Dáil debates

Wednesday, 4 October 2006

Road Traffic and Transport Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Martin CullenMartin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I thank the Members present for their interest in this Bill and for agreeing to deal with this matter at such short notice. I particularly thank the spokespersons for each party for facilitating this debate and the speedy passage of the legislation. The Bill is short, as it comprises only two sections, the first relating to road traffic law which underpins and promotes road safety in the area of drink-driving and the second relating to road transport matters. The Bill is mostly a technical one, although it proposes two important policy initiatives which improve and strengthen provisions relating to drink-driving. I shall address the road safety provisions in the first instance.

Deputies have shown a particular interest in road safety issues generally, expressing particular concern about the high level of deaths and injuries on our roads — a concern that I equally share. Indeed, many of the issues raised by Deputies during debates and discussions are now reflected in legislation enacted by the House. The key determinant of road safety performance is the behaviour of road users. Positively influencing behaviour forms the primary focus of our road safety strategies.

Behaviour is influenced by initiatives across a number of areas, including the promulgation and enforcement of laws that promote road user behaviour. Such laws must also be underpinned and supported by the application of fines, prison sentences and driving disqualifications that collectively create an appropriate deterrent to those who endanger the lives of others by their failure to acknowledge and comply with the appropriate behavioural norms. The Road Traffic Act 2006 considerably strengthened the law in these areas.

The number of people being killed and injured on our roads is still unacceptably high. I do not hide my personal concern about the trends in road deaths established over the past two years. A total of 396 people lost their lives in 2005 and 279 people died up to the end of September 2006. However, there is a glimmer of hope for the future. A small change has happened — potentially a very significant one. Since the introduction of roadside mandatory alcohol testing, MAT, in July, which has a legislative basis in the Road Traffic Act 2006, drivers are beginning to take heed and, more importantly, they are beginning to change their behaviour and attitudes towards drinking and driving.

The number of road deaths in August 2006 was 17 — the lowest number for any month since November 1999. This compares to 24 road deaths in August 2005 and 35 in August 2004. This trend is also reflected in the number of deaths during September 2006 which was 22, compared to 31 deaths in September 2005 and 34 in September 2004. This downward trend follows the introduction of MAT. In parallel, the number of road collisions has also fallen. Increased levels of enforcement are having a significant deterrent effect on those who would otherwise drink and drive. While it is important not to base trends on two months' statistics, the reduction during August and September is a positive development which I am hopeful will continue.

The immediate focus of the Bill on the road traffic side is to support the introduction of legislation that will further strengthen drink-driving provisions and improve enforcement. Section 13 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 provides that a person arrested under various provisions relating to drink driving, and the commission of other serious offences, can be required to provide a breath, blood or urine sample in a Garda station for evidential purposes. However, the section refers to the formation of an opinion by a member of the Garda that an intoxicant has been consumed in advance of administering an evidential test.

My Department has looked at decisions in the courts and has found that the presentation of the wording of the section gives rise to the potential for misinterpretation. In recognising that this is a pivotal provision in terms of the overall code applying to drink-driving, I am taking the first available opportunity to both clarify and strengthen the provision. It is proposed to re-state section 13(1), therefore, to remove the requirement for a member of the Garda to form an opinion in the Garda station, where a driver is arrested under any of the drink-driving provisions, including those relating to a refusal to provide a roadside sample, and in the case of the other serious road traffic offences which are not drink-driving related.

This amendment is sensible since the initial roadside encounter between a garda and a driver involves either the commission of a serious road traffic offence, the formation of an opinion that an intoxicant has been consumed or, in the case of a MAT checkpoint, a refusal by a driver to provide a sample where there was no requirement to form an opinion. In the circumstances, with the assistance of the Attorney General, I am proposing to streamline the provision so that the necessity to form an opinion again in the Garda station no longer applies.

At present, only a designated doctor can take a blood or urine sample in a Garda station. The timely availability of a doctor has given rise to problems in this area. Given the increase in detections resulting from the introduction of MAT, it is likely that this problem will become more significant. It is proposed to extend the pool of resources available to the gardaí to take blood and urine samples. The provision will ensure that, once practical arrangements are in place for the identification of nurses in the vicinity of Garda stations, a greater number of medical staff are available for taking samples. There are a number of consequential amendments resulting from this provision included in the Bill.

A typographical error, which could have a limited impact on the operation of mandatory alcohol testing, is also being corrected. Section 4 of the Road Traffic Act 2006 provides for the introduction of MAT checkpoints. It is an offence under section 4(6) to refuse to give a roadside breath sample, the penalty for which is a fine of up to €5,000 on conviction and/or imprisonment for up to six months. Anyone who refuses to give a roadside breath sample can be arrested under section 4(7).

Section 13 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 provides that a person arrested under various provisions relating to drink-driving, and the commission of other serious offences, can be required to provide a breath, blood or urine sample in a Garda station for evidential purposes. Section 4 of the Road Traffic Act 2006 amends section 13 of the Road Traffic Act 1994 to provide that a person, who is arrested for refusing to provide a roadside breath sample under the MAT system, can be required to provide an evidential test in a Garda station. The amended section 13 refers to a person arrested under section 4(6) of the 2006 Act. This should read section 4(7). This typographical error relates only to a small number of cases where a person refuses to give a roadside breath sample and where they are arrested for the purpose of providing an evidential test.

The MAT system has been operating effectively since the end of July and the numbers who refuse to provide samples are, according to the gardaí, very low. It would ultimately be a matter for the courts in any relevant case brought before them to determine whether the typographical error did or did not negate the clear intention of the Oireachtas in enacting the relevant provisions of the 2006 Act. However, to remove any such uncertainty, and in light of legal advice received from the Attorney General on this matter, it is proposed to amend the section. There are also a small number of consequential technical amendments, which arise as a result of the changes which are being made.

Section 2 of the Bill deals with road transport provisions, in particular the granting of operator licences to both road haulage operators and to road passenger operators. The reason for these provisions is to address an issue that was identified during routine work within my Department. It emerged that section 3 of the Road Transport Act 1986 had been inadvertently repealed in October 2005. This section is the main statutory power given to the Minister to grant licences to road haulage operators. The repeal was made under the Road Transport Act 1999 (Repeals) (Commencement) Order 2005, made on 28 October 2005, in the mistaken belief that section 3 of the 1986 Act was obsolete.

The Office of the Attorney General has confirmed that a power for the Minister to grant such road haulage operator licences must be contained in primary legislation — the necessary powers to do so do not exist under the European Communities Act 1972. As both passenger and haulage operators share a common regulatory framework under EU law, the Office of the Attorney General also reviewed my power, as Minister for Transport, to grant passenger transport operator licences. The power to grant such licences is contained in regulation 3 of the European Communities (Road Passenger Transport) Regulations, 1991, which were made under section 3 of the European Communities Act 1972.

The advice of the Office of the Attorney General was that specific provisions are not contained in the parent EU directives that permit or oblige the issue of these licences. Accordingly, that office advised that it was beyond the Minister's power at the time to make regulations providing for such licences. Instead, such a power must be contained in primary legislation. Section 2 of this Bill will remedy this problem by providing for such a power.

The main provisions of section 2 are as follows. Subsection (1) provides for the Minister to have the power to grant both road haulage and road passenger transport operator licences. Subsection (2) provides that applicants must be of good repute, appropriate financial standing and have professional competence. Subsection (5) retrospectively validates any licences for both road haulage and passenger operators granted, or deemed to have been granted, under the previous legislation.

The Office of the Attorney General has advised that all relevant statutory instruments made under the Road Transport Acts be reviewed to ensure they are statutorily compliant in relation to licensing. This work is under way. A comprehensive review of all legislation governing the road haulage and road passenger operator sectors will then be undertaken with a view to consolidating them into one Bill, a point Deputy Olivia Mitchell has raised on a couple of occasions and with which I agree.

I am conscious that the Road Traffic Acts have also become a complex body of legislation and this needs to be addressed. A programme of restatement of legislation is being commenced under the Government initiative to improve the quality and accessibility of legislation. In response to the consultation exercise carried out during the summer, my Department put forward the Road Traffic Acts as a body of legislation suitable for restatement and I understand this is currently under consideration. The restatement of these Acts will greatly facilitate their subsequent consolidation.

I thank the House for allowing the urgent debate on these important provisions. I look forward to a positive and supportive debate on the Bill and I commend it to the House.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.