Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 9, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

“(iii) the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle that is in a public place shall not hold or have on or about their person tobacco or a similar product while in the said vehicle except when it is parked. The penalties as for mobile phone use at subparagraph (ii) shall apply,
(iv) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 1 on page 40 of the Act of 2002 in respect of using a vehicle whose width exceeds maximum permitted width,
(v) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entries at references 9 and 10 on page 40 of the Act of 2002 in respect of seat belts,
(vi) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 11 on page 41 of the Act of 2002 in respect of using a motor cycle without wearing crash helmet,
(vii) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 12 on page 41 of the Act of 2002 in respect of permitting a passenger not wearing crash helmet to be carried on a motor cycle,
(viii) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entries at references 15 and 16 on page 41 of the Act of 2002 in respect of not wearing safety belts,
(ix) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 11 on page 44 of the Act of 2002 in respect of failure of driver to comply with signals given by members of An Garda Síochána,
(x) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 23 on page 44 of the Act of 2002 in respect of prohibition on driving vehicle against traffic on motorway,
(xi) in column (5), by substituting “5” for the entry at reference 24 on page 45 of the Act of 2002 in respect of prohibition on driving vehicle on part of motorway not a carriageway,”.

We discussed briefly the tobacco problem in cars on the Second Stage debate. In the first part of my amendment I am trying to support the Minister's amendment seeking to raise penalty points for mobile telephone use on the basis that the distraction of finding cigarettes and matches, lighting them, smoking and so on is of the same order of magnitude. I agree with the Minister's increased penalty for the use of mobile telephones while driving. The mobile telephone penalty does not apply when the vehicle is stopped and I am seeking to use that aspect of it. If a person wishes to have a puff, he should stop and make a mobile telephone call or have a cigarette. However, the person should not engage in that form of distraction when he is travelling.

The North Rhine-Westphalia state in Germany has banned smoking in cars for safety reasons. I gather there are German court cases dealing with the matter now. In addition to the health aspects of the matter, which Senator Crown and others in the House have been strong on, the road safety dimension of smoking while driving is now coming to be recognised. The purpose of this part of the amendment is to show that the Minister's wish to increase the penalties for mobile telephone use when driving a car attracts the same penalties as smoking.

The other parts of the amendment refer to cases led by the Minister's example. We went through the penalty points legislation. We could play parliamentary ping-pong about whether it should be "5" or "7" and so on. In the spirit of what we are trying to achieve we chose some of them. I am proposing these should be the offences with "5" in column (5) of the legislation. The Minister proposed a penalty of five points for mobile telephone use when he gave his views on what should merit an increased penalty. I will go through them. They follow the proposed part (iii) of the amendment.

Part (iv) relates to a vehicle exceeding the maximum permitted width. I will not mention the location but I came across an incident illustrating the serious consequences of that behaviour. Someone was driving and the towing vehicle was narrower than the vehicle which was being pulled. When the vehicle got to where a person was waiting for a bus, the driver did not realise the danger because only the following vehicle was wider and the unfortunate victim was dragged until the next crossroads. My strong view is that it should be a serious offence to tow a vehicle that is wider than the vehicle that is towing. If the Minister needs extra details of my example, I would be pleased to supply them. That is something we should consider.

Part (v) of the amendment relates to seat belt offences. In the recent past one of the consequences of the overloading of cars has been that at least one of the people in the car will not have a seat belt. Let us suppose there is a car for five people and there are six people in it, then the extra person is not protected. Frequently, we find that the extra person is injured. Gardaí still report, with some amazement in their voices, on situations of people not wearing seat belts after four decades of advice to do so. Some people continue to ignore the advice. We have cars which make warning noises if people do not have seat belts fastened. However, even after all this time with the Houses of the Oireachtas working for safer roads I am calling for an increase in the penalties for seat belt offences.

Part (vi) of the amendment relates to not wearing crash helmets either as the driver of a motorcycle or a passenger. This is something we have been trying to achieve for a long time and I am putting it before the Minister for his consideration. Part (viii) of the amendment also relates to safety belts.

The penalty points for refusing to comply with signals given by members of An Garda Síochána are too low. We are trying to promote law-abiding behaviour for everyone. The Garda is in place to uphold the law. For someone to simply ignore the signals of a garda seems to me to be something we should not wish to see continue.

There are two more parts to the amendment - I thank the Minister for his patience. I travel on the M4. Almost every day someone has parked a vehicle on the motorway. Motorways are designed for fast speeds, up to 120 km/h. If a car is parked, a passing motorist may wonder whether someone has had a heart attack or why the car is parked at the side. It is a distraction. I am unsure whether it is a habit that is developing but I see it a good deal. I would be interested to hear what advice the Minister has had from the Garda Síochána on the matter. The hard shoulder is part of the design of a motorway. They are not there for driving on or for parking.

I realise the Minister is bringing forward more legislation but those are my thoughts having examined the reports by the Road Safety Authority and the Garda Síochána. Should the Minister wish to increase penalty points for any of the offences I have listed he would have my support.