Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Cowley was in possession and has 16 minutes remaining.

Jerry Cowley (Mayo, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was strongly in favour of the penalty points system. Its introduction had a major effect because drivers believed they had a good chance of being caught. However, they have become complacent and this has put an end to the effectiveness of the penalty points system. In a recent parliamentary question, I asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform about the appointment of more gardaí for front line duties and he indicated this would happen. I hope this is the case because resources have always been a difficulty.

Fairness is essential. If the people can be convinced by a policy, its chances of success are much greater. It is unfair that a motorist who drives one mile per hour above the designated speed limit is given two penalty points. The lack of fairness and proportion puts people off, creates unease and interferes with the success of the law and the penalty points system. I call for an intermediate zone in which a monetary fine would be the appropriate penalty.

I am glad to raise again the need to introduce a system to reduce the number of road traffic fatalities. We need a system to retrieve people who are dangerously ill and rapidly transfer them to a so-called centre of excellence. It has been proven internationally that if one can provide essential treatment within what is known as the golden hour, one can save lives and prevent people from leading a life of disability. It is estimated that a helicopter emergency medical service, which can provide essential treatment within the golden hour, would cut both the mortality rate and the rate of long-term disability by 50%. We do not have such a service.

I feel sympathy for anyone involved in a road traffic accident, including the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, who was involved in a bad accident yesterday. We are delighted he is all right As he pointed out, his concern is for two American citizens involved in the accident. We hope they will make a full recovery.

When seriously ill victims of accidents require services not available in a local hospital, a helicopter emergency medical service is essential. Provision must be made for such a service as part of the strategy to save lives on our roads. We share with Northern Ireland the dubious distinction in Europe of not having such a service.

For more than a decade I have been involved in a campaign to introduce a helicopter emergency medical service. I met the former Ministers for Health, Deputies Noonan and Martin and the former Minister for Health in the North, Bairbre de Brún MLA, on this issue. I also met the cross-Border working group on pre-hospital care established under the Good Friday Agreement in Newry. As a result of this meeting, a recommendation was made to the North-South Ministerial Council that an all-Ireland feasibility study be carried out. This study was completed in 2002 but was not published until April 2004. To date, nothing has been done on foot of this good report, which clearly states that an inter-hospital retrieval service providing intensive care in flight is necessary. This requirement was flagged in a report on the ambulance service produced in 1993 and reiterated in 2000. Like doubting Thomas, the Minister wanted and was given proof. Now that the baton has been passed to the Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, it is for her to decide on a helicopter emergency medical service. Having been jigged around between Departments, the issue needs to be grasped.

We are the poor relation in Europe as regards helicopter emergency medical services. When large numbers of Ministers from other European countries visited Ireland during our EU Presidency, we did not have such a service, which is a shame, particularly given that it could save many lives.

Through no fault of its own, the Air Corps, which currently provides a service, is not capable of doing the job because its service is not dedicated and its equipment reflects its multi-purpose role. The Air Corps spends more time bringing Ministers from A to B than taking part in mercy missions. The average time it requires to reach a hospital to collect a patient in desperate need of air transport is 12.25 hours, which is a long time to wait for an essential service. What happens to the golden hour in such circumstances? The Bill and the road safety strategy should provide for such a service, without which people who would otherwise survive will die.

If the findings of the Hanly report are implemented — I do not believe they will be — the provision of helicopter emergency medical services will be an imperative. Although they are currently essential, they will become even more important if 24 hour services in local hospitals are closed. If the west does not have a neurosurgical centre, it must have a helicopter emergency medical service. International research has proven that the more one moves a person who has suffered a serious head injury or fractured spine, the greater the chance the person in question will die or lead a life of disability. Patients are currently removed from hospitals such as Mayo General Hospital and placed in the back of an ambulance for 12 to 16 hours, during which they are not connected to the intensive care equipment they need to sustain their oxygen levels and so forth. I am not criticising the ground ambulance service as it is an excellent though unappreciated service. I recognise it has received investment but it is still an incomplete service. No matter how good a ground ambulance is, it simply cannot make the time an air ambulance can. Time can be of the essence in treating victims of serious accidents. A ground ambulance, attempting to reach essential treatment services for patients in Dublin city, is forced to compete with traffic gridlock. If the Government wants to save more lives on the roads, an air ambulance service is one way to do so. Research proves that if accident victims receive treatment in the golden hour, death rates can be halved. Many patients with high sickness scores — the means by which levels of illnesses are measured — cannot be transported in ground ambulances. They should be transported by a helicopter emergency medical service. Introducing such a service would do wonders in reducing death rates and the numbers of people who are disabled for life because of road accidents.

In Beaumont Hospital, alone, it is reckoned four lives per year would be saved by such a service and 16 less people would be disabled for life. For every life saved, it is estimated that €1.27 million is saved on insurance payouts, loss of income and so forth. Multiply that figure and a major saving of more than €25 million per annum could be made through an air ambulance service, more than one would pay for it. It would also lead to the better use of intensive care units with time spent in them reduced by one third, as proven internationally.

The feasibility study spells this out and it should be part of the national road safety strategy. This goes beyond the concerns of individual Departments and is an important recommendation. The Minister for Health and Children in a reply to a parliamentary question on the matter informed me that it would have to be discussed with the Department of Defence. However, this must be a dedicated service. There is no point in having the Air Corps bringing a Minister to the Blasket Islands when an individual involved in a road traffic accident is in need of transfer to a treatment centre. The Garda received a dedicated helicopter service because the then Minister for Justice, Ms Owen, said that such a service would be of assistance in responding to crimes. All Members know the valuable work done by the Garda helicopter and the force will now get a second one. If a case can be made for a dedicated service to catch criminals, why not one for saving lives?

In the Western Health Board area, three ambulance stations are needed to reach the international standard of a centre for each person within a twenty-mile radius. No matter how well developed the ground ambulance is, it still cannot make the time a helicopter can. Take the scenario of a young man involved in a road traffic accident in the west, suffering with a delicately bleeding brain. Can one imagine taking him the distance on the rocky road to Dublin? That would not be proper treatment for an individual with a bleeding brain, clinging on to life in the hope of reaching the treatment centre in time. International research shows this is when the golden hour comes into play. Reducing services in local hospitals entails a greater risk of serious consequences.

The report presents a wonderful opportunity for saving lives on the roads. I know of people confined to wheelchairs after accidents because they could not be sent to a treatment centre in time. I know of the case of one young man who fell from his tractor on his farm. When his GP saw him lying in the field, he knew he needed urgent treatment in the national neurosurgical centre. However, as he did not get there in time, he is now confined to a wheelchair for life. He was taken by ground ambulance to the local and then regional hospital. It was not until the next morning that he was flown by Air Corps helicopter to the national rehabilitation centre in Dún Laoghaire. Why could he not have been flown from the scene of the accident rather than on the following day? That man will never walk again and there are many similar cases that GPs come across. I can give the names of people who have died because of the lack of an air ambulance service.

The campaign for such a service has gone on for some time. I made a submission to the national road safety strategy on this issue but was disappointed when it was not examined. However, it is never too late. Dr. Jack Philips, chief neurosurgeon at Beaumont Hospital, said that every weekend he sees many young people on life support machines for whom he can do nothing for he knows they are brain dead. So many of these people could have been saved if they received essential care in time. It is criminal not to act on this report. The service could be provided on a North-South basis as Ireland and Northern Ireland are the two places in Europe not to have this service.

There are many cases of babies from Donegal and Tralee, born with congenital heart disease or suffering from meningococcal meningitis, struggling for life and requiring urgent operations in, say, Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children in Crumlin, who have died due to the delays of ground ambulances. Another alternative is to open a neurosurgical centre in Galway, but this will not happen. If the recommendations of the Hanly report are introduced, a hospital emergency medical service will be needed more than ever.

The alternative is to build good roads but again this will not happen, particularly in the west. In the mid-term review of the national development plan, 69% of the planned western roads were developed, while 34% more roads were developed than planned in the south and east. The number of road deaths can be reduced at the cost of €12 million for an air ambulance service. Along the west coast, there are already 24 hour helipads. With an annual budget of €10 million, this service could be provided. This is an insignificant amount in contrast to the money spent of e-voting.

John Dennehy (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill, the primary purpose of which is to provide for the introduction of a metric system for road signs. It also involves other issues, for example, the adoption of changes in the administration of the fixed charge system for traffic offences, including outsourcing of certain actions and functions of the Garda in that connection.

I have a concern similar to that which I expressed in regard to the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Bill, namely, the need for consolidation of the various measures parked in different Acts, which can be confusing. I would like to see those bits and pieces put together in some way. The issue is much too dangerous and hazardous. Any activity that results in 300 or 400 people killed in a year must be dealt with in a particular way. One of the results of the scattered legislation is that people who infringe regulations get away on technicalities partly because issues are not clarified and spelt out in a plain, coherent fashion. As many offences as possible should be listed in one Act.

I am also concerned about road safety and the attitude of some commentators in the media. When we were dealing with the issue of hand held mobile telephones in cars one article appeared in which the writer suggested that the logical follow-on to banning hand held mobile telephones was that one would also need a hands free gear stick and various other mechanical changes in the car. It was ludicrous but it was frightening that anyone could take that kind of approach to such a serious topic and to the fact that 300 or 400 people are killed every year on the roads. It would not be tolerated in any other country.

The conversion of road signs to metric units is long overdue. We have a mix and mess of road signs, one such stupid example was cited recently in the Irish Examiner to the effect that a sign stated a speed limit of 30 km per hour for the next 5 miles. That is the kind of crazy situation we have. Once we adopted the metric system for other transactions such as finance and weights it was logical that we would move quickly to the use of the metric system for measurement on the roads. There have been arguments against this conversion as there were over the other conversions. In this case they range from sentimental attachment to the old Irish mile, a topic on which someone won a prize for letter of the week, to the cost involved in converting speedometers in vehicles when necessary.

Public safety must be the primary consideration on this issue. The question is whether the change to a standardised system will be less confusing and bring more clarity to driving for us and for the thousands of visitors who drive here whether on holiday or business trips. It will certainly in time prove to be a safer system. There will be a bedding-in period and people will take time to deal mentally with the changed situation but that is part of driving and is the primary argument against hand held mobile telephones, namely, that one must concentrate. It is just like a gear change, one must concentrate at all times on what one is doing in the car, on the road and what is ahead. It is much too dangerous to allow anything impinge on road safety, including bad signage. Some people will continue to convert back to miles in their minds but in the long run we will have a more commonly understood and therefore safer system for drivers and other road users.

The main difference between this and the previous metric conversions is that in this case we are dealing with hundreds of lives being lost every year, which is shocking. It is worrying that this is almost accepted. Sometimes people play the numbers game and say it is great that the number is down by 20 or someone in the Opposition will say it is up 40 or whatever but it is tragic and we must take every possible step to make the roads, driving and motorists safer. This is just a step in that direction. Many associated issues lead to the carnage on the roads. One death is one too many. Deputy Cowley mentioned four lives saved by a dedicated air service and someone has obviously done some work on that. More work of that kind should be done on road fatalities in general.

I was shocked recently to read that following a post mortem on a victim of a road traffic accident only the coroner knows whether the driver was incapacitated by drink or drugs. There is talk of bringing in new legislation to make that information available. I always presumed it was available. I requested and understood that each road fatality was investigated in a full and clear manner. When a death occurs we tend to an extent to put on the béal bocht and worry about bringing more distress to the people who have lost a loved one. The only way we will improve the position is to investigate fully every fatality and every serious event. Speaking as a former industrial safety officer, until we start examining every unsafe practice and serious incident we will not eliminate fatalities because for every death there is a given ratio of dangerous events in which people happened to be lucky enough to get away with it. The same is true of the roads.

I wonder what value we attach to human life. Deputy Cowley mentioned something in the region of €1 million but we certainly do not attach a high enough value to it. If we did we would not allow the situation to continue. Over recent years I have heard scathing comment about the amount of money spent on roads from one party that says we are spending too much on the construction of safer motorways. I drive from Cork to Dublin every week and believe I am fully entitled to the safest possible route. Statistics show that route to be a motorway. I am entitled to that as is every other motorist in the country. How many lives are to be sacrificed to maintain the low cost and low standard secondary road network that we have and on which most driving is done? Many of these roads were created by simply putting tarmacadam over what were in effect animal paths, leaving the bends and twists in them. We have very bad roads that are more like adventure courses than part of a modern road network. The arguments for cyclists can be made and we can have cycle paths and so on. However, these people will not put the rest of us on bicycles. We are entitled to have good motorways and dual carriageways. It has been proven that they are safer and about 3% of accidents happen on motorways. I make that comment on cycling as someone who did not drive until the age of 34. I practically lived on a bike and I have probably done more mileage in my time than all members of the group to which I refer. I did not pause for too many photographs, unless it was for a sports meeting. At some stage, I had to get a car for practical reasons, but my preference would have been for the bike. Both cyclists and motorists have to be facilitated. However, trying to stop us spending money on a modern set of roads is criminal. This is especially the case when over 300 people die on our roads every year. When people try to block that progress, they are responsible.

I know of at least one Fine Gael Deputy who complained about the signs that are currently on our roads. This is what this is all about; changing the signage for the better. I have made a point three years running to the CEO of the National Roads Authority at the Committee of Public Accounts and I will reiterate it here. The NRA must give advice on the location of such signs. One morning, I counted 46 badly damaged signs between Cork and Dublin. Many were forward warning signs which cost up to €100,000 apiece. Cullahill in County Laois was the worst example, where all four warning signs were battered to pieces. The NRA took no notice of me and replaced all four in exactly the same location, but they had been hit 30 or 40 times. The manifestation of bad engineering work is that they are badly located. Signs are fine if they are placed in the right location. I appealed to the NRA that the physical damage done showed that they were not in the right location.

I also made an appeal to the NRA on traffic islands. I agree with the creation of the plinths outside of villages and towns as well as the development of lighting for them. There is a plastic object in front of the islands, but 90% of them have been smashed and blown away. Anyone examining the edges of the islands will see that they are regularly struck by passing vehicles. I wanted reflective studs on the base of these islands. The islands consist of a mass of concrete thrown together and they are impossible to see. This is often because they are on the edge of villages or towns where there is not good public lighting. The committee's last meeting with the NRA took place three months ago and the retiring CEO assured me that he was getting a firm of contractors to paint the bottom of these signs and that I should therefore be happy. I am not happy because as they are so close to the ground, they will be covered in mud straight away. Reflective studs, which are the same idea as cats' eyes on a motorway, should be put on all of them. A hazard is being built and that should not be permitted. We have spent much money on traffic calming, but I have been appealing for three years for this to be done and it has always been refused. I hope the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, might take that on board. It is a common sense thing. These are being created in different places. There was an attempt made in New Inn in County Tipperary, where the studs were put in the centre of the road in a roundabout effort, but it is scandalous that any of us are allowed to get away with that kind of thing. An attempt will be made to paint the islands black and yellow as that has been traditionally put on moving vehicles, yet they are not suitable for that at all.

If the signs are being battered, then they are being erected in the wrong place. I want to give credit where it is due and the standard is improving immensely with the forward warning signs, in particular the large signs which are quite expensive. A few of them have been badly constructed where the crossbars are slipping down, so that two halves of a sign have a six to ten inch gap between them. That is not good enough. Good signage is critically important and road engineers should treat every road issue as though strangers were driving on it. If one is driving on a motorway or dual carriageway and suddenly a sign pops up, then one will have to break suddenly to swing off it. Good forward warning signs remove that problem. The issue of signs has not been dealt with seriously enough. There have been some comments on the debate in the media implying that signs will not kill anyone. I know of at least one constituent killed on a motorcycle because a stop sign was in an obscure location. He drove straight on to a main road, so signage is critically important.

There is new legislation to change the administration of the fixed charge system for traffic offences. The Committee of Public Accounts got a report on that which was not very cheerful. There were 87,004 fixed charge notices issued between 31 October 2002 and 31 December 2003, yet 50% of the photographs taken were faulty. With proper administration and the full support of everybody, including gardaí, civilians and traffic departments, we could probably cut our fatalities by 50%. We could do it if people feared that they would receive penalty points for offences. It would put manners on all of us who drive. I am worried about issues like cancel notices and so-called other driver nominations, where 22,881 registered owners contacted regarding offences were not driving the car during the alleged offence. That is a crazy figure. If we need to take steps to prevent cars being driven by others then we should be able to do that. We have taken such steps on the issue of minors. It has taken us a long time to make it a specific offence to supply a mechanically propelled vehicle to a minor. We need to be able to deal with issues relating to the penalty points system, such as cancelled notices, drivers holding foreign driving licences and foreign registered vehicles.

I have not had a chance to compliment Deputy Callely publicly since he was appointed Minister of State at the Department of Transport. In wishing him well, I am sure he will look beyond Dublin as he needs to do. I remind him that a car driven dangerously, for example in dangerous conditions or by a driver under the influence of drink or drugs, can be as dangerous as a shotgun. We insist that those who own weapons should lock them up, take great care of them and possess licences for them. I do not believe that we have been sufficiently stringent in respect of cars, however. I do not accept the "nanny state" argument, which certain commentators seem to find funny enough to use. Such an argument is not appropriate when over 300 of my fellow citizens are being killed on the roads each year. If this Bill is part of the process of getting tough, so be it. I wish the Minister of State well and commend the Bill to the House.

Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Deputy.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to contribute to the debate on this important legislation. I wish the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, well in his important role. I mean that sincerely.

Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I extend good wishes to the Deputy in his new portfolio.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate that. The work of the Minister of State and the Department of Transport can be a matter of life and death in many instances.

This is a dangerous time of year on the roads because it gets dark earlier. Roads can be more dangerous because of fallen leaves. It is easy to skid on damp roads. I understand that the revised speed limits will be introduced on 20 January next, when we may have icy weather on dark evenings. Is January the best time of the year to introduce a change of this nature? Would it be better to wait until the onset of long and bright evenings when there is less danger? I do not intend my remarks as a criticism, but as a matter of debate. Would it be better to wait until the summer, or at least until the clocks have gone forward? I ask the Minister of State to consider such a change in the legislation, although I appreciate that it may be too late.

Many Deputies have spoken about the need to review speed limits. I understand that there will be a general revision of speed limits in many parts of the country. Is it not possible to introduce changes in speed limits at the same time as the metrification of the limits, rather than making this change now and a further change at a later date? It seems we are increasing the cost, complexity and potential for confusion associated with the changes.

It is important that we acknowledge the need to review speed limits, which are inappropriate in many places throughout the country. The designated limit is dangerously slow in many instances. When one drives from Cork city towards Midleton, a speed limit of 40 mph is imposed for over half a mile of dual carriageway. It can be difficult and almost dangerous to stay within that limit. Many drivers brake suddenly when they realise that a speed trap might be forthcoming and they might get a penalty point if they do not slow down. The level of danger is increased in such circumstances. It is important that such limits should be reviewed.

It appears that some local authority members are putting pressure on council officials to extend 30 mph speed limits to areas further outside towns and villages to increase the likelihood of land in such areas being deemed suitable for development. Such factors need to be taken into account. It is not right to impose an inappropriate speed limit simply to facilitate the future development of land.

I agree with Deputy Dennehy that it is important that cycle ways and walk ways are provided for in road developments to the maximum possible extent. The Government should have a policy of incorporating cycle ways and walk ways where possible, especially near urban areas but also in the country. Many parents are afraid to let their children out on the road on bicycles. The Minister of State, Deputy Callely, who was assigned to the Department of Health and Children, is aware that a lack of exercise can lead to obesity. Cycling in the fresh air, which is one of the best forms of exercise for children and adults, is now extremely dangerous on many of our roads, especially in rural areas where cars travel at fairly high speeds on narrow roads and around corners.

The Minister of State is from Dublin, but I am aware that he travels to Cork from time to time. I ask him to examine the failure of many local authorities to cut briars on the sides of roads. This issue arises every year when vegetation grows onto roads, thereby reducing visibility and causing danger to pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Deputy Dennehy was right to mention the need to consolidate the legislation in this regard. Land owners are responsible for cutting vegetation at a certain time of the year, but many of them fail to do so, thereby making roads dangerous and unsafe. I contend that responsibility for the task should revert to local authorities. They should cut vegetation at the sides of the roads in late July and early August to ensure that people can cycle and walk. Our roads are narrow enough, but they become dangerous when vegetation grows and makes them narrower. I ask the Minister of State to consider this issue.

Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will undertake to examine the matter.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for indicating that he will examine this problem. I am not sure what the answer is, but the matter should be examined because it has caused a great deal of concern, particularly in rural areas. Land owners and local authorities are not certain who is responsible and there is a lack of enforcement.

Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will seek clarity on the issue and communicate my findings to the Deputy.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not want to see all kinds of prosecutions, but I believe this area needs to be examined. I am sure the Minister of State will be pragmatic. I think local authorities should take responsibility for cutting hedges. The cost of doing so should not be huge. I am glad the Minister of State intends to take it on board.

I am agreeing with Deputy Dennehy on many matters this evening, which is unusual. I agree with him that we need to ensure that signposting is clear. If a stranger from somewhere, like County Kerry who does not know Dublin very well is driving through the capital, he or she will find it difficult to find his or her way around. Such problems are also encountered in other towns and cities. It is difficult for people from out of town to find their way around St. Stephen's Green, for example. I recall that I got lost in Tallaght some years ago, which may seem funny to people from the area.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I still get lost in Tallaght.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Very good.

Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One could ask for Deputy O'Connor.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Perhaps. Proper road signs are needed to ensure that people such as tourists do not get lost. It can be frustrating to get lost and it can cause people to get very angry. When I stopped at a garage when I was lost, they had three sets of maps on the counter because they were so used to people calling in such circumstances. They had prepared photocopies of the relevant maps to give to people, depending on where they were going. Signposting needs to be clear. I ask the Minister of State to initiate a signposting policy throughout the country to ensure this area is dealt with properly. Signposts should be placed well in advance of the relevant junctions, not just at the junctions in question. It is not right that one should have to swerve at a junction because it was not signposted in advance. Perhaps we need somebody to examine this matter at national level. Each local authority seems to have a different policy in this regard. Local engineers do not seem to be sure whether to put up signposts. I ask the Minister of State to initiate a national signposting group to examine this matter and to take action, rather than simply placing a policy document on the Minister's desk.

The Bill also relates to the penalty points system. I remember when I was driving to Cork on the first morning of the system's operation, it was noticeable that every car on the road was crawling along just under the 60 mph limit.

Now when travelling at 60 mph on a dual carriageway, some fellow behind will flash his lights to encourage more speed. Obviously the fear factor disappeared very quickly. Colleagues on all sides have said that where there is a 40 mph limit gardaí spend a great deal of their time trying to catch people doing 43 mph or 44 mph, and the same approach is adopted to the 30 mph limit. That annoyed many people.

The Minister, who has great imagination, might be interested in a suggestion I came across. Instead of giving someone a penalty point, he might consider asking him or her to take an advanced driving course. One could offer the choice of accepting penalty points, or attending such a course. If a person chose the second route, he or she would have to complete an advanced driving course, paying for it themselves, and learn how to drive properly. I spoke last week to a commercial driver who spent most of his time on the road. His company did a very positive thing: it insisted that he complete such a course. I understand that the company that took him through it came in from the UK. He had been driving for many years and considered himself a good and careful driver. However, having completed the course, he realised that he had not known how to drive properly at all; he had not had a clue. He said that his eyes had been opened to the dangers, the risks and the need for caution. The Minister might wish to take that suggestion on board if he introduces legislation to consolidate matters. It is the system in countries including America, where they call them traffic violator schools. That might be worth looking at here.

I am confused at the references to "built-up areas". Areas such as small villages are built up but are not specified in the Bill. Nowadays we have ribbon development, and in many parts of the country there are houses along the roadside. It has happened over the years, and those houses are now a fact, but we have not planned for roads to be widened or for footpaths to be constructed, with the result that, if children have to go from one house to another, they must walk or cycle along a very busy, narrow road. We must consider whether these areas too are built-up areas.

I note that the Minister has decided that those under the age of 16 should not be supplied with a mechanically propelled vehicle. I agree, but I have not seen the definition of such a vehicle or of "supply". Does it mean that a person may not drive the vehicle on the road? May he or she drive it on a field, or is the person banned from being in charge of such a vehicle in all circumstances? Does the term include golf buggies and lawn mowers? Does it mean that one may not drive, own or be supplied with a car as a gift or even in a will? Someone asked me what would happen if a grandfather willed a 12 year old his vintage Morris Minor. Could that happen?

The concern is small but real. If such things as golf buggies and lawn mowers are mechanically propelled, may a 15 year old cut the grass in his own garden, or does the Bill apply only to the roadway? If he may cut the grass in his own garden on a mechanically propelled vehicle, may he drive a car in his own garden?

Jim Glennon (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is hard enough to get them to cut the grass.

David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Though I could respond to that, I will not do so.

In my area, there is a pressing need to bypass Killeagh and Castlemartin in east Cork. I also wish to draw the Minister's attention to another serious issue. On some dual carriageways there are medians allowing people to cross from one side to another. With the increase in the volume and speed of traffic, that is becoming very dangerous. Imagine a person crossing from one side of a dual carriageway, turning right into the traffic on the other side, which is coming down against him or her. One miscalculation is all that is needed for a major pile-up. There are places where that is waiting to happen, and the Minister should move on it immediately. It might have been all right ten years ago to have such medians on dual carriageways, but nowadays it is not. There are several around the country, and they are extremely dangerous.

The Minister should investigate medians on dual carriageways straight away, asking the NRA to supply him with the information, including their location around the country, with a view to closing them if necessary but preferably to providing overpasses and slip roads to allow safe passage from one side to the other. One does not see such extremely dangerous medians in Britain or other parts of Europe. People in those areas are worried that the NRA might take the cheap option of simply closing the medians, thus necessitating people travelling many miles to cross to the other side. It is very serious, and I do not want to comment in this House next year or the year after on a major smash because a slow-moving vehicle crossed the median and stalled after its driver miscalculated the speed of oncoming traffic.

I also welcome the Bill's changes regarding taxis. As I read matters, there has been concern for some years that virtually anyone can secure a licence to drive a taxi. There have been several cases of offences committed by taxi drivers, including assaults on passengers. I have met a fair number of taxi drivers in the course of my travels, and the overwhelming majority are respectable, honourable people who work long hours to earn a living, and they are appalled at such offences. It is important that we have a system to ensure that, when anyone — a child, one of us or any other citizen — gets into a taxi, it is driven by someone who can be trusted not to assault or attack and who has no record of such crimes. That is important, since a lone child is vulnerable in a taxi. I understand that the question is covered in the Bill; it must be enacted quickly.

It has also come to my notice that accidents involving people on legal drugs such as hay fever remedies and so on have soared. Taking medicines can quite often make people incapable of driving. We must make them more aware of the issue, and perhaps the Minister might examine people driving under the influence of medication. There are warnings on the bottles in small print, but people ignore them. Another quite important issue that alarms me and many other colleagues is that many accidents occur very late at night or in the early hours — 3 a.m. or 4 a.m. In many cases people are falling asleep at the wheel. In other countries campaigns have been initiated to make people aware that they should not drive when tired, something that the Minister might take on board.

We all live in very fast-moving and busy times, and many citizens work extremely hard. Increasing numbers of people are driving late at night when they are too tired, and we must take that into account. It is not dealt with in the Bill, but perhaps it should be. Perhaps the Minister might consider it. Some people drive without sleep for as long as 19 hours. That is unbelievable. It is understandable that a driver could fall asleep at the wheel on long stretches of road.

I refer to an issue, which may be considered humorous. Derek Davis raised the need for stopover points on motorways, in particular, on RTE radio recently. Service stations are provided in France, Germany and Great Britain and if one needs to go to the loo, one can pull in and go but that is not the case in Ireland. What does one do in Ireland if one needs to go while travelling during the night? One can drive 40 miles and pull in at a garage only to be told there is no loo or the key to the loo has been lost. It is important that this issue should be addressed and, where motorways are constructed in future, service stations should also be built so that drivers can pull in and freshen up if they feel tired or if they want to spend a cent. I wish the Bill good speed.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Glennon.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. While the primary function of the Bill is to provide for the introduction of a new system of speed limits based on metric values, the underlying emphasis is improved road safety under a number of headings. When I read the Bill, my attention was drawn to section 24, which is minor but relevant. It addresses the issue of people under the age of 16 owning mechanically propelled vehicles. The section states:

(1) A person shall not supply a mechanically propelled vehicle to a person under the age of 16 years.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €3,000.

(3) In this section "supply", includes supply by way of sale, hire, loan, gift, or other means of making the vehicle available to a person.

I welcome the section. Many parts of my constituency continue to suffer from the scourge of joyriding. While a number of the cars involved are stolen, many are not and they are supplied to, young people by uncaring, unscrupulous, selfish and reckless individuals. The Bill goes some way to addressing this issue. When one examines the trail of devastation caused by joyriding, including death, serious injury, damage to property and so on, one wonders whether the penalty provided for in this section is sufficient to meet the crime. If a car supplied to a youth under 16 is involved in an accident resulting in death or serious injury such as a permanent disability, is a maximum fine of €3,000 on conviction appropriate to the crime? Should a judge have the option to impose a custodial sentence? This issue should be examined.

As technology develops, modern cars become less easy to steal and those who are engaged in joyriding are using older cars, which have been traded in through a variety of scrappage deals. However, these cars, colloquially referred to as "company cars", are being sold by, unscrupulous individuals and section 24 attempts to address this problem. The penalty provided under it is sufficient if the car is driven off the road and burnt out but when an accident occurs, which we see all too often in parts of Dublin, the fine is not appropriate.

A related issue is establishing whether the person to whom such a car is sold is 17 or older. I thought this was a minor and trivial matter but that is not the case. We have laboured with the issue of age for a long time. For example, where alcohol is served, the onus of proof is on the publican when there is a question mark over an individual's age. Progress has been made through the introduction of identity cards and so on but perhaps the section could be tightened up so that the purchaser must produce a driving licence before completing the sale of the vehicle. The intention of the section is correct but more attention should be paid to the detail because I am concerned the person who sells the car could say the youth looked 17 or 18 years because he or she was not required to seek proof of age. The section is underestimated because it will have wide implications if it is enforced properly.

The definition of "supply" covers sales, hire, loan, gift or other means. How will persons under the age of 16 who use quads or scrambling bikes through their involvement in a variety of sporting clubs be affected? The original intention of the legislation was to cover the use of vehicles in a public place but I am unsure whether it will have implications for using these vehicles. Perhaps the Minister of State will examine this issue.

Previous speakers referred to the speed limits that will result from the conversion to the metric system. It has taken too long to convert speed limits to metric measurement. As one drives along the Naas dual carriageway and reads signs outlining the distances to Cork and Limerick in kilometres, but speed limits are expressed in miles per hour. That is confusing, particularly for tourists who are used to reading signs in kilometres per hour. I am glad the change is being made and, while some will consider it hasty, it is, nonetheless, absolutely necessary, as it will result in uniformity.

However, speed limits will be changed under the legislation and not only converted to the metric system, which I welcome. I am glad that under section 6 a speed limit of 80 kph will be imposed on all regional and local roads. The speed limit currently is 60 mph. I recently met representatives of Rathcoole Community Council regarding a traffic calming scheme which will be implemented on Johnstown Road on the approach to Rathcoole village. The Kilteel Road is on the far side of the Johnstown Road. It was a rural road that heads upwards into the mountains and the odd car used it but, following the development that has taken place in the area, this little road is carrying a significant volume of traffic, which travels down the hill at 60 mph. The legislation will reduce the speed on that road from 60 mph to 50 mph. A number of Members have not realised that speed limits on such roads will be changed.

Section 9 permits local authorities to make regulations under guidelines that will be laid down by the Minister. Under the regulations, speed limits could be reduced to as low as 30 km/h. While many of us who were councillors up to recently would have envisaged such a speed limit where road works or housing developments were underway, one of the major issues about which we received queries was road safety in the vicinity of schools where the speed limit is 30 mph. Depending on the regulations that come from the Minister's office, I envisage the new reduced limits of 30 km/h will be in the vicinity of vulnerable areas such as schools and other community or high development areas, where the limit is currently 30 mph. The 30 mph limit on some of these roads where the volume of pedestrians is so high is unacceptable and dangerous. However, these decisions will be made at local level, which is appropriate. Having sat on a local authority for a number of years, I know these are the issues that are raised, but until now there was no procedure to effect change in the speed limits. This change is welcome.

Some people will question whether this change will ever be implemented. The Bill will also allow us to increase the speed limit on some of our ordinary roads. Under the guidelines and the regulations of the Minister, the local authority will have an input and say on the limits on these roads. In the case of the Naas dual carriageway, in my area, where most of the intersections are being closed, the road is three-lanes wide and runs into a motorway and there will be questions to address as to whether we can increase the speed limits. The Belgard Road, which links Clondalkin and Tallaght is a dual carriageway with a bus lane and a 40 mph speed limit. Again, the local authority will have the option of addressing the limits on that road.

This legislation also refers to the penalty points system. Some weeks ago the Committee of Public Accounts debated this issue. Penalty points were introduced in late 2002. The hurried manner in which they were introduced resulted in technical and administrative difficulties. These difficulties were the basis of our debate. The contributions of everyone at the meeting, representatives from the main political parties, the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Transport, and the Garda Síochána, pointed out that while there were difficulties involved in administering the system, in excess of 100 people were alive today as a result of the introduction of penalty points. At the conclusion of the debate the committee was glad to hear that the issues that arose in the early stages with regard to the implementation of the system have, by and large, been addressed. It concluded that no matter when the system was going to be introduced, it would have involved technical problems. The authorities feel they have overcome the problems. They are confident that the roll out of the remainder of the penalty points system will be successful and will not encounter the same difficulties and impediments it did on its introduction.

One aspect of this Bill is that it allows for the outsourcing of some of the services to implement penalty points. This is appropriate as it is unnecessary for the Garda and Departments to be involved, hands-on, in every aspect of the penalty points system. Detection is one issue, but penalty points also involve significant administration. I am glad the legislation provides for the outsourcing of much of this administration.

In the first year of their introduction penalty points made a significant and beneficial contribution to road safety. Driver behaviour changed. However, last year and over the past number of months, many people have said that we have not maintained the change. As the penalty points system is extended, people will become more aware of it. It has potential and will revert to having the positive impact on changing driver behaviour that it had previously.

Jim Glennon (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Curran for sharing time. I welcome this Bill, the primary purpose of which is to provide for metrication. It is time our speed limits used metric rather than imperial measures. The issue has been on the agenda since we entered the EEC in the early 1970s. For many of the reasons already mentioned, metrication is a good idea.

It is good the Bill is going through although it is being dealt with in a somewhat rushed manner. Some local authorities around the country will have difficulty providing for 22 January. Whenever there is a deadline, some people have trouble meeting it. However, there was never going to be a perfect time to introduce this necessary legislation.

I wish to consider some issues arising from the legislation. My colleague, Deputy Curran, touched briefly on the penalty points system. We all know about the change in culture brought about by that system. Unfortunately, the change was only temporary and it is generally accepted that the majority of motors are slipping back into their old ways. There are a number of reasons for this. The novelty of the new system and the blaze of publicity surrounding it were an enormous plus towards a change of culture. However, when people realised enforcement would be as slack as it has been, observance of speed limits dropped.

The motoring public must accept that the Garda cannot stop an accident happening. However, through good management and sensible application of road traffic legislation, the Garda Síochána will be the major contributor to a change in driving culture. This will in turn lead to a reduction in the number of accidents. Gardaí get a raw deal in this regard as they are required to be present whenever there is an accident. Nowadays in particular many accidents occur between 12 midnight and 3 a.m. or 4 a.m. at weekends, the peak hours of business for gardaí on town streets and secondary roads surrounding our towns. It is impossible for them to cover everything. The gardaí are not responsible for preventing accidents nor should we expect that. We cannot allow a blame culture arise or let the finger be pointed at individual gardaí or individual Garda stations asking whether they should have done more to prevent accidents. Gardaí alone will not stop accidents. Only motorists, with the backup of the Garda, can change the culture and reduce the number of accidents.

Enforcement of speed limits and respect for them and road traffic legislation generally are important. However, we often see silly speed limits in place. I pass one every night on my way home. At the Port tunnel road works there is a 30 mph speed limit on a two-lane stretch at the start of the M1. This limit is observed by one driver in 15. I check every evening to see whether anybody else observes that limit, but I rarely have company chugging along at 30 mph on the inside lane. I do not entirely blame the motorists. The authorities, by placing such an unrealistic speed limit in this area, incur disrespect for realistic speed limits on other parts of the road network.

The problem is not confined to that particular area. Deputy Penrose will be familiar with the situation on the N4. My wife got a lovely letter yesterday morning informing her of her first penalty points. There are three different speed limits over a distance of 1,200 metres on that stretch of road. The signposting of these limits and the confusion arising from them is nothing short of ridiculous. It makes our position as legislators and the position of the Garda Síochána as the enforcement agency much more difficult.

There is an old saying that the law is an ass. The law will continue to be an ass if the authorities insist on making it so. The Government, the Garda Síochána and the local authorities are the authorities. We have inputs and must be reasonable in these circumstances. Carelessness on our part regarding unrealistic speed limit zones contributes to accidents.

I was interested in Deputy Stanton's suggestion about an advance driving course, or traffic violator school, rather than penalty points. Far too many drivers sat their test too long ago or possibly not at all. That suggestion could be positively examined.

I regret there is no provision in the legislation for random breath tests. I am in favour of such tests with regard to alcohol, as well as prescribed and recreational drugs.

Jimmy Deenihan (Kerry North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last Wednesday, the National Roads Authority published findings which show the majority of motorists still recklessly break speed limits and ignore the risk of penalty points. Statistics from the survey are quite worrying. More than 85% of heavy trucks speed on motorways, 60% on dual carriageways and 73% on normal main roads. A total of 86% of cars speed in 30 mph zones in urban arterial areas and 75% in 40 mph zones. An alarming 98% of cars and 92% of heavy goods vehicles and articulated trucks speed on main urban roads to which a speed limit of 30 mph applies. The survey also found speeds have increased on motorways and county roads. Average speeds on back roads, where drivers have not yet been constrained by bends, weather and traffic conditions, also increased from 44 mph two years ago to 48 mph last year. Some 86% of cars break the speed limit in 30 mph zones in urban arterial zones, 75% in 40 mph zones, and 30% of all car drivers break the speed limit on main roads. The number of heavy duty trucks and cars that break speed limits despite the clampdown and penalty points system is alarming.

The main provisions of the Bill deal with seven types of speed limit, which will be in kilometres instead of miles. Ordinary speed limits will be fixed by regulation, therefore it is important new regulations are brought in at the same time as the Act. Perhaps officials would clarify this, otherwise there will be much confusion.

It is a retrograde step to increase the 30 mph speed limit to 50 km/h, which is 32.5 mph. People will be inclined to calculate in miles per hour over the next few years. It might lead to confusion when they see a sign stating a speed limit of 50 km/h. A speed limit of 40 km/h would be more appropriate.

There will be an 80 km/h, or 50 mph, speed limit on regional and local roads. This will be difficult to enforce. If I travel on the N69 from Tarbert to Listowel, I can drive at 100 km/h, or 62.5 mph. I then go on to the regional road between Listowel and Ballybunion where I can only drive at 50 mph. This will cause much confusion, and will be difficult to enforce. National roads will have a speed limit of 100 km/h, or 62.5 mph. A limit of 90 mph might be more appropriate in the present circumstances.

The speed limit on motorways will increase to 120 km/h, which is approximately 75 mph. The Minister should, for at least the first year, have the power of discretion to vary this limit to enable drivers adjust their thinking. Such a measure is not contained in this particular section of the Bill.

It is hugely important that signs are clear. Perhaps flashing lights are necessary for drivers approaching and leaving built-up areas. Repeater signs could also be installed. Tourists as well as locals must grasp the change. There may be some difficulties for UK and Northern Ireland visitors who will find the system different. Perhaps the Minister will clarify whether the same changes are taking place in Northern Ireland. Change should happen in tandem in both jurisdictions.

Any outsourcing agreement should be brought before the Dáil so that powers given to contractors are scrutinised. There have been considerable difficulties with a number of wheel clamping contractors and the public must be protected from the abuse of power by this quasi-police force. As a number of people have had major difficulties with clamping contractors, when we outsource, as is provided for in this section, we must be careful that contracts are properly scrutinised.

The Bill also amends technical aspects of existing legislation regarding penalty points. The position regarding hand-held speed cameras needs to be clarified. According to reports of District Court judgments, there appears to be an unwillingness to convict where printouts are not available. Perhaps the Minister will examine the position regarding hand-held speed cameras and avail of the opportunity afforded him to clarify the position in the Bill.

Section 24 is a necessary provision relating to the supply of mechanically propelled vehicles to minors. I am concerned as to how a dealer is supposed to ascertain the age of a young person. Perhaps a similar provision could be added to that in the Intoxicating Liquor Act to enable this potentially useful section to be properly enforced. Will the Minister clarify the issue of what provision will be made in the section for the identification of the age of minors? What measures will be introduced to ensure that young people will provide identification to prove their age?

The Bill will add to the large body of Acts, which somebody referred to as "the jungle of Acts", on road traffic legislation. The Bill adds new sections to those in existing legislation. It refers to nine Acts of which seven are strictly within the road traffic code. It does not refer to four other Road Traffic Acts, which amend the principal Act of 1961. The 1961 Act will also be amended by, this Bill, which is the 12th Act in the road traffic code. The 1961 Act was also amended by regulations made under the European Communities legislation. Much EC legislation has in reality overruled part of the 1961 Act. The myriad statutory instruments under these Acts, adds to the state of confusion. At a time when at least one person per day is killed and ten people are seriously injured on Irish roads the Legislature should not add to the confusion, yet we appear to be allowing the confusion to continue.

As the main enforcers of the law, the Garda is not supplied — I stand to be corrected — with any modern textbook on traffic legislation. Circulars are received and must be absorbed by the Garda. In most cases these are inadequate. I am aware of one particular book on road traffic legislation, which contains 140 pages. It is very difficult for gardaí to understand and implement the totality of road traffic legislation in order to execute a successful prosecution. Ministers should simplify and summarise traffic legislation for the Garda so as to facilitate it in making convictions. It can be difficult for the Garda to get convictions when faced with a judge and defending barrister because of the complexity of traffic legislation. I look forward to a response on these points from the Minister in his reply. As previous speakers said, it is time for the introduction of a new, reforming and consolidating Act incorporating all existing traffic legislation of domestic and European origin.

I especially welcome section 26, which amends the Taxi Regulation Act. It emerged recently that 20% of taxi drivers in Dublin had criminal convictions, which is very worrying for users, both locals and tourists. Tourists depend heavily on the advice of taxi drivers in terms of getting around the city. It can also be confusing for Irish people to get around the city because of one-way streets and so on. It is most important that taxi drivers are dependable, highly principled and responsible people. This section is very welcome in ensuring a high quality taxi service in which people have confidence.

Although the point does not directly relate to the Bill, I agree with Deputy Stanton regarding cycle paths and walk ways. We now have a high standard of road network across the country. Some of the finest roads in Europe are being built here at the moment and we should avail of the opportunity to provide proper cycle paths along the sides of these roads. There has been a benefit in this regard on the road from Killarney to the county bounds, which is extensively used by cyclists during the summer. Because of their width these roads are very safe and the surface on them is much better than county or regional roads. We have an ideal opportunity to encourage people to exercise. I accept that not everybody can benefit from such roads if they are not in proximity to them, however, people living adjacent to them should be encouraged to use them. Cycle paths need to be clearly marked out. Walkways should also be encouraged, especially around urban areas where speed limits should be properly enforced.

In this case, people walking in rural areas, on town bypasses and ring roads could feel more confident and safe. I welcome the Bill and look forward to my questions being addressed when the Minister responds.