Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

35. To ask the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the reason his Department was unaware of the legal standing of the policy in regard to the mandatory nature of public services cards for those who wish to obtain a driver's licence or theory test; the reason his Department and the Road Safety Authority appear to have had a significantly different understanding of the policy; the way in which approximately €2 million was spent by the Road Safety Authority in making arrangements to implement a policy which was then scrapped; the situation regarding public services cards and obtaining driver licences and driver theory tests; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25536/18]

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister clarify what appears to be a change in policy by his Department over the mandatory nature of public services cards, PSCs, for those who wish to obtain a driver's licence or do a theory test? Can he clarify how it came about that his Department was unaware of the legal standing of this policy? Can he clarify why the Department and the RSA appear to have had a significantly different understanding of the policy? Can he explain how approximately €2 million was spent by the RSA in making arrangements to implement a policy that was then scrapped? What is the situation now?

Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for the chance to clear this up. There is a certain misconception about this problem, which was misunderstood by people writing about it. Of course, their message was then conveyed to the Deputy and others who do not actually know what is happening in this case.

It is the policy of the Government since 2013 that the PSC should be integrated into service provision across public services. The use of a single card through which people can have their identity verified offers great benefits to both the individual and the State in terms of time and convenience, as well as the integrity of public service delivery.

The policy of integrating the PSC into the provision of public services is not a matter of making it mandatory, but optional. The legislation in this area is complex and there was evidently a misunderstanding as to this policy and its implementation. The Deputy is partially right in that regard. I personally clarified the misunderstanding by directing that use of the PSC in driver licensing should be an option rather than a mandatory requirement.

The current situation is therefore that a person applying for a driving licence may present a PSC as proof of identity, or use such other documentation for proof of ID as was previously accepted.

At present, to undertake the driver theory test, a PSC is being called for. However, in the interests of consistency, alternatives to the PSC will be catered for. As the driver theory test is operated by the Road Safety Authority through a contractor, I gather that allowing for the use of a passport, for example, may involve revisions to that contract. That is an operational matter for the RSA.

In regard to expenditure, it is not correct that €2 million was spent on the effort to make the PSC mandatory in driver licensing. The €2 million in question was in fact the expenditure on the development of an online application system for driving licences, and this system is going ahead.

The expenditure by the RSA in regard to the PSC was an amount of the order of €30,000 to €40,000, which was spent on advertising the use of the PSC. While the PSC is not in fact mandatory, even this expenditure cannot be considered as waste. It was important to enhance awareness of the benefits of the PSC, as well as the availability of an online option for driving licence applications. The RSA awareness campaign encourages the use of both.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

According to the RSA, in March 2017 the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport instructed that PSCs were to be mandatory in the process of applying for a driver licence or a theory test. Last year, the PSC became mandatory for theory tests. PSCs were to become mandatory for driver tests in April. In March, just one month before the card was to become mandatory for driver licences and nine months after it was made mandatory for theory tests, the Department received legal advice from the Attorney General that there was no legal basis for the change. Therefore, the Minister pulled the plug on the project. This was a year in, after he had instructed the RSA to prioritise it and had overseen the waste of €2 million implementing a policy that turned out to be illegal. Why did the Minister and his Department not check, in the first instance, that there was a legal basis for that change?

Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is using rather dramatic language. During the integration of the PSC into the driver licence application process, an erroneous policy of making the card the only acceptable form of identification was pursued by the RSA. At no point did the Department then direct the RSA to adopt a mandatory approach. In light of concerns, the RSA's planned approach was in line with neither Government policy nor legislation. I decided in March 2018 to make clear to the RSA that the PSC should be an optional form of ID verification but not mandatory.

The Deputy really should not be talking about waste of €2 million. There was money spent on promoting the PSC. The Deputy is absolutely right in that regard. I refer to the €30,000 to €40,000 to which I alluded. The €2 million to which the Deputy is referring was to promote the online system for driver licences. The two should not be confused.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The correspondence between the Department and the RSA on this matter shows total confusion and disorganisation. From the documents released under freedom of information provisions, it would appear the RSA believed it was operating on instructions from the Department that PSCs were indeed to be made mandatory. It seems clear from the freedom of information documents that the law was broken in regard to the theory tests. Who is responsible for that? Who will be accountable for potential data breaches regarding the personal data of theory test applicants? The Department seems to be suggesting that the RSA went on a bizarre solo run. The Minister's own spokesperson said no losses have arisen, yet the RSA claims €2 million was wasted. Therefore, one side is being economical with the truth. Which side is that? Someone has to be held accountable here.

Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If there was any confusion, I hope I have been able to clear it up. The Deputy referred to the theory test. She is absolutely right that a PSC is being called for but, in the interest of consistency between the theory test and practical test, alternatives to the PSC will be catered for.

To suggest that the €2 million allocated, not all of which has even been spent at this stage, which will be spent on promoting online driving licence applications, is somehow wasted is confusing the two ideas. The Deputy is right that there was a misunderstanding between the RSA and the Department but that was corrected and it is now working perfectly well.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked the Minister who was responsible for the theory test but the RSA is contradicting him. The authority is saying it was instructed that it was to be mandatory and the Minister is saying otherwise. We would like some clarity as to exactly who misunderstood whom in this case.

Shane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I made it clear. To clarify matters, I instructed that it was optional.