Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 28 February 2018

Select Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport

Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2017: Committee Stage

1:30 pm

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will respond to Deputy Robert Troy's questions first and then address the amendment. As always, the Deputy's questions are legitimate, but they are not relevant to the purpose of the Bill. On his point about the figure of 94%, I presume he is asking why the penalties for those in that category are not more severe. The idea of grading of offences may be worthy of consideration, but this is a very narrow Bill, deliberately so, to enable it to be enacted quickly. However, that has not happened for various reasons, but it is my intention to introduce a road traffic Bill every year I am in office. Such a Bill was introduced last year and the previous year and we are now dealing with this Bill. I am grateful for the Deputy's contribution on the announcement made this morning which was all to do with road safety.

The aim of the Bill is to address a practice which we have identified as being totally and utterly inconsistent and wrong, whereby some people found to be over the limit are not being disqualified. Had we chosen to introduce a much more comprehensive Bill to address drink driving, it would, undoubtedly, have taken longer to get it through than this Bill. When one is in the business of trying to save lives, it is immensely frustrating to be delayed in that mission. Whether members believe this legislation will save lives - I have no doubt that it will - it is difficult to accept delays. If we were to extend the Bill to address a lot more complicated questions, we would meet far greater resistance to it from predictable quarters. There may come a time, however, when we will be able to address all of the issues raised more comprehensively. I would like to be far more radical in a lot of the legislation I am introducing, but this Bill is deliberately narrow in order to address quickly the issue arising in the case of the other 6%. I do not think it is implicit in what the Deputy said that because we are not addressing the 94%, dealing with the other 6% is not legitimate. The argument in that regard has pretty well been accepted. It establishes the principle without a loophole that everybody over the limit will be disqualified. That is the message we want to send. There will be a time elsewhere to review the penalties. I am sure it is the case that they are never up to date or consistent. Road traffic law is full anomalies, but this is one issue we wanted to address quickly.

The Deputy cited particular figures. I could produce figures too. Some people keeping saying the figure is only 6%, but a figure of 6% is huge in the context of the number of people who are dying.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.