Seanad debates

Tuesday, 29 June 2010

Road Traffic Bill 2009: Second Stage

 

3:00 am

Photo of John EllisJohn Ellis (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to discuss the Road Traffic Bill 2009 which has taken some time to get this far, but the teething problems have been well and truly addressed by the Minister. That brings me back to something I have said in the House on numerous occasions. There should be a mandatory publication period of six weeks before legislation is brought before either House in order that people will have time to go through it line by line to see if there are problems that need to be ironed out. Too much legislation passes through the Houses of the Oireachtas without being fully scrutinised. The net result is that when it is put into every day use, anomalies and problems emerge.

We all welcome the success of the road safety campaigns undertaken in recent years. The Road Safety Authority has done tremendous work. Sometimes people say it is too diligent on certain issues, but the results speak for themselves and the reduction in the number of road deaths is significant. At other times people say the regulations are too harsh and that they especially affect rural life. This is an issue to which I will return.

We must look at the danger posed by drug driving, which is criminal. It is worse than the danger posed by alcohol because it is hidden. One does not realise a person may be under the influence of drugs and in some cases it will not be detected. It is sad that we still have a problem in finding a way to detect the use of drugs. A few years a swab system was used in Australia as an initial test. If one failed the test, one was subject to a full blood test. Despite the position adopted by the Minister, this issue should be looked at again because there must be some way of dealing with it. In many instances the Garda will be unable to determine if a person is under the influence of drugs without undertaking a preliminary test.

We also come across another problem presented by people who are genuinely taking prescription drugs. Given that people can sometimes show a reaction, the issue needs to be examined in the Bill, if it is not too late to do so. In many cases prescription drugs can be as harmful as alcohol or non-prescription drugs. The matter should be examined in the context of providing advice. It should be clear what prescription drugs people should not use if they wish to drive. It is stated on some prescriptions that the drugs prescribed may impair a person's ability to drive, but it is not stated it is dangerous to drive. This issue needs to be examined.

We are all aware there has been annoyance at the proposed changes on the part of people living in rural areas. I live in a rural area. I was brought up in a pub and understand how people are affected. I also understand the reasons people living in rural areas feel hurt because in many cases taxis are not easily available. As a result, some people will take a chance, which is not a good idea. Their only hope is to designate a driver. The younger generation has moved on and will designate a driver or find a taxi or minibus. Young people are not taking the risks our generation took in drinking and driving. This shows the progress that has been made in raising awareness of the dangers posed by drinking and driving.

Another issue raised concerns morning check points. A person goes home at midnight having had five or six pints and gets up at 8 a.m. thinking he or she is ok. No one is in a position to say he or she is capable of driving at that point; neither is anyone is in a position to say he or she is incapable of driving. I do not think one can go around with a breath tester in one's back pocket to ascertain whether one is capable of driving. This is one of the issues that causes problems.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.