there been successful prosecutions against people found with drugs in their bloodstream?
Professor Cusack
I know that our staff have given evidence, and the answer from the point of view of forensic evidence is," Yes". My scientific staff have been to court in the past few months regarding several cases.
Do you measure the quantity of the drug in the blood, or is it simply indicative?
Professor Cusack
We do both, but for the purposes of the law the issue is the presence of the drug, so we do not get into quantities.
Obviously that rule would not apply to methadone, since its presence is not illegal.
Professor Cusack
The presence of valium or a sleeping tablet is not illegal either, but it is unlawful if it causes intoxication leading to incapacity to drive. We must prove presence plus impairment leading to incapacity rather than follow the system in Germany and other countries, where the presence of the drug is the offence. We do not have zero tolerance. The presence of the drug leading to an incapacity to drive is the offence.
The quantity dictates the level of impairment?
Professor Cusack
Not necessarily, for people can have very high levels in their blood. With opiates, as one takes people down, one is weaning them off. The more opiates one takes, the more receptors there are in one's brain, and the greater amounts one can tolerate. Someone must be tested to see whether they are capable of driving with the presence of a drug proven or shown.
Do not worry about the technical terms. I get mixed up. The alcolyzer is the screening device for evidential breath-testing. It is another help to the garda forming the opinion. In 2001 and 2002, 751 garda operators and 128 supervisors were trained. If we combine that with the figures for 2000, more than 1,000 gardaí have been trained. The course is run jointly with the Garda training college in Templemore. It is held in Harcourt Street in Dublin. After they have been trained on the two instruments, the Lion Intoxilyzer 6000 or the Intoximeter ECIR, they undergo a practical and written test and are signed off by myself and the chief superintendent, who is the director of education. We have those numbers.
Regarding challenges over training, let me phrase this most diplomatically: the presumption of innocence in our judicial system is paramount. The separation of powers and judicial independence are another pillar of our society, but that does not mean that challenges will not come from every quarter. Perhaps I might read a cartoon from a newspaper, which I have on our board. The very learned barrister and the garda are looking a little bit nervous. The barrister is saying, "you are charged with attempting to convict a drunken driver." In other words, it is proper and open for people to make challenges. The very fact that something is challenged is a reflection of a robust system. However, we must continue training all people, including the Judiciary, in new technology, so that there is consistency and fairness, both for the accused driver and for the people, for the latter group is taking the case. It is a constant process, and I am never put off by challenges.
Professor Cusack told us that approximately 2,000 gardaí have been trained in the operation of this equipment. Is there any intention to introduced this as part of the general training of recruits in Templemore?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
It sounds like a good idea, but neither I nor my colleague is involved with training or with Templemore. However, we will come back to the committee on that and take it on board if feasible.
I say that because currently only 20% of gardaí can operate the equipment, since about 2,000 have been trained.
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
Some might say that that is too many. I appreciate what the member is saying. The technology has not been available for that long, and the training is ongoing.
That takes me to another point. If someone is taken in, can he or she be sure that the person testing them has the necessary qualification? That has arisen on a few occasions, as has the question of room temperature and other conditions.
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
I am a little removed from the training. Perhaps Professor Cusack, who was involved with it, might elaborate.
Professor Cusack
Every operator of the instrument must be trained. Each garda is given his or her own password, and to activate the instrument and use it, one must enter that. That means that one is competent and has one's certificate of training.
Mr. Faughnan
On the Garda traffic corps, I would like to stress something once more. I do not know where the confusion has arisen concerning what it is, but the AA is baffled by references to some sort of civilian or quasi-police unit. That is absolutely not what we had in mind when we began arguing for a Garda traffic corps many years ago. The fraud squad consists of fully trained gardaí, as does the Criminal Assets Bureau. We see the Garda traffic corps as being in a similar vein. I see no need for primary legislation to establish some sort of parallel force, for that is absolutely not what we have in mind. We intend that it become a profession within the Garda in exactly the same way as criminal assets or the fraud squad.
I have made the facetious remark before, that one does not hear that one has no fraud squad this weekend because of the match in Croke Park, but one literally hears that respecting the life-saving traffic function. With almost 400 people dying on the roads each year, nothing on the Garda's agenda or among the services that it is able to provide to Irish society can be of greater importance than a continuous roadside presence. There is certainly wide acceptance of that fact among gardaí, and it is a question of giving them the resources to carry out society's mandate. We cannot expect the gardaí to be able to provide the level of enforcement which the road safety strategy requires unless we give them the tools with which to do so.
Personal responsibility has come up as a frequently recurring theme in the debate. I accept that it is paramount in improving road safety. The analogy related to me is that if one is in a factory with a spinning blade in it, one can certainly counsel workers not to go near it and talk about personal responsibility, but one must also design against human nature, and that means that one must put a guard on the blade. A similar analogy would apply to the way in which we construct roads and the way in which we treat single carriageway roads, for example. Personal responsibility will always be the number one factor in improving road safety, but allowances for human fallibility and passive safety have to be engineered into the system. Safer roads can be constructed.
Lastly, it is probably a moot point to make at this stage, because it has been well discussed, but the issue of drugs and driving is a major area where research is required. We have a good handle now on the effect of alcohol on driving. We can measure exactly what alcohol does, in terms of impairment of night vision because of sensitivity to light at the red end of the spectrum, the six-fold increase in accident risk as a certain level of alcohol is approached and so forth. An enormous canon of work and research has been done in this area in many jurisdictions over the years. Relatively speaking, however, we know nothing about the effect of a whole range of drugs, legal and illegal. If somebody who is testing positive for ecstasy is caught, for example, one would suspect intuitively that it has to have an effect on driving ability. We simply do not have enough research to measure it, however, in anything like the same extent that exists for alcohol. There is a huge area there and I am sure it will be one of the road safety problems of the future. We simply do not have enough knowledge of what are the physiological effects of these drugs in terms of driving ability.
Mr. O’Leary
I should like to make just three quick points, Chairman. Deputy Naughten and Professor Cusack mentioned that the issue of access to coroners' information. It is the case that, as a result of the coroners' report, legislation is being prepared. The issue is being addressed against that background and I am sure it will arise in the context of the discussions between the Minister and Professor Cusack and his colleagues. Deputy Naughten also asked about staffing of the Garda national traffic bureau headquarters. That is an administrative division issue which comes under Chief Superintendent Fitzpatrick in Garda headquarters. There are eight people there now, not much different to when it was established, I imagine. The changes that have taken place are in respect of the divisional traffic units. There were 16 units in 1996 and that has increased to 40.
I am looking for the figures for 1998.
Mr. O’Leary
I do not have those figures, but I will have them sent to the Deputy.
Finally, Deputy Shortall mentioned the issue of non-payment of fines and, in particular, difficulties with social welfare dependants and so on. An attachment of earnings Bill is being prepared but I do not have a date for when it is likely to be ready. It may be more significant to point out that research has been done into the reasons why people are not paying fines. One of the difficulties identified is that there is currently no facility for paying fines by instalment. The view is that it might increase the likelihood of payment if such a system was introduced. It is intended to introduce fines by instalment, as part of a Fines Bill being prepared at present.
Mr. Doorley
I should like to thank the Minister for what he said about public consultation. We would have preferred a ten-year strategy, but are now resigned to a three-year strategy. It is very important, however, that we have public consultation. In order to get people to buy into road safety, we have to ask them and involve them. It is not enough to devise a strategy and expect people to get on with it. I very much welcome that consultaton. There is much talk about young people and road safety but, unfortunately, the representative organisations are rarely asked for their views. That is why we welcome this opportunity. On the road safety agency, our point is that while we understand and support the fact that the high level group was to bring agencies together, but it took three or four years long than it should have to introduce a system like penalty points. The ideal is to have an executive agency that would take over responsibility and drive that forward.
On the research front, we accept the need for it and we always read the related documents carefully. There is a good deal of primary research, based on the number of deaths and injured, but not much beyond that. Conor Faughnan mentioned that there was not enough research on drug driving. More in-depth research is needed to understand why accidents happen. An accident is not caused by one event. Sometimes it is the end result of an entire range of things that come together. The challenge is to try to reduce those contributory factors.
Finally, Deputy Ellis spoke of the road safety element of insurance. The example he gave is not atypical, I believe, but we would like to see insurance companies give credit to young drivers who have no penalty points. We welcome the fact that one insurance company is doing that, but the government has an important role to play to ensure that when an insurance company gets access to drivers' files, there has to be clear evidence that those who do not have penalty points actually receive a reduction in their premiums. The insurance industry maintains it is a pool. If that is so and some people have to pay more, then we would certainly like to see that some people pay less, also, in particular young drivers who are being hammered. Many young drivers are forced to get motorbikes or use public transport because they cannot afford the cost of car insurance. That is another road safety issue.
Mr. Shaw
May I ask a question, Chairman?
Yes.
Mr. Shaw
It is addressed to the Department of Finance. I have read its paper fairly carefully and I note that road safety expenditure is set out under three headings. the Medical Bureau of Ireland, the Safety Council of Ireland and the National Roads Authority. The question relates to the last three lines in it which are in the context of the interdepartmental group. Is it the Department's interpretation that this is, in effect, an update review of the benefit cost of road safety. In other words, when it examines the impact on road safety performance on areas that are not direct recipients of road safety funding, is it implied that it is looking specifically at those areas which are direct recipients of the benefit of investment in road safety? An example would be the benefit that takes place to, say, the Department of Health and Children, in terms of the reduction on the demand for services of A & E departments of the acute hospital network, which in terms of road safety is substantial. That is part of the dilemma in a budgetary process where expenditure and subsequent financial benefits are being compared. Is that the intention within this review group?
Mr. Manley
No. First, the three examples cited are simple ones of growth in expenditure. They were not in any way cited in a particular context. We could have taken garda growth in expenditure just as well as road costs. Public expenditure increased by 40% for the two years 2000-2002, so this is an example of that. On the question of the role of the review group, it was initiated and chaired by the Department of Transport and we are involved in that. To paraphrase the group's terms of reference, we would seek to comprehensively monitor all expenditure which has a bearing on road safety as well as all areas which are not normally thought of as road safety, but which do have a dividend from it. I am not trying to anticipate at this stage what the outcome willbe.
Have the benefits, for example, for A & E departments been included? I understand that in some hospitals sometimes up to 70% of the cases presenting for treatment at A & E departments relate to alcohol or drugs. I know that the Department of Finance has a huge interest in what happens at the Department of Health and Children, or so we are told. Surely the knock-on effect in terms of saving money is enormous?
Mr Manley
I hesitate to go further. Perhaps my colleagues from the Department of Transport may wish to say something on this, but, effectively, we would see the group is involved in a comprehensive expenditure review of all costs. We will see if it can be used to improve road safety on a cost effective basis. It is not a pre-ordained outcome. So far, the group has not met once and essentially consider this the kick-off stage. It is not in any way conclusive.
Mr Kemp
I wanted to make one point on a related topic. We, in common with many other people, have been calling for increases in resources, specifically for enforcement, but for other areas as well. It is easy to do without considering how effectively they are deployed. It is worthwhile to stress we would like to see a review of this type in relation to overall costs and benefits to ensure that resources are being effectively deployed. Just one statistic will put it in context: it is estimated, at present, that the economic cost of each fatality on the roads is €1.3 million. Obviously, serious injuries and other accidents have correspondingly lower figures, but in terms of the amount of resources that need to be employed to reduce fatalities and serious injuries, much can be done on the enforcement and road safety promotional sides for the type of savings than can be made.
Mr. Manley
Public expenditure volumes in the period 1998-2002 provide a basis for evaluating its effectiveness in terms of value for money and examining the impact of road safety performance which are not direct recipients of road safety funding, but not where increases in fatalities, serious injuries and breaches of road traffic law result in increased costs, especially in the health and emergency services and the court services. It is recommended that there be a re-prioritisation of road services, policies and measures based, if necessary, on the effectiveness of existing public expenditure and having regard to stated policy. The body concerned with these aspects has a wide remit and I do not wish to pre-judge its deliberations.
I congratulate the delegation for bringing together the players who enforce road safety. As a Deputy who drives from County Clare to Dublin on a weekly basis, I am conscious of the huge awareness of road safety. Some 330,000 speeding notices were issued in 2002. Most drivers do not exceed the national speed limits. What percentages of these notices apply to 30 mile and 40 mile per hour speed limit zones?
Mr. McGovern referred to the introduction of an advanced emergency medical technical programme. I recently spoke to a medic who has returned from working in an accident and emergency unit in England. Experience there shows that the victim at the scene of an accident is much better off being brought quickly to an accident and emergency unit. What is Mr. McGovern's view on that?
With regard to the public expenditure review in the area of road safety, the high level group on road safety has been in operation for a number of years. The Department have responsibility for policy and legislation. We do not control the budgets of all the implementing agencies. Some of them, such as the National Safety Council, the medical bureau and the NRA, report to us but we greatly depend on the co-operation of other bodies.
In the context of preparing the road safety strategy we undertook a cost benefit analysis which considered the benefits of investment in road safety and tried to quantify the cost of fatalities and serious injuries. The results of the survey are in line with the result of similar studies abroad. We were concerned that at a time when there is pressure on the financial resources and there are numerous demands on us to do many things in the area of road safety, we would be in a position to bring forward legislation that would impose demands on other agencies we do not control. At the same time the benefits of such an approach, which mainly accrue to the health services, would not feature properly in Government thinking.
We also considered that this would be a good exercise in terms of getting and sharing more detailed information and co-operation between the different agencies involved. This would provide for a better focus on the costs and benefits. There is much work to be done on road safety between the implementing agencies, never mind the non-implementing ones.
The ambulance service has for some time demanded the introduction of the MTA grade. Ambulance personnel are restricted in the drugs they can administer and the procedures they can undertake at the scene of an accident. We have all heard of references to the "golden error" and the importance of providing front-line intervention. We would support the professionals in their demand for additional training and expertise to be provided at the scene of an accident.
What about the situation in England, where they are returning to the old system and want medics to deal only with basic treatment on the basis that it is important the victim is immediately brought to the accident and emergency unit, even if it raises other questions regarding the downgrading of accident and emergency units in hospitals?
That is a circular point in some respects. The emphasis in the first instance must be on stabilising anybody involved in an accident. If we are in a position to equip ambulance crews to a greater degree in terms of the services they can provide on the spot it is to be welcomed. I do not believe anybody disputes the need for early transfer into specialist units for medical treatment, but I would argue, and have been convinced from our discussions with ambulance personnel, that enhancement of services at the scene is worthwhile and that ability to administer additional medication, such as cardiac care, which they are not in a position to do at present, would be a welcome development. Thereafter we would encourage early transfer to specialist units.
Are you aware of the situation in England I have outlined?
Not directly. It is not something ambulance personnel are pushing, nor is it being pushed by others. We would share both concerns in that we would accept there is a need to improve the service provided at the scene of an accident, while the early transfer to specialist units is accepted over time in any event. I do not believe anybody disputes this.
Has Mr. Manley seen the cost/benefit analysis document on road safety strategy, produced by the safety council, which suggests that an investment of €120 million has brought a benefit of approximately €360 million? If so, does he accept its findings?
On the question of drivers with provisional licences, those of us who learned to drive some time ago developed a respect for the car because we had to undergo an apprenticeship of a kind with an experienced driver. There was much to be said for the rigorous enforcement of that system. What is the law regarding holders of provisional driving licences driving without an experienced driver? What view does Mr. Kemp take in terms of providing insurance cover for those who are driving only on a provisional licence without an experienced driver?
The Minister has indicated changes he is about to introduce to this area.
What is the current legal position?
The law provides that holders of provisional licences must be accompanied by a qualified driver for the duration of their first licence; one is not required for the duration of a second licence but it can be with regard to a third licence.
Is the law being enforced?
Assistant Commissioner Hickey
There is enforcement, but I do not have the exact figures with me. We can submit them later.
Is insurance provided to those who break the law?
Mr. Kemp
Insurance is provided in the first instance on the assumption that the insured will comply with the law. There are prohibited conditions in the Road Traffic Acts, incorporating European Union directives which prevent us from relying on a breach of compliance with licence conditions to deny a third party claim. That must be covered under compulsory motor insurance. Therefore, if somebody is driving under a provisional licence and is not in compliance with licence conditions, for example, in relation to being accompanied, the insurance company would still have to meet the third party claim. However, there is usually provision in the policy, depending on the terms of the contract, to recover any such outlay from the policy holder or driver. This means that somebody who breaches the conditions will have, in the initial instance, the protection of the policy as regards third party claims but not as regards their own claim for damage to the car. They are also at risk of having the insurer recover their outlay from them. If there were not the legal prohibition, there would be a much more immediate and draconian response to the person who does not comply with the licence conditions.
Will Mr. O'Leary explain the reason it will take a further 12 months to introduce the computerised penalty points system? The gardaí on the ground say this is a bureaucratic nightmare for them. We were given a commitment that it would be in place by now but it is still not in place. I wish to ask Mr. Kemp a question, following on from a question asked by Mr. Doorley? The greatest gathering of statistics on road traffic accidents is held by members of the Irish Insurance Federation and I should like to know if the members of the IIF have any proposals to publish those statistics and make them freely available? That would go a long way towards highlighting the need for statistics and research.
I wish to ask the Minister two questions. First, 15 months ago the then Minister of State, Deputy Molloy, made an announcement in relation to the ban on the use of mobile phones while driving. I take this opportunity to send our regards to the former Minister of State.
We have a vote, Deputy. Can you be brief?
When will that ban be implemented?
Can you answer those three questions briefly because we have to adjourn for a vote in the Dáil?
Mr. O’Leary
In relation to the computer system, I take the Deputy's point that it would be nicer if we were more advanced but the history of the project is that it is now on target but the nature of it means that it cannot be done any earlier than the timescale I mentioned.
With regard to the mobile phone issue, we have been in consultation with the Attorney General - I am not sure about the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform - and there is conflicting legal advice as to whether we need a legislative change to bring that about. That is the current position. It is a matter of introducing legislation.
Mr. Kemp
On the insurance statistics, all of the comparable information that is available on private motor insurance is in the Motor Insurance Advisory Board report. It will issue another report later this year which will update it for more recent years. That shows comparative accident records of various groups and different risk factors in terms of age, gender and area. Collation is more difficult because the information is not recorded on a common system.
Can I ask a question?
The Deputy cannot because we have to go to the Dáil for a vote. I thank everybody for attending this afternoon. A great deal of information was brought forward and we would probably need another two sessions of this duration to deal with all of it. I concur with what Deputy Shortall said. It is probably based on the integrated services process that involved both our constituencies, where providers to the most deprived communities got together resulting in an amazing amount of co-ordination in providing services to the deprived. The same could be done here and I concur with what Deputy Shortall said on that. Perhaps the Minister could work on a form like that because there is a great deal of agreement but at the same time there is a lack of knowledge of what other people are doing or of their ideas.
I would like to hear the Minister——
We can talk to him afterwards. Some people promised to send us documents or further information. I ask them to send it through the Clerk to the committee. On behalf of the committee, I thank you all. The meeting has been very useful.
The joint committee adjourned until 9.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 18 June 2003.