Seán Conlan (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Many speakers have referred to what they would like to happen to the fixed charge processing system and the fact that reform is required. The current system is not without flaws and the new system that has been introduced is likewise not without flaws. Under the current system one receives one fixed charge notice. If one does not receive the fixed charge notice - we do not have an infallible postal system - the first one knows about it is when one receives a summons. It is totally unjust that the system in place allows for a person to receive a summons in the post when a fixed charge notice has not been received and there is no ability to pay the fine. I know people to whom that has happened. There should be a system in place to allow one to pay the fine for so many days or weeks after one receives the summons rather than wasting the time of a court and adding to that the additional costs involved in having to appear in court and explain the situation.

I have previously heard arguments as to why a proof-of-service system is not practical for the fixed charge system, but from a justice perspective, individuals need to know why they are expected to appear in court if they have not received a fixed charge notice. The situation must be addressed as a matter of urgency because it does happen. I know people to whom it has happened.

The taping of telephone conversations in Garda stations has been going on for 30 years. It is not the fault of the Minister, Deputy Shatter. The Minister first became aware of the matter this week and the Taoiseach first became aware of it at the weekend. One could ask which Minister for justice, if any, was ever aware of the recording of telephone conversations in Garda stations and whether it was sanctioned by any Minister for justice or any Garda Commissioner in the past 30 years.

Given that there are only approximately 2,500 tapes – that is the information available currently – that suggests to me that the recordings were more ad hoc than systematic. If that is the case, does it mean it was done by individual superintendents in individual Garda stations, or was it done at a higher level? I agree the approach being taken is correct. However, to lay blame at the door of the current Minister is the wrong place to start. We must find out who sanctioned the recordings initially and whether it was something that developed on an individual basis in individual Garda stations. We can start to make judgments when we find the facts but until such time as we do, we should hold back and be wary of casting aspersions on anyone. As yet, none of us know the facts. I could speak at length on the issue but that is all I will say at present.

We need to put in place a new fixed charge processing system. The current system of receiving a notice from Thurles is not infallible or without flaws and needs to be remedied. The important issue is road safety, not the collection of revenue for the State, and that should be our primary focus. We must ensure good practice and that people observe the rules of the road rather than focusing on revenue generation, which seems to be the focus of attention for many.

See this speech in context