Seanad debates

Wednesday, 24 May 2006

Road Safety Authority Bill 2004: Report Stage.

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Timmy DooleyTimmy Dooley (Fianna Fail)

I join with colleagues in asking the Minister of State to give serious consideration to this amendment, which is put forward for all the right reasons. The Minister of State might think that, as Senators, we are just protecting our electorate. I have spoken in almost all recent debates on the establishment of authorities. While this issue did not arise in the past, I have always had the view that as a society we are moving too much responsibility into a bureaucratic environment. However, members of the public do not see it like that. They still demand of Government the kind of functions that are often passed to authorities. If there is a problem in an authority, as elected representatives, we get the blame, regardless of the authority's position. I understand why Members of the Houses would not be included as board members on this authority, namely, we have our say in terms of policy and the enactment of the legislation. However, councillors are a totally different category.

Road safety, as the Minister is aware, is one of the topics of great interest at present due to the carnage on our roads. It is widely accepted by those who have a view as to the resolution of this matter that a solution will require the buy-in of the public. To suggest that we can devolve responsibility to some authority or other bureaucracy without retaining a link to the community is a fallacy. Members of a local authority could bring to bear a connection between the functions of the local authority, particularly given the work they do in terms of setting speed limits, maintaining roads, dealing with signage and remaining in contact with the community. It is a concern that the road safety authority has the capacity to become another bureaucracy with some level of remove.

The NRA does not have this kind of bar. I am aware of at least one and possibly two members of local authorities who served with great distinction on the NRA. From talking to NRA members, I know they recognise that the input from a member of a local authority, Ms Connie Ní Fhátharta, was of great benefit in terms of the deliberations of that authority. The same kind of sanity and understanding of the nuts and bolts on the ground could be applied in this case.

It can be argued that professionals from different backgrounds should be involved in safety regulations and standards, and so on. However, in practical terms, the councillor is closest to the man on the ground and closest to the knowledge base. I am sure the Minister of State has retained contact with the man on the ground. Even when he served in Europe, he still acted in a clear way to his constituents. The same kind of contact is needed in this regard. We know what happened with An Bord Pleanála when it was pushed to a remove away from those who had an interest or an involvement in the local community or local authority. It was a retrograde step. It would be sad if it were allowed to happen in this regard.

Apart from road safety, the section to some extent casts a slur on the work of members of local authorities and councillors. I realise this is not the Minister of State's intention. He has worked closely with councillors, with whom he has developed a strong link. However, I am concerned as to why this measure was included. It would be a bad day if it was introduced. I hope the Minister can help us in this regard.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.