Dáil debates

Tuesday, 27 September 2016

Road Traffic Bill 2016 [Seanad]: Second Stage

 

7:20 pm

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The system of allowing local authorities to decide the right speed limits for roads in their areas is the correct one, because built-up areas contain a multitude of different kinds of road. It would not be appropriate to set one limit for all of them, and local authorities are best placed to decide what is appropriate to a given road.

Beginning in 2014, the Jake's Legacy campaign has been advocating a mandatory 20 km/h speed limit in housing estates. We all sympathise profoundly with the family of young Jake Brennan, who was only six when he was killed in a road traffic incident in the housing estate where he lived. However, I believe that a mandatory 20 km/h speed limit would raise problems. First, it would not necessarily be appropriate to all roads in housing estates, or indeed in built-up areas and, second, it would be difficult to enforce, particularly on busier or straighter roads. I agree, however, that it may be an appropriate limit in some areas, particularly in densely inhabited areas where there may be children playing. As a result, I am proposing to add a 20 km/h limit to the options available for local authorities to apply. Local government is the appropriate level to decide what speed limit works for which road in these areas, and it is right that the law should continue to allow the local authorities to have the final word, while ensuring that they have all the necessary options open to them, including a 20 km/h limit.

In Part 4 I am dealing with a number of miscellaneous matters. Some of these are technical amendments to enhance the clarity of current legislation. There will also be one new penalty point offence introduced, and a measure to bring summary offences under the RSA (Commercial Vehicle Roadworthiness) Act 2012 within the fixed charge regime.

In Part 5 the Bill will give legislative effect to an agreement between Ireland and the UK on mutual recognition of driver disqualifications. Allow me to explain exactly what this means. If a driver is disqualified in an EU member state which issued their licence, they are automatically barred from driving abroad as they do not have a valid licence. However, if a driver from one EU member state is disqualified from driving in another member state, the ban applies only to the country which imposed it. The person could still drive in their home state or anywhere else. In 1998 the EU agreed a convention on driver disqualification which was intended to deal with this anomaly, and which would mean that disqualification anywhere in the EU would mean disqualification everywhere in the EU.

However, this convention was always going to be difficult to implement, due to the many different legal systems, different definitions of offences and different penalties in the different member states. Recognising this difficulty at the time the convention was drawn up, the EU allowed for any two member states to proceed with bilateral agreements within the framework of the convention, pending the implementation of the convention as a whole. In the event, only one such agreement was ever made, and that was between Ireland and the UK. The EU subsequently decided that, as of December 2014, the operation of the convention on driver disqualification would come under the jurisdiction of the European Court. Our friends in the UK were not in favour of giving additional powers to the European Court and, as a result, they withdrew from the convention on driver disqualification, using the provisions of the Lisbon treaty which allowed them to opt out of certain measures. This meant that our agreement with them, as it was under the framework of the convention, came to an end. The convention itself was revoked by Europe in 2015 as being impossible to implement. I hope that the day may come when some similar initiative may be possible.

Neither we nor the UK wanted to end bilateral recognition of driver disqualification. Many Irish people drive in the UK and many UK citizens drive here. It is in the interests of both sides that we make sure that people who are convicted of serious and dangerous driving offences in one jurisdiction are not immediately free to drive in the other. We therefore negotiated a new bilateral agreement outside the framework of the EU convention. This was signed last October, but cannot take effect until legislation to underpin it is passed. That is what Part 5 of this Bill will do. Once the agreement comes into effect, Irish drivers who are disqualified in the UK for serious road traffic offences will also be disqualified here, and UK licence holders disqualified here will be disqualified in the UK. I am happy to say that this new agreement, being outside any EU framework, will not be affected by Brexit.

I would like to draw the attention of the House to a number of amendments which I shall be proposing on Committee Stage. There will be a small number of technical amendments to improve the existing provisions of the Bill. In addition, I have decided to address the vexed question of written-off vehicles in another amendment. We have in this country no formal, legally sanctioned system for classifying a mechanically propelled vehicle as written-off. This is a source of concern, as sometimes vehicles which have been written off for insurance purposes are repaired and find their way back onto our roads. This may be perfectly legitimate; an insurance write-off may not mean that a vehicle is irreparable, but merely that it would not make economic sense to do so - in other words the repair would cost more than the vehicle was worth. It does mean that there is a risk of vehicles being put back on our roads when they should not be. At present, the practice is that insurance companies notify my Department when they write off a vehicle, and this fact is entered on the national vehicle and driver file. However, the process has no statutory basis and there is no obligation for these notifications to be made. It is my intention to introduce an amendment to the Bill to put this arrangement on a statutory and mandatory footing. This will not answer all of the issues which have arisen and been debated about written-off vehicles but it will represent a significant step forward - the first proper legislative step - in a matter I intend to deal with comprehensively in future.

I have discussed with the Attorney General the best wording to address this matter, and will publish my amendment at the appropriate time in advance of Committee Stage. I have also discussed with the Attorney General the commencement of the so-called "third payment option" for fixed charge notices. This is an option included in the Road Traffic Act 2010, which will allow people who have failed to pay a fixed charge notice within 28 days, or to pay a higher charge within a further 28 days, a third chance to pay before having to appear in court. The third payment notice will accompany the summons to court and, if the person pays not more than seven days before the court hearing, court proceedings will be dropped. This provision has a number of benefits, not the least of which is that it will put an end to cases of people turning up in court and claiming that they never received a fixed charge notice. The implementation of the third payment option has been delayed for far too long. The Attorney General's office has made clear that certain amendments to the Road Traffic Act 2010 must now be made in order for the system to operate successfully. I shall bring these amendments forward for inclusion in this Bill on Committee Stage and I look forward to pressing ahead as quickly as possible with implementation of the third payment option.

Taken together, the measures in this Bill offer significant steps forward in a number of areas. The drug driving provisions will address a growing and disturbing threat to safety on our roads. My hope is that they will not only enable An Garda Síochána to tackle drug driving effectively but also help to build awareness of the dangers of drug driving and so encourage more responsible behaviour by drivers. The new option for a 20 km/h limit will be a valuable additional tool in the toolbox of the local authorities and will make the roads where it is applied a great deal safer for all. The provisions to back up the new agreement on mutual recognition of driver disqualification between ourselves and the UK will ensure that dangerous drivers who are a risk to the public are kept off the roads in both jurisdictions. Finally, the amendments which I have set out and which I will introduce in due course will enable us to begin to address the long-neglected question of written-off vehicles and, at last, to implement the third payment option.

I will conclude by returning to the point on which I began. Road safety has always been an area where this House has shown that it can be positive and constructive, and where we can all work together towards shared goals.

I am happy to consider seriously any suggested amendments from Members on Committee Stage in the spirit in which this Bill is introduced. I look forward to the debate on the Bill and to working with Deputies on each Stage to make the Bill as good as it can be.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.