Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I welcome the Bill. As Deputy Farrell indicated, the underlying effort is to stop people being killed and maimed on our roads. What is particularly helpful and welcome is the provision in the Bill requiring mandatory testing of drivers in hospitals. Drunk driving and the prosecution of it by the Garda is a technical area and gardaí need all the help they can get from legislation. I regret the limit in the past on the ability to test a driver who had been hospitalised following a road traffic accident. Alcohol can be involved in more serious road traffic accidents and it has happened that people have escaped prosecution for causing an accident due to being drunk because they required hospitalisation. Therefore, I welcome the amendment to the legislation.

In welcoming the Bill I join with colleagues who have referred to drug driving. It is an area that requires to be tackled. Drug driving must be treated in the same way as we treat driving with alcohol. When one considers the age profile of those involved in road traffic fatalities one must consider the possibility of drug use. In many cases young men are involved in single-car collisions and the suspicion is that it is not alcohol that they have on board but drugs. Deputy O'Sullivan referred to the speed at which young men drive but when one adds drugs to the equation one would definitely feel invincible. Not only should drug testing be mandatory following an accident but it should be random and the full rigours of the law must be applied where people are suspected of driving under the influence of any intoxicant. The same should be said for prescription drugs which carry warning notices. Just because one is prescribed drugs does not mean one is fit to drive, especially when it puts one's life and other road users at risk. I am interested in hearing a response to that.

A rural public house is an entirely different creature to a public house in the city. We are aware of the community aspect of such an establishment in a small village where it draws people together. That is where one gets one's news. It is what people think of when they think of this country and friendliness. A stranger can go into a rural public house and be made to feel welcome. We can cry about people not being able to go to the public house but it is preferable to examine what is required to ensure they continue. Public houses are entitled to open from 10.30 a.m. until 11.30 p.m. The reality is that many public houses have closed and many others only open in the evening. Such premises only operate for a couple of hours per day such is the extent to which their business has been reduced. They do not provide food because it is not viable. It is important for communities that public houses continue to exist in the same way as the church or post office. They play a valuable role in the community.

The enactment of the Bill will probably make people even more fearful about going to public houses. We must tackle the issue. One way in which we could address it is to consider a reduction in VRT for publicans who wish to transport their customers and another option is to reduce rates. If there is an opportunity to open a business full-time but the reality is that it is not worth a person's while to do it then we must examine the rates regime and reduce it to accommodate such public houses. Publicans are running a business and providing a service and they are not costing the State anything. In fact, they are making VAT returns and they may employ people in rural areas. We should act to preserve them. It is not inevitable that they would be a casualty. People become sentimental about retaining the local public house. If we want them to exist and Johnny down the road wants to go there for his pint that is fair enough but publicans are the ones who must keep the show on the road. They deserve special attention if we are serious about keeping rural public houses open and allowing them an opportunity to continue to run their business. Otherwise, we will not have rural public houses. It will not be a case of whether Johnny should have one, two or three pints; there will not be any public house for him to go for a drink. These public houses are in a minority. They do not have large populations and there will not be crowds marching on the street, but they must be considered. Those are a couple of my thoughts on the matter.

See this speech in context