Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I am not yet used to seeing Deputy Ross on the Government benches. However, I wish him every good luck in his endeavours.

There are some elements of this Bill that are very welcome, including the change with regard to the speed limit in housing estates. As a Deputy who spends a lot of time meeting people in housing estates who have problems I know first hand the dangers in which young children put themselves. I welcome the proposed reduction in the speed limit in housing estates. If it helps save the life of even one young child it will be great. If this Bill results in the saving of the life of one young boy or girl this debate will have been worthwhile.

In regard to drugs, what is proposed in the Bill is a welcome development. Up to now, the Garda Síochána has not had the wherewithal to deal with this issue properly because of a lack of necessary legislation. I hope what is provided for in this Bill will be of assistance. The regularisation of provisions around traffic offences between North and South is also welcome. They are the positive elements of this Bill. Deputy Danny Healy-Rae highlighted road safety issues that are of concern and need to be discussed during the course of this debate.

I would like to speak to the Minister about the issue of regulation. We were all supportive of the introduction of speeding vans because we felt they would help save lives. Speeding vans were never about revenue raising. Unfortunately, that is what is happening in terms of the placement of speeding vans. This is wrong, unfair and crooked. I will give examples. On the day of the Kerry-Dublin match people returning home on entering County Kerry to get to their houses had to pass five or six speeding vans. These vans were specifically located in areas along the route that would be accessed by the large volume of people returning home from the match, on which routes the speed limit has already been significantly reduced. This meant that a person driving the route at a speed of 65 km/h on his or her way home incurred penalty points. That was never the purpose of the speeding vans. They were to create an awareness among people to slow down. I know that the Minister's response will be that if people adhere strictly to the speed limits they have nothing to fear. In an ideal world that is correct. None of us wants to see any person lose his or her life and we are sorry for people who have lost their lives on our roads, of which, unfortunately, there have been thousands over the years. For me, this is treating people in an unfair manner. Another operation was organised last week to target people travelling to and from the National Ploughing Championship. The way in which these strategies are being devised is in my opinion mean spirited.

I am not speaking about people doing 120 km in a 100 km zone but people very marginally over the speed limit in a reduced speed limit area. This is where they targeted large volumes of people going to the ploughing championships.

Is the Minister aware that officers from the National Transport Authority targeted buses on one of the days of the National Ploughing Championships? They boarded the buses and asked for the route licence, which buses are obliged to have in many cases. Many people did not have them because it takes three weeks to get a licence from the NTA. Some of the bus operators were only notified several days in advance that they had a run and they did not have time to get a licence. If the NTA is going to be so strict, it should devise a system whereby the person applying for a licence can get it by return in an e-mail on the day or within 24 hours. People out for hire or out for reward may not get notice of a job or a trip. I thought this was mean spirited.

Of course we want to increase safety on our roads but at the same time we do not want to treat honest to God people as if they were criminals. People for hire and for reward, such as those operating buses, face over-regulation, and my brother touched on this point earlier. Only those operating buses really realise what is happening. Of course all our buses must be up to a standard and the safety of passengers is of paramount concern but these people are honest to God people. Their buses pass the tests they are supposed to pass. At the same time, a bus could pass a test today and next week someone else from a different authority could come into the yard to do another examination. If it is good enough to be passed by one authority, we do not need somebody else to check up on the work. It is crazy. It treats these honest to God bus operators and people with lorries as though they are criminals. The Minister knows very well that people in the private sector trying to create a job for themselves or jobs for their neighbours, whether in trucks or buses, have had a hard stand for the past five years, particularly during the crisis. These people soldiered diligently. They sacrificed their own families and money to try to stay in business. I hate to see these people being picked on and victimised in the way they are at present. I meet them all the time and I am continuously told by people doing school runs that what is happening to them is outrageous.

Another insane and ageist law is that people over 70 years of age who want to drive children to school for hire or for reward, or get employment if their neighbour has a bus and they have the relevant licences, cannot do so. I know many people who are over 70 whose minds are perfectly alert and whose bodies are perfect and they would love to do a school run. They would be good people for the safety of the children and they would be very responsible. They are barred from doing it. At the same time, there is no problem in the world with them going from one end of the country to the next with a group of people provided they were not school children. What genius in what Department thinks this is a proper rule? It is crazy beyond belief. We have people over 70 who are debarred. A school run could be a nice occupation for a retired person who would drive the local children to school but they cannot do so if they are over 70. We are not supposed to be ageist. We are supposed to treat people with respect and dignity. What is happening is very wrong and has been bothering me for a long time. I would love to see it changed.

My brother raised other issues to do with safety but he left out one item, which is the number of accidents caused on a daily basis by deer roaming onto the roads late at night and early in the morning. I know of a number of people who have been seriously injured and of a number of accidents because where I am from the deer population has soared in recent years. If people hit a deer and their vehicle is damaged or the driver or passengers are injured and they go to the National Parks and Wildlife Service because the deer came from land under its control, it will tell them it has nothing to do with it. At the same time, this is the body which, if an honest to God person goes out at night with a gun and goes shooting a deer, will tell the person he or she cannot do it. Will it make up its mind? If it is responsible for the deer it is responsible for them and if it is not it is not, in which case it is our business what we do with them.

In the past I have called for a 70% cull of the deer population in Ireland. One might think this is a lot but it is very factual and correct. If we are to go back to the figure we should have in Ireland, we should lose 70% of our present deer population because it is outrageous. Farmers are being affected. Their fences are being broken and their grass is being eaten and it is all because of this problem spiralling out of control. The number of people who get seriously injured because of deer roaming onto the roads is enormous. I am aware of one case where two people lost their lives and it was put down to the fact there were deer on the road and they swerved to avoid them and unfortunately lost their lives. Something must be done to address this very serious situation.

To return to the positive elements of the Bill, it is to be welcomed in how it deals with a number of problems we have had. I ask the Minister, whom I wish well with his portfolio, to listen to the common sense approach we are taking to the debate and some of the issues we have raised. I know he is very diligent about his work and he might be able to use his position to deal with the problems we have brought to his attention. I thank him very much for being here.

See this speech in context