Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank all of those who have contributed to the debate. I appreciate the broad support for the principle of the Bill, as well as the constructive approach that was in evidence through the debate. This legislation has the improvement of public safety at its heart. We may disagree on the best way to provide that. However, these are disagreements we can work on in practice, rather than disagreements in principle. I would like to address a number of points which were raised throughout the debate, which I hope will reflect back on some of the contributions.

Many Deputies referred to our proposals on e-scooters and powered personal transporters, PPTs, in general. I appreciate the broad agreement that we need to legislate in this area. The issues raised about PPTs are all important, such as where and when they can be used; whether we should require helmets and high-visibility clothing; issues regarding liability; the need for lighting and audio warning devices on scooters; and the regulation of PPT rental schemes. We need to discuss these issues and we need to be sure we get them right. At same time, it is important to be clear on what kind of legislation we are dealing with at this time. The Road Traffic Acts set out definitions for classes of vehicle. For example, they define mechanically propelled vehicles. They also define bicycles. The details of specifications for vehicles, rules on safety equipment and rules for when and where they can be used are set out in the regulations. The Bill will add a new class of vehicles, PPTs, to the Road Traffic Acts. This will enable existing regulatory powers to be used to provide for the standards PPTs will have to meet, as well as where they can be used safely. This will allow us to respond promptly to changes of circumstance. In the case of PPTs in particular, it allows us respond quickly to what is an area of rapidly developing technology.

Deputy Carey referred to forms of micro-mobility other than electric scooters. I assure him that intention in defining PPTs is to cover all vehicles of these types. I will, of course, take all views into account in making these regulations. My Department has conducted two public consultations on PPTs and has received great deal of feedback which will be useful in framing the regulations. We remain open to good ideas.

The issue of insurance is a matter for the Road Traffic Acts, which require mandatory insurance for mechanically propelled vehicles, but not for bicycles. In my view, in this respect, PPTs should be considered as closer to bicycles. I will not, therefore, propose mandatory insurance. A PPT is, in fact, a lighter vehicle than a bicycle and unlikely to cause more damage on impact than a bicycle would. On the same principle, we do not intend to require tax or insurance on PPTs.

I have listened to the debate on the issue of the power rating of electric scooters. I am inclined to agree with those who say this is an area that needs flexibility. I will therefore propose an amendment so that the weight, power and design speed limits in the definition of PPTs can be varied in regulations to respond to this rapidly evolving technology.

I also note concerns raised about an age limit for PPT users. This is a matter we are considering. It will be dealt with in regulations, if necessary. On the matter of supply to a minor, further examination suggests that the provision in section 34 of the Bill would not be enforceable. I will be proposing to remove it.

The rules around e-scooter rental schemes will be important to get right. This will include safe parking, as several Deputies have observed. However, the Road Traffic Acts do not deal with existing rental schemes, such as those for cars or bicycles. The appropriate place for dealing with PPT rental schemes is in the context of sustainable travel. This will need to be discussed with the local authorities and the National Transport Authority, NTA.

Several Deputies raised issues of enforcement. The enforcement of this legislation, like that all road traffic legislation, will be for An Garda Síochána. Some Deputies have raised queries about Garda resources in relation to PPTs, scramblers and other issues. I understand that An Garda Síochána has the necessary resources, but any detailed queries on this are a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee.

Deputy Fitzpatrick referred to the important work done in prelegislative scrutiny by the Oireachtas committee on transport. This has informed our work here. I agree with him on the importance of raising public awareness before the new traffic management measures come into force on the M50.

I also share the views expressed by others that careful analysis will have to be undertaken before any decision to apply similar measures on other roads. In addition, I assure Deputy Fitzpatrick that the Bill makes clear who will have access to information on the motor insurance database and for what purposes.

Deputy Carey also mentioned data security in connection with driver licences and vehicle data. In this case we are not creating a new database but a linkage between data held by the Department on driver licences and on vehicle ownership. Software systems containing State records have always been a target for hostile actors. Although no system is 100% safe, the Department takes database security seriously and constantly reviews, updates and monitors all software security systems to ensure the systems are as secure as possible.

The question of people submitting video evidence to An Garda Síochána for certain traffic offences was also raised during the debate. This is an important point but it is part of a wider discussion of evidence submitted to the Garda by the public and it would be premature to address it in law at this time.

We have committed in the programme for Government to improve conditions for asylum seekers. I am happy to confirm I will be bringing forward an amendment to ensure asylum seekers will be eligible to apply for driver licences.

I appreciate the supportive comments from Deputies on the need for legislation to address the antisocial use of scramblers and quad bikes. Action in this area is essential and, as was pointed out, so are enforcement and community engagement. I confirm there has been detailed discussion between my Department, the Department of Justice and the Garda on the issue. I thank Deputy Lahart for his interesting and carefully considered comments on scramblers, as well as on a number of other issues. I agree with him that the legislation on scramblers is only one part of the solution to the problem. Community initiatives and public awareness of the dangers are also essential.

The question of incentives for e-bikes is one for my colleague, the Minister for Finance, but I am happy to support ways to promote their uptake. I can see the arguments for a stand-alone Bill on e-scooters but in the long run these are a type of vehicle used in public and they do belong in the setting of wider road traffic legislation. Deputy Lahart also suggested we have a choice between private ownership or shared rental schemes for e-scooters. I do not believe we need to make this choice and we can and will have both. I appreciate his concerns about the possibility of all types of unregulated machines being used but this is precisely why we are introducing the proposals we have in the Bill to ensure powered personal transporters, which can be used legally, are safe vehicles and must be used in a safe way.

Deputies Sherlock and Murphy raised questions on the proposed changes to planning laws to facilitate the BusConnects project. The Bill will provide for specific and limited circumstances under which An Bord Pleanála can approve a scheme or road development that materially contravenes a development plan or local area plan. This is not a new procedure. The board already has the power to grant certain permissions that contravene a development plan in specific circumstances.

The proposed new rules on fit and proper persons to be a driving instructor were raised by Deputies McNamara and Carey. The principles of excluding persons with certain types of convictions from certain professions, either temporarily or permanently, is well established, for example, the law on taxi regulation. Deputy McNamara's suggestion of considering additional offences has been noted and will be considered prior to Committee Stage. Deputy Carey suggested removing the provision relating to penalties for people whose driver licences have recently expired. I take his point given the situation with Covid. I believe that in the long term it is a good amendment and I intend to keep it in the Bill. However, commencement of the provision will be considered only when we have a certain and more normal situation after the pandemic.

Deputy Carey also mentioned publication of collision reports. The Road Safety Authority does publish analysis of factors involved in collisions but this can take some years due to the need for detailed examination and coroners' inquests.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh raised the issue of the proposed horse-drawn carriages legislation. Following delays as a result of the pandemic, I can confirm that work on horse-drawn carriage legislation has now been recommenced. It is complex and technical and due care needs to be taken to get it right but I expect to see it published as a stand-alone Bill.

A number of Deputies raised the question of backlogs in the driver testing service. Although it is not directly relevant to the legislation I would like to make a comment on this. Covid has, of course, caused delays and a backlog in the service. The Road Safety Authority had taken on additional testers to deal with this. Deputy O'Rourke asked a question on this and I will answer it. I am happy to say the ten testers whose contracts were due to expire in December and the seven whose contracts were due to expire in March are all being offered extensions by the Road Safety Authority. This will maintain capacity for the time being. I understand the new testers whose contracts are due to expire will not reach the end of their contracts until May. In the first quarter of next year, the Road Safety Authority will conduct a detailed review of the evolving situation with the test and resource needs, and we will see where we go from there.

I reiterate that after the Bill has passed we will turn to examination of the consolidation of the Road Traffic Acts, as Deputy Connolly requested in her contribution. It is something that is important. I agree fully with her that our legislation is often very complex to administer and understand due to a lack of consolidation. Despite the complexity of the Acts, the Department knows of no case of a prosecution that has failed due to a lack of consolidation. However, that does not take from the argument the Deputy rightly made.

My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Naughton, indicated in her opening speech we would bring forward amendments on Committee Stage and I also mention this today. Some of these will relate to the BusConnects projects to make sure there is flexibility. To answer Deputy Leddin's question, that will also include provision for us to put in place experimental traffic management systems whereby local authorities will have to take real ownership of these new, innovative measures in a way that allows us to trial them for a period and afterwards to withdraw or retain them. This will give it real legislative strength. We need to do so after a recent decision on the Strand Road in Dublin as there is a risk it could have a chilling effect on all new innovation and development of traffic management for decarbonisation and improving the public realm. I am looking forward to developing those and explaining and introducing the amendments on Committee Stage, as well as other amendments on giving greater certainly to the legislative underpinning of BusConnects. I look forward to a constructive debate on Committee Stage and I thank all of the Deputies for their contributions on Second Stage.

See this speech in context