Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent) | Oireachtas source

They have been flying already, especially from the direction of Deputy Troy. I cannot expect the same response.

I thank the Acting Chairman for what he had to say and I must say that in a former life, not so long ago, if I had seen unanimity around the Chamber as I have seen here in the last two days, I would have been very suspicious and probably would have taken a completely different point of view. Therefore, it is an uncomfortable position to be in to be introducing legislation which has received such applause.

This was obviously not originally my own legislation. I inherited a great deal of it, though not all. It has been a long time coming. Nevertheless, I believe it has been improved in the last few weeks and months and I hope that it will have an early passage to the Statute Book.

There is one note of discord that I might raise. It is not discord from what is being said but it is something I should point out. Although this measure has been so warmly welcomed, and it is wonderful that it has been, there is no room for complacency in addressing the underlying problem. We do not want to now begin to bask in that warmth and suggest that everything is all right. Everything is not all right. All speakers, particularly Deputy O'Dowd who reiterated it just now, pointed out that the trend in road deaths is in going in the wrong direction and has been, bar last year, since 2013 and 2014. They were bad years, 2015 was a good year and this year has been a chronically bad year. We have cause for worry, not for complacency. This Bill, if we are honest about it, was formulated and introduced at a time before we saw the bad trend of this year. We cannot indulge in any sort of self-praise or complacency.

Indeed, there is probably room for criticism, not just of ourselves as politicians, but for the State agencies and the Road Safety Authority, and room for examination of those bodies that are responsible for road safety in this country to ask how we have gone so wrong. In my speech introducing the Bill to the House I asked the question of whether we have succeeded - I do not believe we have - in addressing the problem of drunken driving at this stage. Far from, the trend is upwards in those terms. The trend is also upwards in the number of young people getting involved in drunken driving. That is a matter of great concern. However, I hope the Bill will address those problems and reduce the figures because we do not know how many people are dying as a result of drug-driving at the moment.

That is something I ought to say before I respond to what has been said by all speakers yesterday and today, most of which has been in support of the Bill. I reiterate what the Acting Chairman has said in that all have been very constructive. As I said before, we will consider very carefully any suggested amendments. Some will not work for obvious reasons. However, I know that the spirit in which the amendments were suggested is a serious one and we will take them in the spirit in which they were given. As I said at the outset, road traffic legislation is a matter on which there is broad agreement on our goal, which is ultimately the safety of all road users. At the same time, I welcome the fact that there have been many and varied contributions and I would like to emphasise once again that I am happy to consider the issues raised.

Deputy Troy asked if I would confirm the Government’s commitment to road safety, both as a matter of law and in terms of resourcing. I am happy to confirm that we are committed to road safety, as I believe all Governments have been and will be. There is surely no higher duty of a Government than the safety of its citizens. In terms of resources, I cannot comment at this stage on the forthcoming budget, but I can say that I agree that proper resourcing in a number of areas is essential to promoting safety on our roads.

Deputy Troy, along with Deputies Munster, Broughan and Pringle raised in particular the numbers of the Garda traffic corps. The Garda, as we all know, was subject to a bar on recruitment for some time during the austerity years and the effects of this are still being felt. We are in the fortunate position, as the economy improves and revenues increase, that Garda recruitment has recommenced and this should benefit all areas of law enforcement, including road traffic law. For more specific details, I would refer Deputies to my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Resourcing for roads was also mentioned by Deputies Cullinane and Troy. Capital funding for roads infrastructure is not, strictly speaking, a part of road traffic legislation but, as both Deputies rightly emphasised, it is an essential part of road safety. Ireland has just under 100,000 km of road in its network and the maintenance and improvement of national, regional and local roads places a substantial financial burden on local authorities and on the Exchequer. Given the state of the national finances, the focus has had to be on maintenance and renewal rather than major new improvement schemes.

The transport element of the capital plan published in September 2015 is based on a gradual build-up in capital funding for the road network, from the current relatively low base towards the levels needed to support maintenance and improvement works. Funding for maintenance will continue to be tight for the coming years, with a significant increase from 2020. Under a decision by the previous Government, €96 million is provided in 2016 for repairs and preventative works arising from severe weather damage on the road network, of which €8 million has been allocated to national roads.

The core of the Bill is undoubtedly the collection of measures to deal with drug driving and Deputies have, understandably, raised several points of interest. Deputies Robert Troy and Catherine Murphy suggested the list of drugs addressed in the proposals for the new offence - in essence, cannabis, cocaine and heroin - is small. They are correct that a vast range of substances can have an impairing effect on drivers. The three substances were chosen after detailed consultation with the Medical Bureau of Road Safety, MBRS, on the basis that they are the most commonly detected illicit substances in specimens tested by the bureau. The legislation represents a new step, one which places these drugs on the same level as alcohol in the sense that being over a certain limit will, in itself, be an offence.

With regard to the roll-out of drug testing devices, I advise Deputy Catherine Murphy that this is a national programme, which will be implemented by the Garda. It is proposed that a drug testing device be available in each of the 86 Garda stations which currently hold an evidential breath testing instrument. In addition, 50 devices will be made available to mobile units nationwide and the number of devices required will be kept under review with the Garda after the devices have been rolled out. The cost of the devices will be borne by the MBRS from its voted allocation.

I acknowledge that drug testing is expensive relative to alcohol testing. Therefore, although mandatory drug testing is envisaged at a mandatory intoxicant testing checkpoint, unlike at a mandatory alcohol testing checkpoint, not all drivers may be asked to provide a drug test sample at a mandatory intoxicant testing checkpoint as this would not be practical or cost effective. We should also be mindful that alcohol tests only test for the presence of one drug, namely, alcohol, whereas the drug testing device tests for four classes of drugs, namely, cannabis, cocaine, benzodiazepines and opiates.

There is also a capacity to add additional drugs to the devices for testing. With regard to Deputy Murphy's question regarding testing for what is known as crystal meth, although it cannot be tested for at the roadside, I understand the Medical Bureau of Bureau Safety can test for methamphetamine in the blood and urine samples sent to the bureau for confirmatory tests by the Garda.

Concerns were raised by Deputy Frank O'Rourke about the possible impact of the new proposals on people who are taking prescription medications. Deputy Troy asked about the misuse of legally prescribed drugs and Deputy Gino Kenny suggested the new law would criminalise people for having drugs in their system. In answer to both of these points, I propose to clarify exactly what the law does and does not do. First, it is already an offence under the Road Traffic Act 2010 to drive while under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of controlling a vehicle. An intoxicant in this case can be legal or illegal, prescribed or non-prescribed. Second, the new offence of driving with the presence of cannabis, cocaine or heroin above a specified level is exactly like the offence we have for alcohol. It does not have any impact on prescription drugs except in the case of Sativex where, as I indicated in my opening speech, there will be a medical exemption from the new offence. Third and perhaps most important, road traffic legislation is about safety. When it comes to intoxicants this means that road traffic legislation is about what affects driving, irrespective of whether the substances are legal.

What these points mean is that the new legislation will not have an impact on prescribed drugs. As ever with medication, if someone is prescribed medication, he or she should take it but if he or she suffers side effects which could impair driving, he or she should wait until these effects pass before getting behind the wheel of a vehicle. A person who is impaired due to legally available drugs, irrespective of whether they have been prescribed, is already liable to prosecution under existing road traffic legislation.

We are not aiming to criminalise people but acting to try to improve road safety. While I look forward to seeing the detail of the amendments Deputy Gino Kenny stated he would propose, it sounds very much as if the three tier approach he suggested is what we are doing. We already have an offence of being under the influence of intoxicants to the point of incapacity and we are introducing an offence of being over a certain level of three of the most common drugs found by the MBRS when analysing specimens sent to the bureau for testing by the Garda. It will not be an offence to be under that level. In any case, I will be happy to discuss this matter further with Deputy Gino Kenny as the Bill progresses. Deputy Gino Kenny may wish to note that oral fluid drug testing is a screening test only. The screening system will detect recent cannabis use for up to approximately six hours. In the case of a positive roadside result the driver will be arrested and have an evidential blood sample taken in the Garda station.

On a specific point, Deputy Troy stated the underlying basis for the drug driving proposals in the Bill was a report dating from 16 years ago. In fact, the starting point was a report by the MBRS which was published in 2012 and there have been ongoing discussions with the MBRS and the Garda during the preparation of the Bill. I am, therefore, satisfied that the proposals are based on a more up-to-date understanding of the issues.

Deputy Tommy Broughan questioned the length of time it has taken for us to introduce roadside drug testing. I am advised that DRUID, a multinational European project commenced in 2006, reported in Cologne in 2011 that it was still the case that there had not been a satisfactory preliminary drug screening device developed and available at that time. Australia was using an earlier and more limited technology which was not applicable here. Following on from DRUID, the MBRS report of 2012 recommended the implementation of roadside testing. The then Minister accepted this recommendation and there followed drawing up of specification, tendering, testing and procurement for the preliminary drug testing device. This process was completed in 2014 and is ready to be implemented once this legislation has been enacted.

Deputy Lawless asked where we stand with clamping legislation. The Vehicle Clamping Act was passed in 2015 and when it is commenced it will be the function of the National Transport Authority to regulate clamping activities wherever they take place. The authority requires a period to make and prepare the necessary regulations provided for under the Act, as well as to ensure appropriate training and administrative supports are in place to allow for commencement of regulatory activities. This necessary preparatory work is well under way.

Deputies Troy and Cullinane raised the issue of distracted driving, in particular distractions due to mobile telephones and other electronic devices. When the Bill was initially proposed the general scheme included a number of measures on this issue, which I gather were withdrawn before the legislation was published. There is no question that driver distraction is a highly significant factor in causing collisions and there is general agreement that this is an area where the law needs to be strengthened. I understand the reason it was not included in the Bill, as published by my predecessor, was that it is a very complex area and it was necessary to proceed with certain matters, particularly drug driving and mutual recognition issues. Further work is being done in this area, which I agree will have to be addressed at some future point when we are ready to agree on a way forward, and to provide legislation which is both practicable and enforceable. I gather Deputy Troy may propose amendments in this area. I look forward to seeing his proposals and to discussing them with him in due course.

There were some interesting contributions on the question of written-off vehicles. As I indicated, I will make proposals on this matter on Committee Stage. In the meantime, if Deputies have specific suggestions on this issue, I will be pleased to meet with them for further discussion. I am happy to take guidance on the issue if anyone is interested in offering me advice.

I will say a few words about review of speed limits, an issue raised by Deputies Michael Harty and Imelda Munster. At the time of the issuing of my Department’s updated guidelines for setting and managing speed limits to local authorities to assist them in their statutory responsibilities relating to the application of special speed limits, local authorities were requested to review and update all speed limits in their administrative areas in accordance with these guidelines. This process is ongoing. In the case of national roads, local authorities were requested to undertake this review in conjunction with Transport Infrastructure Ireland. The primary purpose of the review is to improve the consistency of the application of speed limits nationwide so as to contribute to a reduction in speeding, which is a key cause of road collisions and fatalities.

Deputy Broughan stressed the importance of the third payment option for fixed charges. I agree that this option should be implemented as soon as possible. Implementation will require amendments to road traffic legislation, which I will introduce on Committee Stage of this Bill, and amendments to justice legislation. The relevant justice legislation is being progressed by my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality.

In the meantime, work is well advanced between the Garda and the Courts Service on developing and testing the necessary IT supports for the third payment option. I think it is only fair to add a reminder that what we are preparing for is not only the commencement of the third payment option but the commencement of all of Part 3 of the 2010 Act, which will set the entire fixed-charge system on a new basis. I look forward to seeing this come into effect once the Bill and the associated justice legislation have been passed.

Many of the issues raised by Deputy Broughan are being addressed through the work of the criminal justice working group on the fixed-charge processing system, which my Department co-chairs with the Department of Justice and Equality. The group was established as a result of a recommendation in the Garda Síochána Inspectorate report, The Fixed Charge Processing System - A 21st Century Strategy, to the effect that a system be introduced to ensure that all penalty points be endorsed on driving licences. The working group has recommended that association of certain vehicle and driver database components of the national vehicle and driver file system was among solutions which would assist with the more efficient operation of the fixed-charge processing system and optimum allocation of penalty points. The necessary association of these database components is being dealt with by my Department through a master licence record project. The project is expected to take three years to complete at a cost of €4 million.

Deputy Broughan raised the issue of consolidating our road traffic legislation and what the timescale might be in that regard. The Bill before the House is the current priority as far as legislation is concerned. After it is passed, we will begin examining the process of consolidation in what will be a very large project. This will, as a first step, involve a scoping exercise to estimate what is necessary, how much time will be required and what resources will need to be allocated to the project given, as the Deputy is aware, that the legislation in this area has become extremely complex. Consolidation will require more than passage of the legislation as it currently stands in a single Act. It will entail careful review of the legislation being consolidated in order to identify points where it can be clarified, simplified and improved. A project of this kind will require time and resources, and is expected to take a number of years to complete, as, for example, has been the case with the Companies Acts and the Finance Acts previously.

The provisions in the Bill which deal with mutual recognition of driving disqualifications have rightly attracted attention. This is an important measure which will help to keep dangerous drivers off our roads. Having listened to the debate, there are some points I would like to clarify. The agreement with the UK on mutual recognition of driving disqualifications applies to disqualifications in court, not to disqualification due to reaching the limit on penalty points. In an ideal world, it would involve both. However, mutual recognition of penalty points is a rather different and more difficult issue. While the mutual recognition of penalty points has been identified as an important area for co-operation in road safety between ourselves and Northern Ireland, it is an enormously difficult one on which to deliver as there is no agreed international framework dealing with the recognition of penalty points for driving offences. No other European countries have a working system of mutual recognition of penalty points in place between them. Much good work was done by officials from both sides since 2013 but significant issues remain to be resolved. While the work will continue, I do not think we can expect to see mutual recognition of penalty points with the North for some time to come.

There is also the question of whether mutual recognition of driving disqualifications could be arranged with other countries besides the UK. The unfortunate failure of the now defunct 1998 EU Convention on Driving Disqualifications, which I described in my opening speech in this debate, illustrates just hard it is to reach satisfactory agreements in this area. The relationship we have with UK is unique, given both the land border we share and the numbers of drivers from each jurisdiction who drive in the other jurisdiction. It was certainly right to pursue agreement with the UK as a priority. There is no other case nearly so urgent in this area. The revocation of the EU convention means that, for the time being at least, a convenient framework for arranging mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between Ireland and any other country is no longer in place.

The question of hedge cutting was raised by Deputy Danny Healy-Rae. This is an issue with obvious road safety implications because in some cases hedges are obscuring essential road signs or forcing pedestrians to the edge of footpaths or onto roads. The responsibility for hedge cutting rests with local authorities. I am not personally acquainted with many members of Kerry County Council but I know a few of the Healy-Raes and I suspect Deputy Danny Healy-Rae may have some friends there. I understand my predecessor wrote to all local authorities reminding them of their responsibility in this area and its importance to road safety. I would be happy to do so again.

Deputies Catherine Murphy and Michael Healy-Rae asked about safety camera vans for speed detection. First, the management of the GoSafe contractor and the deployment of safety cameras is a matter for the Garda. What I would like to advise the two Deputies is that the safety camera system has been hugely successful and has saved many lives in this country. A report by the department of economics in Trinity bears this out and shows that 23 lives are saved and 40 serious crashes are prevented each year as a result of safety camera operations. It also clearly highlights that, contrary to popular belief, safety cameras in this country are not a cash cow for the State. The operational costs of running safety cameras are more than double the income in fines that they generate. However, safety cameras save lives in a cost-effective way and the continued expansion of the safety camera programme is a worthwhile objective. It is also worth stating that independent research shows that the majority of people in this country support the use of safety cameras to reduce the number of speed-related deaths and injuries.

It is also important to stress that speed limits are not guidelines or targets that must be reached and that people cannot adopt anà la carteattitude towards the rules of the road, particularly those relating to such limits. Contrary to Deputy Michael Healy-Rae’s comments that drivers are being done for driving a few kilometres over the speed limit, the facts published by the Garda simply do not support this opinion. According to Garda statistics, the vast majority of detections, 80%, were made in respect of vehicles being driven at speeds between 10 km/h and 29 km/h above the posted limit and 11% of detections were for speeds in excess of 30 km/h above the limit. Just 9% of detections were made in respect of vehicles being driven at speeds between 1 km/h and 9 km/h above the posted limit, which, in a 50 km/h or 60 km/h zone, is the difference between life and death for a cyclist or pedestrian if hit by a car.

Deputy Eamon Ryan asked about the level of funding for cycling and other sustainable travel initiatives. While it is not strictly a road traffic matter, I am happy to comment. Some €23.5 million has been allotted for greenways in the past five years. Separately, under other programmes, including the sustainable transport measures grants programme and the regional cities programme, there has been funding for cycling projects in the greater Dublin area and the regional cities. This year, the NTA is receiving €23.2 million for sustainable transport measures grants and €13.5 million for regional cities, much of which is going towards cycling infrastructure.

I was struck by many of the other proposals and suggestions from colleagues. I was delighted to hear Deputies Ellis and Lou McDonald refer to their own Bill, which they introduced here previously, and by the fact it has been incorporated in the legislation before us. It is right that I should say it proves there are some good things about Sinn Féin, and those should be acknowledged as much by this side of the House as that Sinn Féin Deputies acknowledge there are some good things about the Bill. I thank them for the contribution they have made, which was obviously influential in the drafting of this Bill.

I also want to thank Deputy Rabbitte for her contribution on the limits. While there has been general, and almost uncritical, applause for the 20 km/h limits in housing estates, it is worthwhile looking carefully at her point that it took 18 months to introduce those limits and also that they are highly dependent on further funding, so this is not a panacea without further follow-up. I thank her for that and I will bear it in mind when we come to Committee Stage.

Road safety depends on a great many factors and the legislation to address it is an ever-evolving response to those factors and to changing circumstances. The Bill will represent a major step forward in addressing the dangers associated with people driving under the influence of drugs. It will also improve safety through creating an option of a 20 km/h speed limit in built-up areas and through providing the basis for mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between Ireland and the UK.

I also wish to emphasise again, as I did in my opening statement, the need for individual personal responsibility. Each driver is responsible for his or her behaviour when he or she gets behind the wheel. Drivers are also responsible for deciding not to get behind the wheel if they are not in a fit state to drive. As with so much else in road traffic legislation, I hope, in particular, the drug driving measures I am introducing will highlight dangers and discourage dangerous behaviour. We are not, ultimately, interested in convicting people for driving offences: we would much prefer if people acted responsibly and did not commit the offences in the first place. That said, it does not in any sense reduce or remove the responsibility of the Oireachtas or State agencies to curtail the sort of behaviour we are condemning in the Bill.

Before I conclude, I take the opportunity to remind Deputies that next Monday marks the beginning of Irish Road Safety Awareness Week. Motorcycle safety, tyre safety, driving for work and vulnerable road-user safety are the focus of this year’s Irish road safety week which will see a week of activities taking place nationwide from Monday, 3 October to Sunday, 9 October. We and the RSA urge all road users to play their part and to redouble their efforts so that we might reverse the road fatality trend which we have unfortunately seen so far this year. I look forward to engaging with Deputies during the further Stages of this Bill as it passes through the Oireachtas, and I also look forward to its expeditious and effective implementation. Once again, I thank the House for the opportunity to present this Bill and for the valuable and interesting contributions made by every Member.

See this speech in context