John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)

I wish to share time with Deputy Glennon.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. While the primary function of the Bill is to provide for the introduction of a new system of speed limits based on metric values, the underlying emphasis is improved road safety under a number of headings. When I read the Bill, my attention was drawn to section 24, which is minor but relevant. It addresses the issue of people under the age of 16 owning mechanically propelled vehicles. The section states:

(1) A person shall not supply a mechanically propelled vehicle to a person under the age of 16 years.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €3,000.

(3) In this section "supply", includes supply by way of sale, hire, loan, gift, or other means of making the vehicle available to a person.

I welcome the section. Many parts of my constituency continue to suffer from the scourge of joyriding. While a number of the cars involved are stolen, many are not and they are supplied to, young people by uncaring, unscrupulous, selfish and reckless individuals. The Bill goes some way to addressing this issue. When one examines the trail of devastation caused by joyriding, including death, serious injury, damage to property and so on, one wonders whether the penalty provided for in this section is sufficient to meet the crime. If a car supplied to a youth under 16 is involved in an accident resulting in death or serious injury such as a permanent disability, is a maximum fine of €3,000 on conviction appropriate to the crime? Should a judge have the option to impose a custodial sentence? This issue should be examined.

As technology develops, modern cars become less easy to steal and those who are engaged in joyriding are using older cars, which have been traded in through a variety of scrappage deals. However, these cars, colloquially referred to as "company cars", are being sold by, unscrupulous individuals and section 24 attempts to address this problem. The penalty provided under it is sufficient if the car is driven off the road and burnt out but when an accident occurs, which we see all too often in parts of Dublin, the fine is not appropriate.

A related issue is establishing whether the person to whom such a car is sold is 17 or older. I thought this was a minor and trivial matter but that is not the case. We have laboured with the issue of age for a long time. For example, where alcohol is served, the onus of proof is on the publican when there is a question mark over an individual's age. Progress has been made through the introduction of identity cards and so on but perhaps the section could be tightened up so that the purchaser must produce a driving licence before completing the sale of the vehicle. The intention of the section is correct but more attention should be paid to the detail because I am concerned the person who sells the car could say the youth looked 17 or 18 years because he or she was not required to seek proof of age. The section is underestimated because it will have wide implications if it is enforced properly.

The definition of "supply" covers sales, hire, loan, gift or other means. How will persons under the age of 16 who use quads or scrambling bikes through their involvement in a variety of sporting clubs be affected? The original intention of the legislation was to cover the use of vehicles in a public place but I am unsure whether it will have implications for using these vehicles. Perhaps the Minister of State will examine this issue.

Previous speakers referred to the speed limits that will result from the conversion to the metric system. It has taken too long to convert speed limits to metric measurement. As one drives along the Naas dual carriageway and reads signs outlining the distances to Cork and Limerick in kilometres, but speed limits are expressed in miles per hour. That is confusing, particularly for tourists who are used to reading signs in kilometres per hour. I am glad the change is being made and, while some will consider it hasty, it is, nonetheless, absolutely necessary, as it will result in uniformity.

However, speed limits will be changed under the legislation and not only converted to the metric system, which I welcome. I am glad that under section 6 a speed limit of 80 kph will be imposed on all regional and local roads. The speed limit currently is 60 mph. I recently met representatives of Rathcoole Community Council regarding a traffic calming scheme which will be implemented on Johnstown Road on the approach to Rathcoole village. The Kilteel Road is on the far side of the Johnstown Road. It was a rural road that heads upwards into the mountains and the odd car used it but, following the development that has taken place in the area, this little road is carrying a significant volume of traffic, which travels down the hill at 60 mph. The legislation will reduce the speed on that road from 60 mph to 50 mph. A number of Members have not realised that speed limits on such roads will be changed.

Section 9 permits local authorities to make regulations under guidelines that will be laid down by the Minister. Under the regulations, speed limits could be reduced to as low as 30 km/h. While many of us who were councillors up to recently would have envisaged such a speed limit where road works or housing developments were underway, one of the major issues about which we received queries was road safety in the vicinity of schools where the speed limit is 30 mph. Depending on the regulations that come from the Minister's office, I envisage the new reduced limits of 30 km/h will be in the vicinity of vulnerable areas such as schools and other community or high development areas, where the limit is currently 30 mph. The 30 mph limit on some of these roads where the volume of pedestrians is so high is unacceptable and dangerous. However, these decisions will be made at local level, which is appropriate. Having sat on a local authority for a number of years, I know these are the issues that are raised, but until now there was no procedure to effect change in the speed limits. This change is welcome.

Some people will question whether this change will ever be implemented. The Bill will also allow us to increase the speed limit on some of our ordinary roads. Under the guidelines and the regulations of the Minister, the local authority will have an input and say on the limits on these roads. In the case of the Naas dual carriageway, in my area, where most of the intersections are being closed, the road is three-lanes wide and runs into a motorway and there will be questions to address as to whether we can increase the speed limits. The Belgard Road, which links Clondalkin and Tallaght is a dual carriageway with a bus lane and a 40 mph speed limit. Again, the local authority will have the option of addressing the limits on that road.

This legislation also refers to the penalty points system. Some weeks ago the Committee of Public Accounts debated this issue. Penalty points were introduced in late 2002. The hurried manner in which they were introduced resulted in technical and administrative difficulties. These difficulties were the basis of our debate. The contributions of everyone at the meeting, representatives from the main political parties, the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Transport, and the Garda Síochána, pointed out that while there were difficulties involved in administering the system, in excess of 100 people were alive today as a result of the introduction of penalty points. At the conclusion of the debate the committee was glad to hear that the issues that arose in the early stages with regard to the implementation of the system have, by and large, been addressed. It concluded that no matter when the system was going to be introduced, it would have involved technical problems. The authorities feel they have overcome the problems. They are confident that the roll out of the remainder of the penalty points system will be successful and will not encounter the same difficulties and impediments it did on its introduction.

One aspect of this Bill is that it allows for the outsourcing of some of the services to implement penalty points. This is appropriate as it is unnecessary for the Garda and Departments to be involved, hands-on, in every aspect of the penalty points system. Detection is one issue, but penalty points also involve significant administration. I am glad the legislation provides for the outsourcing of much of this administration.

In the first year of their introduction penalty points made a significant and beneficial contribution to road safety. Driver behaviour changed. However, last year and over the past number of months, many people have said that we have not maintained the change. As the penalty points system is extended, people will become more aware of it. It has potential and will revert to having the positive impact on changing driver behaviour that it had previously.

See this speech in context