Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I again welcome the Minister to the House. The Minister and I were at a seminar yesterday at which we briefly discussed safety issues, fatigue and so on. It is interesting that vehicles are now being developed which will recognise fatigue, and it is hoped that will be the next step forward in improving the safety record on roads of which we are all in favour.

What are we to do about the parked vehicles? The situation is improving. Dublin had a notorious reputation for illegal parking. Professor Michael MacCormack of UCD investigated it and found an illegal parking rate of over 80%, and about an 80% chance that nothing would happen if one did park illegally. The renowned economist, Colm McCarthy, said that the only solution to it at that stage was that if one found a car illegally parked, one could keep it because there was so little enforcement. It was a typical McCarthy proposal in that regard.

I spoke yesterday with one of the controlled carpark operators, where one goes through a barrier to enter, who said he has never used clamping. The Bill is addressing illegal parking on open access private land such as shopping centres about which Senator O'Neill spoke. It is a huge problem on the west side of Dublin. If there are matches in Croke Park the shops cannot do business because the GAA fellows take over the carpark on the morning of the match and nobody can get in to do any shopping. What are the rights of those people to try to control that? It is private land. Some clamping operates on it but they could not possibly do enough to take cars from a full carpark.

I much prefer what happens in Carlow, Thurles, Aughrim and other venues where local people operate the carparks; in Tullamore it goes to the GAA club. The GAA should be a better neighbour in regard to parking. I know there are people in some provincial towns in particular who dread a match because they cannot get in or out of their houses. They cannot go shopping for the day. It is great fun and they are great games but something had to be done about that problem.

Hospital car parking is a problem also. That is an issue we might have to clear up because as I read the Bill, the provision in respect of a hospital is not statutory while it is statutory in respect of a railway station. There were private hospitals, but most hospitals are now in the public system.

An educational establishment is not statutory, but a railway station is. In his speech the Minister stated that he wants to have parity of treatment between the different places. If I may, I will run a fine comb through the Bill to make sure that happens.

One appreciates annoyance on the part of people who are clamped. Some earlier incarnations of the Bill dealt with those people who thought they could park anywhere without penalty. Approximately 150 vehicles a day are clamped on the streets of Dublin City. There are 44,000 parking spaces. The clamping rate is 0.34%. If somebody sets out to park at lights, on a corner and so on, society has to say that will be dealt with. The system may have been out of proportion to the problem.

I am glad the Minister went for regulation rather than licensing. It is the correct approach to take. The NTA will be the operational body. Regulation does not come cheap. I hope this will be a case of compliance rather than having yet another regulatory arm. I understand the Minister stressed in his speech that setting up extra bodies to do these tasks is expensive, as no doubt the Minister, Deputy Noonan, will tell us during his Budget Statement.

On the maximum fee of €100, I understand Dublin City Council has a maximum fee of €80. The tow away fee is €160. Will that be reduced? Would it be a good idea to reduce it? Given the cost to society as a whole of somebody's illegal parking on a street in Dublin, it may be correct to let the city manager keep the €160 fine. Illegal parking is somebody cocking a snook at the rest of society. A fine of €100 is relatively lenient.

On transaction costs, there are two appeals procedures for €100. This offence is not the end of the world. It is not a human rights case, rather it is a case of someone parking in the wrong place and disrupting the city. We should tell people to get over it rather than have another field day for lawyers to contest cases at huge costs where the amount at stake to individuals and the Exchequer is €100. Some measure should be taken to minimise costs. It has been a feature of Irish society that legal costs are far too high. It jeopardises the overall competitiveness of the Irish economy.

We have to protect private property where it is at risk. Major car parks where access is restricted do not use clamping as they have enough details on drivers to pursue them elsewhere. Besides, they can charge people on the way out. This Bill concerns open access public spaces, some of which are in schools and hospitals. Illegal parking around such places is something which we should not condone. It disrupts their work.

Page 12 of the Minister's speech refers to the relocation charge of €50. I understand in Dublin it is substantially more. We might discuss what to do about that on Committee Stage. I do not know how much perceived misconduct there was in clamping authorities. There may have been a lot more perceived misconduct by those who parked illegally in the first instance. Part of the wider brief of the Minister is to keep cities moving and, no pun intended, to clamp down on people who obstruct the movements of others. Many motorists are particularly selfish and regard themselves as the centre of the world. They are deprived of access to their vehicles, but society as a whole has very good reasons for doing so, such as attempting to dissuade people from certain conduct.

As with drink driving and improved road safety, society as a whole has moved on a lot.

Four or five years ago, people came to Opposition politicians because they were exasperated after being clamped, but there may have been a pretty good reason for the clamping. If we can put reason back into the process, as the Minister clearly intends to do, I will support the next Stage of the Bill.