Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Martin Kenny for his proposals. We all agree we need to reduce deaths on our roads and it is fair to say there are no ideological differences in that regard but there are different views as to what is practical and effective. Speed limits are reviewed from time to time for appropriateness as circumstances change. However, writing into law that there has to be a review within 12 months would not help. That is even more the case when we consider that the legal requirement the Deputy is proposing is not on the effect of the change but on only one aspect of it. In addition, the proposal that the recommendations of the review would be binding would be an unusual provision for any review under road traffic law. Reviews can make recommendations which turn out not to be feasible or appropriate. Reviews could make a mistake and would then be binding in law. It would be highly risky, to say the least, to write a blank cheque for a review that nobody at local authority level has seen, a review that has not even happened and of which the scope and terms of references are as yet unknown, as is the composition of the reviewing team.

The Deputy also referred to "high collision locations". I know what is intended by the manner in which the Deputy has made that reference but it is not a term defined in law. There can be many causes of collisions. Speed is a major factor and as we know, the speed at which a collision happens is also a major factor in determining how serious the outcome is. However, even if there were a definition of a "high collision location" proposed by the Deputy, which there is not, it would be wrong to imply, as the proposal does, that the sole factor at issue was speed, as an example.

TII can and does analyse all the risks on the road and has a register around them. That will continue to happen without this amendment. The idea of writing into law specific requirements for what reviews of this type should cover, and that they would be binding in law, would be risky and dangerously narrow when we do not know what those reviews might recommend to local authorities or TII. I believe it would be a mistake to say that the recommendations of a review nobody has seen would be binding. The recommendations could contradict road safety principles, for example. We do not know who might comprise the review team or what its terms of reference might be. Furthermore, the terminology used, "high collision location", is not defined. We are not in a position to support that particular amendment.

As to the time limit for local authority speed limit reviews, it is obvious that local authorities need to do speed limit reviews in their areas from time to time, and they do so. However, setting out the timing in law would not be appropriate. We are going to try to address that through the guidelines we issue. We are going to synchronise and sequence that clearly to local authorities. Different local authorities will face different issues and some reviews that might happen after the overall speed limit review, which will have to occur nationally, may take a different timeframe. They may be shorter. We will be setting ambitious timelines through the statutory guidelines and directions we will issue following the enactment of the Bill. A speed limit review may be undertaken to examine one particular road following the national review, which will take a number of weeks to do. There may be a subsequent review that will take a different length of time. The timelines we will publish following the review will be ambitious, much more focused and truncated than we have had in the past 20 years. Our statutory guidelines and directions will be about giving flexibility to local authorities, depending on their circumstances. We want to ensure that local authorities do the reviews properly and in the most efficient way possible. It might be very easy for some reviews to adhere to a time limit in primary legislation but other reviews might take longer, depending on their complexity. Through guidance and direction, we will have the ability to set out clear timelines and we will be doing so.

Deputy Matthews asked about a definition of "built-up areas". That definition is set out in the Local Government Act 2001. We will be giving further detail in that respect when we publish the guidance for local authorities on which significant work is ongoing.