Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am sure that is the case. That is part of the reason I wonder why there is not one large organisation because it seems to me that would involve greater leverage.

The comment that every generation must learn the law is an interesting one. There is some validity in that. It would be useful for us to recommend some things from the hearings and one of them would be about education and retraining programmes. When there is a change, for example, to drink-driving rates, people pay attention because they think it will affect them, but when the rates fall, people do not have the same level of awareness.

Reference was made to the level of enforcement. I was breathalysed on the way home from Leinster House one night when we had a late sitting. It was the only time in 35 years of driving that I was breathalysed. It was part of a Christmas campaign. Breath-testing is carried out on a sporadic basis. People who are at the upper end of the offending scale are not being caught. What tends to happen is that there are drink-driving campaigns as opposed to consistent breath-testing. I agree that we must look at the available evidence but, irrespective of what law we enact, without enforcement it does not matter if it is 120 or 150. We are still not catching the people we should be catching. On occasion, even when people are caught there are times when technicalities arise. For example, in my area the machine in the Garda station was not properly calibrated and the offender got off. There are a range of factors that must be taken into account. We must look at the evidence in considerable detail and if it stacks up there is merit in the legislation. The potential to save lives is the critical reason underlying the enactment of legislation such as the Bill under discussion. However, we will not look exclusively at Road Safety Authority reports and we will take international evidence into account as well.