Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the contributions from across the House. Deputy Gould had some constructive suggestions. I will set out initially what we are doing in the Bill because a lot was stated around a lot of other reforms but it is important to set out the context again. We are reforming the penalty point system to target multiple offences in one act. It is a progressive reform.

It targets those reckless drivers who commit multiple offences in the one act. This is something that will make a difference to road safety. Bringing in mandatory drug testing will address a serious gap and issue we are seeing, particularly in light of the trend and the evidence we saw from the Road Safety Authority and An Garda Síochána last year, which showed very concerning and increasing levels of drug driving. We need to tackle that head-on. It is causing a serious number of deaths and injuries on our roads.

There is also the wider issue of speed limits. Many people discussed speed limits but it is important to say that the speed limit review was not introduced in any type of reactionary way by this Government. The Government set up an evidence-based review commission that considered international research and best practice. The review has been peer reviewed. Multiple road engineers and international experts were involved. The review is guiding the wider changes in speed limits we are seeing.

While we are changing the legal default speed limits in the legislation, once the legislative process is concluded, guidance will issue to produce a new speed limit framework to be used by all local authorities. We are trying to synchronise and co-ordinate the process across all local authorities to end the fragmented system of speed limit reviews we have seen historically under which one council may start in one year and another the next without any national synchronisation. Essentially, the default speed limits will underpin the new speed limit guidance but local authorities and councillors will have the ability to revise speed limits upwards, if it is safe to do so, or to bring them further downwards if that is the correct decision.

It is important to state that, of course, there will be exceptional circumstances. There are roads that are well engineered and that can have higher speed limits. However, we need to set a safer default baseline, which local authorities can then make correct and prudent decisions to alter. There is an example I reference all of the time. In their contributions, some Deputies referenced national primary roads. National primary roads will remain at 100 km/h and motorways will remain at 120 km/h but there are national secondary roads that are not at the engineering standard to allow for driving at 100 km/h. That is why the speed limit review proposed a limit of 80 km/h. Similarly, the limit on local rural roads is currently 80 km/h. There can be grass growing up the middle of the road, poor visibility and mainly ditches to the side of the roadway. We know from the data that it is on such roads that the predominance of accidents occur. These are unsafe roads with unsafe speed limits. This changes the default speed limit on those roads. In built-up or urban areas, the proposal is to mirror much of what has happened throughout Dublin where the limit has been set at 30 km/h. However, the limit on arterial roads in these areas will be set at 50 km/h. The guidance will set out further detail on how the speed limit review and framework will operate in the context of local authorities. This must be underpinned by a strong legislative context. That is why we are advancing this measure, which is very much evidence-based.

I will come back to some of the comments that were made. Some of the comments made by some members of the Rural Independent Group were very disingenuous and unfair to the Minister, Deputy Ryan. In fairness, the Minister has sought to prioritise the evidence across all matters involving road safety, as have I. We have a very effective working road safety transformation board. Personalising and politicising such a sensitive issue is unfair and it is beneath the political system. We should not play politics with such a sensitive matter in the context of the many people who have lost their lives and the devastation on our roads. We should all be mature enough to provide constructive suggestions in respect of the Bill rather than trying to polarise people and attack the Minister when he is supporting an evidence-based measure.

Deputy Mattie McGrath attacked the Bill and made reference to multiple NGOs. One in ten deaths on our roads last year occurred in the Deputy's county of Tipperary. He says he is full of sympathy and I am sure he is but I would ask him to be not only full of sympathy, but full of impetus for reform. We have to be very careful. If we want to be victim-centred in our approach to road safety and reform, I would ask all Deputies across the House to support the Bill. It is victim-centred and based on evidence in respect of road safety.

Deputy Danny Healy-Rae spoke about educating youngsters. The most I have heard from him on road safety in my years in this House was a defence of drink driving. What message does that send to young people? I ask him and all of the Deputies who have sought to polarise the public and to undermine important road safety reforms to send the right message to people and to stop insulting victims and people in this House. They should extend their sympathy to standing up for reform that works and evidence we can all stand over.

I will speak to some of the other points raised. Some people made reference to driving tests. We are reviewing the driver testing curriculum. It has not been revised for 30 years and needs to more accurately reflect modern driving, particularly in light of upgraded technology and changes to the road network. We have sanctioned an additional allocation to the Road Safety Authority to commence that review of the curriculum.

Deputy Shanahan made reference to someone getting caught speeding in a 30 km/h zone. The obvious thing to do is not to speed at all. If pedestrians are hit by a vehicle travelling below 30 km/h, they will have a 90% chance of surviving. If hit at 60 km/h, or perhaps at the unfortunate speed the Deputy referenced, 90% will be killed. In that context, it is correct for Gatso vans to be placed in urban areas. Last year, 43 pedestrians were killed in villages, towns and cities. People need to be cognisant of that when criticising the deployment of speed vans. The deployment of speed vans is arranged between An Garda Síochána and GoSafe, as a company. It is not a revenue-generating exercise. There is an algorithm and data oversight system that allows vans to be deployed where increased speeding is detected. The vans are there to address the very worrying trends in breaches of speed limits on our roads that have been noticed.

There was reference to camera-based enforcement. There has been extensive work done in modelling the Scottish approach, which has demonstrated very progressive reforms in the context of a camera-based enforcement strategy. We are going to advance that this year and put a budget behind it as part of the forthcoming Estimates process later this year. We will have a camera-based enforcement strategy that makes better use of technology in enforcement.

On intoxicated driving, as Deputy Duncan Smith mentioned, members of An Garda Síochána must form the opinion that a driver is driving while intoxicated. The Deputy referenced concerns regarding prescribed medication. It is not a crime to drive while on prescription medication but obviously, if it results in a level of intoxication, it is an issue. It comes down to personal responsibility.

The issue of multiple learner permits was raised. We are working with the Road Safety Authority on addressing the issue of multiple learner permits. It is a reform we want to advance this year. Deputy Ward mentioned our engagement with victims' groups. I have met Leo Lieghio, Susan Gray from PARC and many other victims' groups, as have people in the Opposition. We are keen to work with victims' groups to ensure any legislation we advance is victim-centred.

I will address a point raised by multiple Deputies. I accept that enforcement needs to improve if the legislation we are advancing is going to work. If our existing legislation is going to have a greater effect, we need to see improvement in enforcement. That is something I raise regularly with the Commissioner, the assistant commissioner and An Garda Síochána. I do not dispute that it is a core issue in the context of road safety.

Points were raised on engineering. We need to see continued investment in our road network for local, regional and national roads but we also need to reform, to look at the evidence we have seen over the last 12 months as regards drug driving, which is something we are tackling, and to address the culture of recklessness.

That is why we are reforming the penalty points system and addressing the fragmentation and complete dysfunction of speed limits nationwide. This is a clear and important reform that we must advance in the context of this legislation. I appreciate all input by Members and look forward to progressing this Bill quickly through both Houses. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context