Ivor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)

I would like to put down some markers, which might help Senators understand the background to this provision. The proposal does not of itself change the present requirement for unlimited third-party cover for road accident personal injuries. The section proposes a mechanism for change if change becomes necessary in the future. No change is being made to the existing provision of unlimited third-party cover. My officials inform me that sooner rather than later unlimited cover will cease to be available from insurance companies because their reinsurers, the underwriters, will not give them unlimited cover in the future.

As the law stands at present, motorists would be breaking the law if they used their vehicles in a public place without unlimited cover. As a result some other requirement for insurance must replace the unlimited cover as it becomes available. A limit on cover could not be put in place unless both Houses of the Oireachtas approve the regulations proposing such a substitute arrangement as well as the amount of the limit. As has been said before, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport would have an important role in this regard.

As one who started my career in insurance, I have some knowledge of the industry. My personal preference and that of most people would be for unlimited liability cover for personal injuries, which is the ideal level of cover in respect of accidents. While that is a fair position to hold, we must take account of the developing practicalities in the real world where insurance companies will no longer provide unlimited cover. If that is the position, this proposal will allow a mechanism to ensure that people will be able to continue to obtain insurance cover.

The Senator raised a fair issue about the level. In a major accident involving, for example, a tram or a train, nobody wants to have only a limited level of cover that would not meet that requirement. My officials have informed me that the level, if it is to be limited, will still be in multiples of millions of euro, so that it will cover any unforeseen accident.

The Law Society has written opposing the amendment on the grounds that——