Diarmuid Wilson (Fianna Fail)

With the allocation of €5.5 million by the National Roads Authority, phase two of the Cavan by-pass will commence on or before 11 June this year. I thank the Minister for that.

Whereas the penalty points system has been a great success, I have some concerns about it. It would be a mistake to include too many offences in the penalty points schemes as I think it should focus on speeding offences. If we broaden it too much, it may not achieve what it set out to do. It should concentrate on speeding offences, wearing of safety belts and lights.

It is not appropriate to extend the penalty points system to deal with those driving without insurance. If somebody is caught driving without insurance, he or she should be put off the road for up to two years. Somebody willing to drive without insurance is endangering the lives of others.

A person convicted of careless or dangerous driving should not incur penalty points but be banned from driving for a period.

I agree with the points made by Senator Browne on those driving while under the influence of drugs. As well as random testing for drink-driving, there should be random testing to see if a person is driving under the influence of drugs and this provision should be included.

The fact that 144,000 drivers have received penalty points shows the system is working. However, how many have incurred penalty points when driving in areas with 30 or 40 mph speed limits? Somebody who is convicted of driving at 33 or 34 mph in a 30 mile zone should not incur penalty points but should be fined heavily. We should concentrate on speed checks on the main roads. The introduction of the penalty points system 17 months ago has resulted in saving 100 lives, which is to be welcomed.

The Minister together with his colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, will work to speed up — pardon the pun — the introduction of a dedicated traffic corps. The introduction of speed cameras throughout the country is welcome, but will the operation of the privatised speed cameras be based on commission? If so, that is a dangerous precedent because, if it is being done on a commission basis, it will be in their interest to issue as many speeding fines as possible. I would like the Minister to clarify that matter.

I agree with what Senator Dooley said about the tacograph system, which operates very successfully in trucks. I see no reason why it should not also be used in cars because it would be a bigger deterrent than any speed check.

The Minister should examine the sale of high-speed cars. What is the logic behind allowing people to purchase cars capable of doing 160 mph when the maximum speed limit is 70 mph? People should not be entitled to buy or sell such cars. It should be made compulsory to fit a device which bleeps to alert drivers when they exceed the speed limit. Such devices are fitted as standard in some cars, but not in most vehicles.

I am concerned by the delay between the commission of an alleged offence and the issuance of proceedings. It can take up to three or months before people are notified. While I appreciate there has been a problem in getting the computer system up and running, such notification should be treated as a matter of priority.

In recent court cases in Dublin, five people had alleged offences against them struck out because they claimed they had not received due notification. I can assure the Minister this does happen because I was a victim of such an occurrence. The first I knew about having incurred a speeding summons was when a garda called to my house. I understand that one must be notified by post of such an offence in the first instance, and one is then supposed to submit details to the relevant authority as to who was driving the car at the time of the offence. I did not get an opportunity to do that. Letters of notification should be sent by registered mail to the alleged offenders.

The penalty point system cannot be viewed in isolation because other Government initiatives have led to safer roads. The low-cost accident reduction schemes, funded by the Government, have been very successful since their introduction some years ago. I am glad they are to be continued.

The signage, lighting and cats' eyes programme, announced by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, has also played a major role in road safety. As we all know, however, there are not enough road signs. One of the major difficulties facing drivers is whether a 30 mph or 40 mph limit applies when entering urban areas. In many cases, there are no signs to indicate the speed limit, and if there are any signs they are often too small to be noticeable. Speed limits should be painted on main roads into towns, instead of only having roadside signs which are hard to see.

I am aware that the Minister is considering the metrification of speed limit signs but he should provide additional warning signs in Border counties, stating clearly that they refer to kilometres and not miles per hour. The Minister should speed up consultation with the authorities in Northern Ireland so that drivers from that jurisdiction can be included in the penalty points system. It is a disgrace that while cars registered in the Republic do their best to obey the speed limits, they can be overtaken by Northern-registered cars whose drivers do not bother to pay the ensuing fines. The sooner the penalty points scheme is extended to include drivers from Northern Ireland, the better for road safety. I urge the Minister to take up this matter with his counterparts in the North. I also intend to raise this question with my colleague, Deputy Brendan Smith, who is chairman of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. The BIIPB is an appropriate forum at which to raise the issue.

I congratulate the Minister on all the work his Department is undertaking. He is one of the most hard-working Ministers and the public appreciates that.