Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am a member of the Joint Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport which discussed this Bill. The sanction, rather than the limit, is being changed in the Bill, but we all know that it is no small deal to put someone off the road. Therefore, there has to be a good reason to do it. The committee considered a Road Safety Authority document, but we then invited representatives to discuss it because we were not sure about certain things in it. Others had also told us that facts we had been given were being misrepresented. We, therefore, invited them in and debated the matter in some detail.

The legislation should be based on evidence, particularly when this sanction is being introduced. I felt the Road Safety Authority had satisfied the test that there was evidence that this would make a difference. However, it will only make a difference if there is enforcement and not only at this level but also at the levels above. We saw the controversy surrounding the introduction of mandatory alcohol tests, MATs, and how it had undermined confidence. The number of tests was so inflated that we could not say with certainty that the evidence had not been undermined. That is part of the reason the issue is not one confined to the Garda because in making public policy we have to rely on the information made available.

We must have certainty on the number of roadside tests carried out. Without it, we cannot rely on the figures. There has to be some discussion between the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Minister for Justice and Equality to ensure we can be certain that the figures we receive are absolutely accurate. I imagine that, with the amount of attention this matter has received, the Garda will be put on notice. However, there has been no sanction. One cannot change behaviour unless there is a sanction. I am very unhappy that there has been a proposal to have no sanction at any rank. At the most senior rank, where decisions are made, there most definitely should have been a sanction. It filters down to this kind of legislation and has a bearing on the reliability of the information we are receiving. I do not believe the approach taken is the correct one.

Behaviour & Attitudes was asked to produce a survey of public support. It found that 91% of Irish adults had indicated support for automatic disqualification of any driver caught over the drink-driving limit. A national survey of 1,000 people was conducted in January 2017. Of those surveyed, 61% believe that if a driver is caught over the drink-driving limit, he or she should be disqualified for more than 12 months. Some 89% of adults in urban areas and, interestingly, 93% in rural areas indicate support for automatic disqualification of any driver caught over the drink-driving limit. The percentage is higher in rural areas than in urban areas.

The issue is that people want to feel safe on the roads. Alcohol is a sedative and impairs driving. I asked questions about driving the morning after a night out, for example, because people are afraid of inadvertently being over the limit when tested. We were told that 14% of all alcohol-related fatal crashes happened between 6 a.m. and noon. Some 15% of alcohol-related fatal crashes involving a driver or a motorcycle happen in the same period. I felt there was sufficient evidence.

I have some sympathy for the point being made about the lack of transport in rural areas. I also have great sympathy for people who have experienced the death of a loved one, particularly where drink was involved. There is a very powerful advertisement on television that shows the carnage that changes people's lives forever.

We are not producing this legislation for some minor reason but because it will make a material difference by saving lives, albeit those of a very small number of people. It is important, however, that we achieve this.

I asked about mouthwashes and other products that contained alcohol, the use of which might result in people going over the limit inadvertently. I am satisfied from the information we received that there is no risk in that regard.

There is an argument to have a public transport system or service that does not leave people as isolated as they are. With our spatial patterns, it is very difficult to achieve this, which I completely accept. I would like to hear what the Minister has to say about what can be done in that regard. People living in rural areas will tell him what they believe will work. There are many good collaborative rural transport initiatives.

I see some of it in parts of my county. If we are to have an evidence-based approach to the issue the argument falls on the side that it should be done, but there is no point in doing it unless the Minister is willing to make sure there is sufficient enforcement. There most definitely has to be an approach that at least addresses rural isolation to the degree it can, because that is a very valid point.

See this speech in context