Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Tá roinnt ceisteanna agam ar na leasuithe seo. As I stated on Second Stage, I welcome the Bill. I had concerns. If the Minister wants some movement on the amendments - I am not totally in favour of the full extremes that the amendments seem to suggest - I believe that somebody who has failed to comply with the requirements of mandatory testing as set out here at least should automatically lose his or her licence because it is a road traffic offence.

On the question of imprisonment or threat of imprisonment, the proposal is a major step forward. There should be such a threat. Bear in mind that with the threat of imprisonment for six months or 12 months, the Minister is then criminalising that person. We know what goes on in the prisons. We know how overcrowded they are and how brutal they can be, and we need to be mindful whenever discussion is being had to increase a level of imprisonment, for instance from six to 12 months, that such does not happen. While the Bill provides for a term not exceeding six months, it should be amended to allow for the imposition of loss of licence. If the Minister indicates that he is willing to accept that, then I will not put down an amendment on Report Stage. If not, I will pursue this matter. There are a number of other issues in section 2 which all of these amendments comply with, and I will be coming back to that aspect.

The other aspect is that this is mandatory testing specifically for intoxicating liquor. At some stage we need to look at some type of complementary mechanism which provides mandatory testing for drugs, whether illegal or legal. There are reports stating that there were quite a number of accidents, which have caused horrific injuries or deaths, where the problem was not intoxicating liquor, but various types of drugs. We need to find some mechanism in a case where somebody is definitely intoxicated. The breath test involved here can only show alcohol and we need to proved that the Garda can carry out the other steps allowed by section 3, that is, the obligation to provide a blood or urine sample, given that otherwise the person involved would evade the justice system or the punishment for being behind the wheel of a car in an intoxicated state, albeit not of alcohol.

My other suggestion on this section relates to subsection (6), which states:

A member of the Garda Síochána shall not make a requirement under subsection (2) of a person to whom paragraph (a) of subsection (1) applies if, in the opinion of the member, such requirement would be prejudicial to the health of the person.

In that case, the garda should have the power to then transport that person to a hospital or medical facility where the requirement can be complied with where the garda might not be able to force the issue there. That would be an issue where somebody is literally so out of breath that he or she cannot blow into the bag or the apparatus the garda has produced. In such a case, the correct course of action is to bring him or her to a location where a blood or urine sample can be taken by a medically qualified person. That would prevent persons from acting up and stating that they have asthma or whatever, and that they cannot blow to the sufficient strength to allow the garda to prove whether they are intoxicated.

See this speech in context