Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

The advent of the new administrative disqualification and fixed charge system for certain drink driving offences placed the spotlight on the range of mandatory disqualifications currently applied under the Road Traffic Acts. The immediate consequence of a decision to apply an administrative disqualification of six months to a specific group of drink driving offences means that the periods for minimum disqualification that apply following convictions for drink driving offences generally required review.

That review established that there was a need to look critically at the overall range of minimum disqualifications that are currently applied in respect of the more serious offences created under the Road Traffic Acts. The disqualifications in question are known as consequential disqualifications as they are applied as a consequence of conviction of an offence. The range of offences to which they apply was set out in the Road Traffic Act 1994. That Act, with an amendment promoted through the Road Traffic Act 1995 in respect of certain drink driving offences, also established the minimum periods for such disqualifications.

Given the much higher profile that applies to road safety now and accepting that there is a broad consensus on the need for more consistent deterrents that reflect the seriousness with which society views breaches of traffic law, it is timely that the system for consequential disqualification should be reviewed. The section therefore provides that the minimum period of disqualification for the most serious offences, which include dangerous driving causing death or serious injury and the most serious drink driving offences, will be increased from two years to four years in respect of a first offence and from four years to six years for a second or subsequent offence. The new offence of striking a railway or other bridge which gave rise to death or serious injury has been added to the list.

The Deputy proposes that the periods be increased from two years to five years for the first offence and from four years to ten years for a second or subsequent offence. These proposed increases are disproportionate, having regard to the disqualifications generally. The periods in the Bill are a significant increase on the current position and it is still open to the courts to apply longer periods if it is deemed appropriate to do so. I recall when dealing with other issues similar to this it was pointed out to me that if one includes disproportionate provisions in the Bill, the courts will just do something different. The court will look at the proportionality of the provision and the range of years involved but it is open to the court to impose a longer period and a more severe penalty.

See this speech in context