Áine Brady (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)

The Office of the Attorney General included the provision at sections 2(10) and 3(9) specifically to address possible challenges and prosecutions for an offence, for example, under sections 49(1) and 50(1) of the principal Act where the requirement to provide a preliminary breath specimen is not required. Those particular sections provide for the offences of driving or attempting to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place or being in charge of a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place with intent to drive or attempt to drive the vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle. In such circumstances an intoxicant includes alcohol, drugs and any combination of drugs or of drugs and alcohol.

Subsections (10) and (9) of sections 2 and 3, respectively, clearly provide that in such proceedings it will not be a defence to show that a member of the Garda Síochána did not make a requirement in regard to a preliminary breath specimen. The Minister does not propose to delete the provision.

Furthermore, sections 2(3) and 3(2) provide for the offence of refusal or failure to provide a preliminary breath specimen and where such an offence has taken place, needless to say the person is advised accordingly of having done so by the member.

Deleting the wording suggested by the Senator's amendment would weaken considerably the provisions of the Bill. The substitute wording proposed addresses a different issue, that of the garda informing the person of the offence. To provide in legislation as to how that information is conveyed to the accused not only unnecessary but could also have significant consequences for many other provisions in the Road Traffic Acts. I therefore ask the Senator to withdraw the proposed amendment.