Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senators for raising the issue. Since we were here last year I have seen interlocking in operation. It happened when I was on a Matthews bus to launch the CTCC roadshow or trade show that will take place later in the year. I saw the device on that occasion and it is very simple and straightforward. I was not asked to test it but I can assure Senators that I had not been drinking on that day and would have passed.

A few points were raised. The amendment proposes to make alcohol interlocks compulsory on vehicles on a phased basis. It was also proposed on Committee Stage so I do not propose to restate all of the points that I made then and shall confine myself to the key issues.

We all agree about the seriousness of intoxicated driving. There have been many changes in the law in recent years that reflect this serious offence and strengthen the provisions available for dealing with same. We have, thankfully, seen a significant culture change in attitudes to drink driving which has now become widely recognised for the danger it is and is no longer socially tolerated in the way that it was. The Bill includes further measures in the area of intoxication impairment testing and testing of incapacitated drivers for intoxicants.

The use of alcohol interlocks tends to be considered internationally in terms of sentencing rather than as a universal prophylactic or preventative measure. Both the Road Safety Authority and my Department have considered them in this context. The installation and monitoring of alcolocks would be costly. The RSA is planning to undertake a cost-benefit analysis on their use in sentencing during 2014 and I make a commitment to Senators that the analysis will be done. I believe that the future of alcohol interlocks will be found in the area of sentencing rather than general application.

For example, if somebody is barred from driving for being over the alcohol limit or gets penalty points for that purpose, it would be open to the courts to require that he or she has an interlock when he or she resumes driving. It is also worth bearing in mind that there are many types of alcolocks on the market and we would have to be clear about the technical specifications before considering imposing their use either on offenders or all drivers. We need a bit of time to get it right.

In the next Bill - the autumn-winter Bill - I propose to give the power to the courts to require that somebody has an interlock installed in his or her vehicle under particular circumstances. I will also consider the possibility of extending it to all buses, given that they carry a large number of passengers, and trucks, which can cause catastrophic road accidents. I am sceptical as to whether it should be a general requirement for all vehicles. I am really not sure if that is necessary or if the evidence stacks up to benefit that move.

It is an evolving technology and it is still relatively new. It is only being used by a small number of transport operators. I am not aware of if being used in a single vehicle. We do not really know what sort of issues might arise and I believe it is premature to prescribe it in legislation. Pursuant to the debate here and the road strategy, which was adopted by the Government some months ago, the Road Safety Authority will do that cost-benefit analysis in 2014 with a view to taking the first steps to including it as a sentencing option in the next Bill.

I am with the Senators in the sense that I believe it may well be the next quantum shift in terms of technology and making our roads safer but I do not believe now is the time to impose it across the entire fleet. We at least need the time to try it out in a few other instances.