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

The number of people killed in incidents on our roads is an issue of major concern for all of us. Speed, together with the consumption of alcohol or drugs and distractions such as mobile telephone use, is most definitely a factor in some collisions. The reduction in the numbers involved in the traffic corps over the past few years rather than in increase is relevant when we consider enforcement. Temporary solutions, such as 30 minutes per day for uniformed members, is welcome, but it is not sustainable on an ongoing basis.

Over the May bank holiday weekend, for example, 613 vehicles were seized for various offences, which tells us that enforcement is important. That is done for safety reasons, not to punish people. GoSafe vans augment the enforcement. However, they are usually visible on national primary roads. Often, the least safe roads do not have safe locations to park with a vehicle.

Cyclists as well as pedestrians are among those who have tragically lost their lives and suffered major injuries, including life-saving injuries. When road conditions and road safety are being considered, we need to think more widely than cars. Cyclists and motorcyclists are high-risk groups, as are pedestrians. Poor road surfaces can impact these groups to a greater degree, as can road design.

If we were to take an evidence-based approach to road safety, it is simply not tenable that information collected by the RSA on collisions is not then provided to local authorities or TII. This nonsense has to be resolved and should not have gone on for so long.

In the past, local authorities collected a wide variety of data relating to traffic collisions using a CT68 form. Everything from weather conditions to road conditions and so on was mapped. This included accidents where there was material damage to a vehicle. That information is now provided to the RSA by the Garda where there is a fatal accident or a serious injury, not material damage. There is little point in gathering statistics if they are not used to reduce road accidents. Local authorities and TII need that information to construct a cost-benefit analysis and prioritise funding where road conditions are a factor.

Road type matters too. We need to break that down. National primary and secondary roads are primarily funded by the Department with TII administering the fund. Regional and local roads are funded by local authorities directly with some, but not all, local authorities getting significant grant funding from the Department. The way local authorities are funded complicates the picture. Most people presume that when they pay their motor tax, it goes to road construction and maintenance in their own area. In fact, it goes into the national coffers. Local property tax was collected for additional services, and that is what people were told was for libraries, parks and so on. In fact, some of that funding must be used for roads and housing, reducing the need for departmental funding, which I believe is a three-card trick.

Baselines are used to determine this. They were set by local authorities as far back as 2000, using the 1996 census, when motor tax was ring-fenced to fund local authorities. Those baselines were recently revised. It was decided that population increase, even when it is extensive, is less important than geographic size. In fact, population increase only has a tiny weighting when considered against geographic size. This means that some of the most rapidly growing local authorities do not have the resources to hire staff or provide services in proportion to the growth of their population. It has the effect of reducing or eliminating government grants for roads and footpath maintenance, which distorts the picture. Just as road mileage is important in terms of maintenance, so is road usage when we consider things like the volume of traffic, including heavy goods vehicles.

County Kildare, for example, got the minimum increase in its baseline but had one of the highest increases in its population between the two census', with 25,000 additional people. The Minister of State will remember a previous county engineer, Mr. John Carrick, who estimated that 80% of all traffic coming from and going to Dublin came through County Kildare on the N7, N9 and M4. We hear every day on AA Roadwatch about traffic that comes off those roads into Kildare and does damage. That is national traffic.

Nowhere in this review was there an assessment of service deficits, even in situations where whole new communities have been constructed and obviously require services. Places such as Ongar and Tyrrelstown in west Dublin simply were not counted in terms of need. Such an audit or assessment would identify the absence of services or where services are stretched to their limits. It would also consider staffing deficits, including in road departments. If such an approach was taken, it would have an impact on the baselines. These are not going to be reviewed again until after the next census, so it is a huge disadvantage to have an increase in an area's population. Why would it be encouraged? It is madness. It has an effect right across, and it certainly has an effect on the amount available. Regions certainly do not get Government grants for roads.

The motion refers to 2023, when only €135,000 was awarded under the regional and local roads programme to the four Dublin authorities. That is the example. The reality is that four Dublin local authorities were required to spend local property tax on roads and footpaths. That is why the amount is so low. That would come as a surprise to most people in the Dublin area who are major contributors to the motor tax fund and, indeed, local property tax fund. A person's motor tax is used as general taxation and his or her local property tax is used to fill potholes, not for parks, libraries and other facilities.

This has a bearing on the ability of local authorities to even seek grant funding for projects, including some of those for active travel, because they do not have the funding to hire people directly. They cannot get consultancies to do the work because they are all overworked and unavailable. We have to look at the totality of the funding. What is happening in regard to these baselines is so convoluted that it is difficult to explain to the public. The Government is getting away with it and it is hugely disadvantaging areas, particular those where there are large and growing populations. It has a bearing on road conditions and that has to be addressed.

See this speech in context