Ms Verona Murphy:

To answer Senator O'Sullivan's questions on cyclists, it is not about the right of either the cyclist or the truck driver. It is about a mutual understanding and respect of road use. That is the conundrum. Cyclists undergo no formal training. They learn to ride a bike and that is more or less it for the rest of their lives. A truck driver will be shown how to take that manoeuvre to the left from day one. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport reduced our carrying capacity from 42 tonnes to 40 tonnes on a five axle vehicle. The hope was that would put six axle vehicles on the road carrying six tonnes. In terms of the manoeuvrability of a six axle vehicle in comparison to a five axle vehicle, they would be miles apart. We do not have the possibility of doing it any other way but if the cyclist had undergone any type of formal training, he or she would understand the manoeuvre in the same way that the truck driver only has the traffic light system to complete the manoeuvre. The cyclist can stay back and let him complete his manoeuvre. They should have respect for one another. Alternatively, what would happen is that the cyclist may be knocked down because of poor visibility.

There is a huge disparity in terms of what can be seen, but we cannot dictate which are which with regard to left hand drive and right hand drive trucks. If a left hand drive truck comes into the country, it is normally of foreign registration. All my trucks are left hand drive because I predominantly work on the Continent and it was for easy access to toll booths when they were in being. The manoeuvre is taken in proper fashion but it is generally the cyclist who does not understand the manoeuvre. It is about safety and respect for one another. We have nothing against cyclists. We want all cyclists to be highly visible. It is not just cyclists that we do not want to wear headphones. We do not believe any road user should wear a headphone, whether they are a pedestrian on a leisurely walk or whatever. In France and the rest of Europe, one will receive a €1,000 fine for the use of headphones while operating a mechanically propelled vehicle. That should not be any different from operating one on the general roadway

With regard to overtaking in inclement weather conditions, it is very frustrating. I have had experience of that and it is more about one's own judgment. I do not believe drivers hog the white line on dual carriageways. The problem is the size of their wheels versus what we are used to but in inclement conditions that does not matter. If there is heavy rain, it is always safer to err on the side of caution. The driver is probably maintaining his proper speed. He is not doing anything wrong but the size of his wheel in comparison to the amount of water that is being thrown up makes it highly dangerous, and it takes great experience to overtake a truck of that size while driving in inclement weather conditions. It is better to arrive alive. I have often sat behind a truck for 40 km or 50 km in inclement weather conditions for the sake of not being able to overtake and see where I am going. Again, it is about mutual respect for all road users. Environmentally, cyclists are encouraged in cities throughout the world. We have no difficulty with that but there needs to be an understanding of the manoeuvre that driver is making and, equally, that the cyclist is the smaller of the two road users. There is nothing we can do. We have all the requirements of DOE testing, which is to a very high standard. We are held to account. There is no longer any slippage in this area whereby one might get away with this or that. Our standards are extremely high. They are set down by the RSA and the CVRT DOE centres and if one does not have the requirement, one does not pass the test.

I had a gentleman with an 03 registration truck complain to me the other day. The manufacturer's mirror that was fitted in 2003 was still on that truck but the standard has since changed, and it is on the basis of vision regarding pedestrians and cyclists. He was aggrieved that he had to change and update the standard of the mirror because it was a manufactured mirror but that is how we evolve. This is how road safety works. Standards change, and it is costly to comply. I do not see that costly updated vehicles are any different. They are all subject to wear and tear. They are all in need of maintenance and roadside checks but as Deputy O'Keeffe said, those roadside checks should not take place on roadways with speed limits of 100 km or more. I have spoken to the RSA and have been diligently told that it is An Garda Síochána which dictates where a roadside check takes place. In no country in Europe will we see a roadside check on a motorway. One will be diverted off the motorway but one will not see a check carried out on the M1, the N9, the M9 or any of those motorways. Equally, one will not see tractors on motorways but one will see them in Ireland. That amuses our European counterparts when it comes to road safety and road standards.