Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to speak to this important legislation. Before I get into the nitty-gritty, this is my first opportunity to congratulate publicly the Minister of State, Deputy Kelly, on his new Ministry. I wish him well in the future and the best of luck.

I welcome the Road Traffic (No. 2) Bill 2011 and I commend some of the comments on it. We should look at its detail and discuss it in an open and transparent fashion, and that has begun already in this important debate.

One of the purposes of the Bill is to allow for mandatory alcohol testing at lower limits in line with the Road Traffic Act 2010. The debate is about drink driving, speeding, and road safety. This is an important debate. I will ask fundamental questions on these issues. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by speeding. A substantial minority, I accept, are caused by the abuse of alcohol, and recently, there has been the abuse of drugs by motorists. These are the issues we must consider.

We also have a responsibility. From driving up and down the country and all over the place, I am aware that on a brand new road it is tempting to drive quickly and that when one has a powerful car, it is difficult to remain in total control in such situations. I put it up to the car manufacturers that they also have a responsibility. If they could design a car that would reach a certainly limit only and could not go any faster, that would be a major contribution. It would save many lives and nip in the bud the male macho young-driver syndrome evident in wider society. From my direct experience, by the way, this type are not all young. These are issues at which we must look as well.

In speaking about the Road Traffic (No. 2) Bill, it is important to show leadership and bring the public with us. Road safety campaigns are important. When I was a primary school teacher, I saw the impact of such campaigns. Some were effective but some were boring for young people and we had to think outside the box to come up with ideas. A helpful contribution is the practical experience of bringing children to traffic schools and showing them DVDs and videos and all sorts of things about road safety. So, too, is the practical experience of young primary school children meeting the gardaí who work in the Traffic Corps. They come in, advise them and support them, and give them that sense of adventure and excitement while at the same time emphasising road safety. There is a broader aspect to the road traffic issue and to this issue.

Section 2 clarifies the situation where a person fails or refuses to produce a driving licence or learner permit when asked by a member of the Garda Síochána. Section 40 of the principal Act, inserted by section 59 of the Act of 2010, is being amended to clarify the provisions.

It is also important to recognise that the vast majority generally comply with the law and that is something we often forget about in the debate. Since the introduction of the tighter controls on drink driving, the vast majority of drivers have gone along with it. People do their best, and they have taken the hit well. It is important that we accept the reality that the vast majority of motorists comply with the law and the day has practically gone when those who go to their local to have one or two pints would drive home. It is easy enough for those of us who live in urban areas as there is no difficulty in walking or getting a taxi to the local, and when there are two or three sharing a taxi, it costs only €2 or €3 each, and it is common sense as well. We also must take into consideration that, as I stated previously, the vast majority of those people would comply with the law and would fit-in. They have no issue with section 2, which is about produce a driving licence or learner permit, or anything like that. Sadly, and it is a little like other issues in this country, the minority sometimes dominates the setting of the political agenda. The man in his 50s or 60s who used go and have a quiet pint or two, now cannot do that because of those who had nine or ten and were totally irresponsible. That is something I sometimes regret because I know many sensible people in that situation who would be responsible, and yet they are being hammered and are suffering again. I raise this with the Minister in the debate because it is important that we talk about these issues.

I note that some of the other Members mentioned the position of the rural pub. I am strongly sympathetic. As somebody who spends a great deal of time in Dromineer, as the Minister of State will be aware, I understand from meeting people there the hassles of driving. In fairness to some of the publicans, they have been creative and have barmen and bar staff who bring people home from the pub, or they provide a good local service. I would say to the publicans that if they want to keep their punters, they will have to provide a service as well. From talking to people, they do not mind paying €2 or €3, if it will get them to the pub and home safely, and they can meet their friends.

There is still a nanny State brigade in this country about drinking as if there is something immoral or wrong about it. There is nothing wrong with somebody having a few pints with his neighbours and friends and talking about local issues, and particularly for senior citizens, meeting their neighbours and friends in such situations. It is almost like part of the community welfare service. It is not a question of binge drinking. The vast majority are moderate drinkers who have a few drinks, enjoy themselves, talk to their neighbours, get on with their lives and use that social setting as a support. Those who have the arguments on the rural pub have a strong and valid argument. I feel strongly about a situation where a man is living three or four miles up the mountain and it is a big issue for him to come down to participate in social life. Publicans must react to that and the Minister must look at these issues too in dealing with public transport in rural areas.

This is not a major issue in an urban area. However, I also see it in the context of job creation. In the past 12 months I have met many in the catering trade who are losing a barman here or a catering staff member there, and that is an issue also. The Minister must consider it, not only as a road traffic issue but also in the job retention debate. As most Members accept, the only game in town is job creation. We must do everything to that end and part of that debate must be the catering trade, which is directly connected with this legislation.

In Part 1, section 40, subsection (6) is being inserted to clarify the type of information a garda may demand of a person. For starters, it should not be acceptable that anybody would refuse or would fail to produce a licence. Section 40 (6) is important. If one looks at it in more detail, a person may be required to provide all of the following: name and address and date of birth. An offence is committed if a person fails or refuses to provide any of that information or provides false or misleading information. Subsection (6) is a simple subsection with which the vast majority will comply.

Subsection (7)(b) of section 40 of the Principal Act is also being inserted to clarify the provisions relating to the power of arrest where a person refuses or fails to give the information specified in the provision or where the Garda suspects that the information being provided is false and misleading. That is also a matter on which we must be strict. It is important that we deal with such persons, who are not among the vast majority who will comply with the legislation.

Overall, I welcome the legislation although some people have concerns about it. When somebody comes forward with sensible legislation, regardless of differences on other issues in the House, Members should support it. I thank the Acting Chairman, Deputy Seán Kenny, for the opportunity to speak on this matter.

See this speech in context