Dáil debates

Wednesday, 17 January 2018

Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2017: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

7:20 pm

Photo of Eoin Ó BroinEoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to be able to speak in support of this important legislation. To give some background on where I stand, I do not know much about transport policy as it is not an area in which I have expertise or experience. I do not have a driving licence or drive a car, I am not a publican and I do not live in a rural area. However, I have closely followed this debate since the issue entered the public domain. The reason for doing so is that I have been fortunate to have been able to spend a significant amount of time with people who have lost family members in road traffic accidents. Members of the Joint Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport heard the story of Marsia Lieghio, a beautiful 16 year old girl whose family are from my constituency. As the committee heard, Marsia was ploughed down by a car and lost her life in 2005 in circumstances involving dangerous and reckless driving. She died on her younger sister's birthday.

When I was a member of South Dublin County Council, Marsia's father, Leo Lieghio, approached me because the family was trying to raise the profile of the case for stronger legislation to ensure these types of tragic and unnecessary deaths would not happen in future. What struck me when I met Leo was that, in the midst of the deepest grief and struggling with an incredibly difficult set of circumstances that I can only imagine, he committed himself to publicly campaigning, speaking out and urging those of us in positions of some responsibility for making decisions to do something to try to tackle this very serious issue. I gave him a commitment some years ago, before this Bill had been published, that if I was ever in a position to speak in support of or vote for a measure that had the slightest chance of ensuring other families would not be put in the same position as the Lieghio family, I would do so. On that basis, I will say a few short words in this debate.

Deputies will know that Leo Lieghio is a member of the Irish Road Victims Association. In February 2017, the association held an incredibly poignant event outside Leinster House when it displayed 188 photographs of people of all ages, many of them young, who had died as a result of reckless driving. While different circumstances applied in each of these tragic and unnecessary deaths, drink driving was a factor in many of them. We have a responsibility to put to one side the issues raised by previous speakers in this debate and do the right thing by the families who have been bereaved as a result of reckless driving and drink driving to ensure fewer families are affected by it in future.

At the centre of this argument is the question of what happens when a person drinks alcohol. I have a simple rule in life, namely, I do not touch social media after I have had even one drink. The simple reason is that my judgment is impaired when I drink alcohol. I do not make this point flippantly but to emphasise that if I believe my judgment has been impaired to such an extent that I will not use social media, how on earth is it acceptable to get into a car, switch on the engine and drive when one's judgment is similarly impaired? It is not that in the ordinary course - on a decent road in good weather conditions when nothing unexpected occurs - people would not drive home safely. The issue arises when one combines the impairment of a person's judgment, even with the smallest amount of alcohol, with bad weather and another driver doing something reckless on the road. This forces people to make a split second judgment, which they would ordinarily make correctly. In circumstances of impairment, however, people are less able to make the appropriate judgment. I unequivocally support the Bill for this reason. If we accept that our judgment is impaired, even by a small fraction by alcohol, and that these impairments play a role in some road traffic accidents and road accident fatalities, there is no justification for opposing or abstaining on the Bill.

I deliberately stated that I am not from a rural area. I represent a large urban constituency and I am acutely aware of the seriousness of many of the issues rural Deputies from all parties raise regularly in the House. I do not underestimate these problems but the solution to them lies not in opposing the Bill but in Deputies giving a commitment to work together to tackle them. Deputy Scanlon spoke about the condition of roads in rural areas and he is correct. I am familiar with the roads in his home county as I spend time there. However, that is not an argument for opposing the Bill but one for putting much greater pressure on the Minister opposite and his Government colleagues to increase investment and tackle the problem. I will give any Deputy who is concerned about this issue a commitment that I will work with him or her as much as I am working in support of the Bill.

Some people will argue that the Bill will hurt the pub trade. That may be the case and it is not a scenario I would welcome but if I am asked to make a choice between ensuring there are fewer deaths on our roads and ensuring the vintners trade becomes more vibrant, it is not a choice for me.

Others argue that the real issue is one of enforcement. I do not doubt that is the case and I will not defend the failure of the Government or the previous Government to invest adequately in Garda resources. There is no single solution to this problem. While greater enforcement is important and necessary, the lack of enforcement is not a reason for refusing to support the Bill. The opposite is the case.

I do not believe the Bill will hurt rural Ireland. I have been reading reports in local newspapers, including some from counties Donegal, Westmeath and Kerry, about people from rural areas who have lost loved ones as a result of impaired drivers failing to make the correct decisions. These people are also being hurt. People in rural areas are hurting just as much as people in urban areas are hurting as a result of unnecessary deaths on our roads. Again, while I am not from a rural area, if I want to do the right thing by people in rural areas, as I want to do by my constituents, supporting this Bill is a small but nonetheless important step to make.

I will only use half of the time available to me because it is important that the Bill progresses to Committee Stage as quickly as possible. I have no idea how many lives would be saved as a result of this Bill and I do not believe anybody examining the evidence that has become available since the start of this debate could say with any certainty how many lives would be saved. However, I am certain that it has the potential to save some lives. If we tackle enforcement, improve roads and address other areas of transport policy, we could save even more lives. If the Bill has the potential to save even one life, every Deputy has a responsibility to support it and ensure one life is saved, if for no other reason than to ensure that one family does not have to experience the grief, trauma and pain that Marsia Lieghio's family experienced after her untimely, unacceptable and unnecessary death and continue to experience every day.

I urge Deputies who are wavering or considering abstaining in the vote and those who are committed to voting against it to reconsider their position. If they want us to work with them on the other issues that have been highlighted, I will give them a commitment to do so to have the issues addressed. I appeal to them, however, not to stand in the way of this significant and important legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.