The purpose of today's meeting is to resume our discussion on road safety and we will have two separate sessions. On behalf of the committee I am very pleased to welcome from the PARC road safety group, Ms Susan Gray, chairperson, and PARC members Ms Fiona Clancy, Mr. Noel Clancy, and Ms Loraine Fehilly. From Spinal Injuries Ireland I welcome Ms Fiona Bolger, CEO.

I remind witnesses of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. If their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I now invite the witnesses to make their opening statements.

I thank the committee and its Chairman, Deputy Michael Murphy, for the invitation to speak on road safety. Joining me today are Noel and Fiona Clancy and Loraine Fehilly, all of whom lost loved ones in road traffic collisions. I lost my husband, Steve, in a road traffic collision in Donegal.

Revised Garda figures show that 188 people died on Irish roads in 2025 while the true number of serious injury collisions remains unknown as the RSA only records and reports those given to it by An Garda Síochána. So far this year 52 precious lives have been lost. Each family bereaved should receive a free copy of PARC’s "Finding Your Way" guide from gardaí shortly after the fatal collision. Our guide helps families to understand the process after a fatal road collision, the questions they should be asking and the information to which they are entitled. It has been sponsored by bereaved families, including those here today, since 2012.

On 8 October 2025 I had the privilege of speaking here on all aspects of road safety alongside the assistant Garda commissioner for roads policing, officials from the Department of Transport and the Road Safety Authority. The format was conducive to identifying and addressing barriers in enforcement. Many of PARC’s ten key road safety issues were discussed in detail, like the learner driver loophole whereby learner drivers can continually renew their permits without ever sitting a driving test. This was raised by Deputies Michael Murphy and Emer Currie. The Minister of State, Deputy Canney, has since signed regulations which will apparently close this loophole in November but we have some doubts. We ask this committee to get total clarification from the Minister for Transport on these regulations. Deputy Currie raised the issue of fixed charge notices for illegal number plates at the meeting in October. These can now be issued by gardai and we are delighted with that. Gardaí are now able to access the national vehicle and driver file on their mobility device app which is now uploaded to all devices on a 24-hour basis, which is more good news. Gaps in the capturing of penalty points on the national vehicle and driver file have been confirmed by three subsequent reports published by the Department of Transport since the meeting in October which shows that there is much more work to be done in that area. PARC believes this committee should adopt the same format again and invite all of the relevant State bodies to a single meeting here to answer questions. That format worked so well last October and we had so many positive outcomes.

I would like to remind committee members today of the other issues that PARC brought to their attention during the October meeting. These are long-standing issues that must be addressed by the RSA, An Garda Síochána and the Government. We urge the committee to raise all of these issues with each relevant agency as it appears before this committee in the time ahead.

The number one item on our list, and it will always be number one, is roads policing units. The number of gardaí assigned to roads policing units must be increased.

There were over 1,000 members in 2009, and that figure dropped to 649 in February 2026. We are waiting for the latest figures for March to be published by An Garda Síochána. PARC has analysed the distribution of gardaí assigned to these units across the country. The findings were shocking. For example, Dublin now has 125 fewer Garda members in roads policing than it had in 2009, and the Leitrim-Sligo division has been reduced to 14 members. We note that Limerick is the only division and the only county that has increased its numbers since 2009, so whatever they are doing, they are doing it right. They have got the increase they wanted. The Government can introduce as many new laws as it likes but without a constant high visibility of gardaí, including those in specialised roads policing units, many people will not be deterred from breaking the law.

Deputies Murphy and Currie have asked the Minister for justice on several occasions for the number of gardaí in roads policing in each division who are actually on active duty. We cannot seem to get that number. We implore members to keep asking because we know 649 is not the true figure.

As regards court-issued penalty points and disqualifications, PARC members attended district courts around the country and discovered that many drivers convicted and given penalty points were not getting the points applied to their licence. Many court-issued driver disqualifications were also not recorded on transfer to the national vehicle and driver file database. Since I brought this matter to the attention of Deputy Currie, she has raised a series of questions with the Department of Transport. This has been going on for far too long. I look forward to attending a meeting with the Deputy later that she organised with the Courts Service and the Department of Transport to discuss reform in the capturing of driver numbers for the Minister's national vehicle and driver file.

Third, in 2013 a commitment was given by the Road Safety Authority to implement strict rules by 2014 on learner drivers who wish to renew a permit. The RSA was going to put an end to multiple learner permits being issued by it without the requirement for the learner driver to actually turn up for a driving test. All they have to do to this day is apply for such a driving test, use the letter of confirmation stating that they have applied and not turn up for the driving test, and the RSA will issue a new permit to them. That is appalling. We had over 9,000 no-shows last year alone, and they would all have received a new permit without turning up for their driving test from the authority. All those slots were lost to other drivers, learners who are anxious to get a quick date to get their driving test and hopefully pass. These new regulations are finally coming into effect. The Government must ensure that the RSA is fully prepared to implement these new regulations, which took 13 years to come to this stage. We must stop learner drivers renewing their permits without sitting a test. However, we have doubts that the authority will be ready. It has 12 IT systems to be updated before that, and it must write to all the second permit holders.

Fourth, as regards non-surrender of licences on disqualification, the Government must abolish the current system used by the Road Safety Authority, which merely requests disqualified drivers to surrender their licence or permit by post to an RSA post office box in Cork. Only 6% are complying. We need a system similar to that in Northern Ireland whereby the licence is immediately handed in to court on disqualification.

Fifth, the Government must prioritise the national vehicle and driver file Bill to facilitate the sharing of data, especially with An Garda Síochána. Could the Chair raise this issue publicly in Dáil Éireann with the Minister for Transport and ask for a clear commitment for enactment before the summer recess?

Sixth is consolidation of the road traffic Acts. The Government has been promising for 17 years now to bring in a consolidated Act to gather all the road traffic Acts together. A major gap in current legislation on uninsured vehicles was highlighted recently by the Motor Insurers' Bureau of Ireland, MIBI, and RTÉ, showing that in 2025 there were more than 211,000 uninsured or unregistered vehicles operating in this country. We must insist that the consolidation of the road traffic Acts starts now.

As regards penalties for dangerous driving causing death, PARC calls for the maximum sentence for dangerous driving causing death to be increased from ten to 14 years, aligning with laws in Northern Ireland. Along with stronger sentences, we believe that driving disqualification periods should take effect only when the offender is released from prison, rather than overlapping with the sentence.

Finally, we would like to put on the record that PARC totally backs Saoirse Aylward in her campaign for recognition of unborn babies who die as a result of a road traffic collision. Saoirse is doing this in memory of her unborn son Jax, and it will be called Jax's law. He died in a crash in 2024. We call on the RSA to recognise all such deaths in its road stats every year rather than waiting for bereaved families to come to it and beg for their unborn child who died in a road crash to be included in roads death stats for that particular year.

I thank the Cathaoirleach and members of the committee for inviting Spinal Injuries Ireland to the committee. We have apologies from Yanna Hartin, who is a young lady who sustained a spinal cord injury as a result of a road traffic accident. She was to be here today to give the lived experience but, unfortunately, she has been hospitalised. We wish her the very best in her recovery.

When we talk about road traffic accidents, we often talk in numbers of collisions, fatalities and serious injuries but behind every statistic is a person and a family whose life changes in an instant. A spinal cord injury does not affect just one individual; it reshapes entire families, roles change overnight, careers pause or end, finances come under strain and futures are rewritten.

In Ireland, hundreds of people sustain life-changing spinal cord injuries every year, many as a result of road traffic collisions. For many, it begins with a single phone call from a hospital or from An Garda Síochána. From that moment on, life is divided into before and after.

In the weeks that follow, families enter crisis. Parents, partners and adult children often take extended leave or leave the workforce entirely, travel repeatedly to specialist spinal units, often far from home, and are asked to absorb complex medical information and make life-altering decisions at a time of profound shock. Children experience fear, confusion and a sudden loss of security. One family described it this way: "we thought the ... hardest part would be the hospital. We didn't realise the hospital was only the beginning. Our whole ... life had to be rebuilt ... — work, school, our home, our finances, everything. For many families, that is the reality. The acute injury is not the end point; it is the beginning of a lifelong journey.

I would like to briefly mention Yanna who was to be with us today.

Yanna was a leaving certificate student in 2023 when she sustained a life-changing injury in a road traffic accident while travelling to her summer job. She was at the very beginning of her adult life, finishing school, working, involved in her local community and planning her future. In a single moment, her future changed and so did her family's. Like so many families after serious road trauma, they were thrust into a world of hospitals, rehabilitation, uncertainty and the need to adapt every aspect of daily life. Yanna’s story is also one of determination. She is now studying in DCU and continuing to pursue the life she wants to lead. Her story reminds us that these injuries are not temporary and they are never borne by just one person alone. They are lifelong and they are shared.

What can we do? We all know the key drivers of serious and catastrophic injuries, including speed, particularly on rural roads, impaired driving, including from alcohol and drugs, and driver distraction, especially from mobile phones. These are not new issues and we are all well aware of them but we need a sustained focus and collective responsibility to address them.

While prevention is critical, we must also recognise that the system does not yet meet the needs of those already injured on our roads. People with spinal cord injuries often face significant financial pressure alongside the physical and emotional impact of their injury. Access to a medical card is not guaranteed, despite the complexity and lifelong nature of their care needs. Many experience delays or uncertainty in securing this basic support, which is essential for managing ongoing health costs. At the same time there are gaps in access to rehabilitation and limited pathways to support people in returning to education, employment and full participation in society. I am aware these are not matters for discussion at today's committee meeting, but I bring them to members' attention.

Road safety is not only about preventing fatalities; it is about preventing families from being permanently altered in a single moment. Every serious injury we prevent is a family spared a lifetime of trauma.

I thank the witnesses for their opening statements. Today's meeting continues our focused programme of work in this area which comes against the backdrop of an increase in road fatalities. Ms Gray outlined the numbers: 190 last year and 52 so far this year. We are all conscious that every statistic represents a family and a community dealing with loss. This committee intends to provide leadership that will hopefully identify concrete actions and make strong recommendations to Government and other relevant agencies.

I thank the witnesses for their incredible work and the time they have devoted to improving safety on our roads. I have seen at first hand from dealing with Ms Gray how much work goes into fighting for an enforcement system that we need and deserve. I am sorry for her own personal loss. However, I am very grateful that she has devoted so much of her life to trying to change things so it does not impact other families.

I will deal with roads policing first. Last year, there were 22 road deaths in Dublin and 125 fewer gardaí in our roads policing. There are only 12 in my area of DMR west. I asked Ms Gray to remind us why it is so important to raise that today.

We work closely with the roads policing unit. We find it does an excellent job. It is a specialised unit but it needs the members, resources and vehicles. It is an absolute disgrace that even though the former Garda Commissioner, Drew Harris, spoke at this committee in 2024 and pledged 150 more gardaí to be assigned to the roads policing unit across the country, comprising 75 in 2024 and 75 in 2025, we did not get them. He pledged that because he knew they were needed and knew the importance of the great work the policing unit does. We have been asking why. Many Ministers and the Garda Commissioner have said that as more gardaí are being trained in Templemore and pass out, it will free up other gardaí to get into roads policing and that that would be done. Something like 619 gardaí graduated from Templemore last year. A garda must be qualified for three years before they can apply to go into roads policing. Why do we not see more gardaí going in, especially with road deaths increasing the way they are?

We have been informed that the number we have right now, 649 at the end of February and we are working on the March figures, is not a true figure. There are members among the 649 who are not and will never be out on road policing duties. This includes some who are on suspension, some on long-term sick leave and some who are on light duty. No matter how hard we try, we cannot get the figures from the powers that be. It is essential that we know how bad the situation is.

The work that PARC has done on the changes to be introduced to close the loophole around the multiple learner permits is very welcome. However, further to the replies to my parliamentary questions, Ms Gray has said she has doubts and is concerned about the delay in writing out to people on their second learner permit at the moment. Why does she have doubts about that?

Back in 2013, the RSA put an action plan into the road safety strategy that by the first quarter of 2014 it would have closed this loophole to sort out the issue of the multiple learner permit holders and ensure they sat a test before the authority would renew a permit. Roll on to 2025, it took the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Canney, to force, for want of a better word, the RSA to take the necessary action and get the driving test waiting time to an average of ten weeks by last September. No excuses were accepted. The Government sanctioned another 70 testers for the RSA in 2024. It would train them up, get them in and we would then have 200 testers to get the driving tests done.

We have been watching the authority's website closely and last week, the average waiting time was up to 12 weeks. They got it down to an average of ten weeks in September of last year, as the Minister of State had instructed. However, we believe once he took his eye off the ball, it is not stayed at an average of ten weeks since. In Dublin, the waiting time is 20 weeks, which is not good enough. The RSA does not have the 200 testers it was supposed to have in place last year. The last figure we got was 193. Taking all that into account, now it is being told to ensure it is ready for these regulations coming in on 1 November. The Deputy was told in the reply to a parliamentary question in December that the RSA would write out to all the second permit holders this year to inform them of the new regulations and that, if they go for their third permit and have not sat a test in the past two years, they will not get a third permit.

She got a reply saying the RSA had not written out but was due to write out. In February, the RSA said it still had not written out. It was looking at the total number on second permits and, after it had made a list, it would re-evaluate and see what it would do. That does not give us much confidence. It needs to write out to these people. It has 12 IT systems to update before November. Committee members need to keep an eye on where it is with that.

Who did Ms Gray say took his eye off the ball?

Minister of State Seán Canney.

In what way?

He instructed the RSA to get the driving test down to ten weeks by September. It did that and he was praised it for it, but since then we have been closely watching the driving test waiting times and they have never stayed down. I do not believe it is any coincidence that once the RSA passed the date the Minister of State gave to get it down to an average of ten weeks, it started increasing. The RSA has not got to 200 driving tests. It had 57 car driving test centres up until recently; that is down to 56 now. All this is so worrying. It is promising new test centres will open - one on 5 May. Until we see these things happening, we know from past hurt and pain that it has to be monitored all the time. It should not have to be but what Seán Canney made them do, it is obvious they were not going to do that, in my opinion, unless-----

An independent report recommended abolition of the RSA. There was a change of mind on that. Has Ms Gray any view on that decision?

Totally disappointed. We have absolutely no confidence in the current leadership of the RSA. It has failed so many times. The Minister of State, Deputy Canney, looked at the Indecon report. The Government decided last year to run with it. Lo and behold, the Minister of State came out in December and said "No". How much money did that report cost Irish taxpayers? Now they have decided to keep the RSA. The main thing we want to see happening in the RSA is taking the responsibility away from it for driving licences, learner permits and driving tests. The writing has been on the wall for years. How many times has the Government to witness it failing, failing, failing?

We had great leadership in the RSA in 2006 - Noel Brett and the late Gay Byrne. They worked closely together and got road deaths down massively. They were always out in the media, everybody knew who they were and they challenged the Government often on things they knew would save lives but which the Government was not acting on.

I will ask about that. Compared to other European countries, we were a leader in reducing road deaths. Unfortunately, it has gone the other way in recent years. It has increased while numbers in Europe continue to decrease. We saw the report last week about Garda visibility on the streets in general reducing public order offences, assaults on the street and that kind of thing, whereas for road traffic, the decreases in numbers have already been mentioned. I was at a briefing yesterday in the audiovisual room by Sheila Gilheany of Alcohol Action Ireland. There was a statistic about arrests for drink driving. In 2007, there were about 19,000 while for the last few years it has been about 5,000. That is a quarter of the arrests that were being made. Is that connected to the amount of road traffic gardaí that are on-----

There is a lot of things connected but if we do not have strong leadership in the RSA to lead the way, we are going nowhere. We have Sam Waide and Anne Graham now and we get so many calls from people asking who is heading the RSA. Nobody had to ask that when Noel Brett was there and the late Gay Byrne. They need to be far more visible. They need to be out there for one main reason, in our opinion: to alert learner drivers to the regulations coming in and explain to them-----

You are talking about the RSA.

Yes, the RSA.

What about gardaí on the roads, particularly at weekends and at night?

Yes. We need far more visibility, not only at the weekends. If people have not got the fear of getting caught, they will take chances. Then when they are caught, they believe they will not get the penalty points. There are so many gaps and things to be fixed in the system.

Are those figures roughly accurate? There was a graph in the audiovisual room yesterday. From 19,000 to 5,000 seems a shocking reduction in the number of drink-driving arrests.

And yet every long weekend the gardaí are saying, "We will be out there in force. We will catch you." We feel sorry for the gardaí.

Are you convinced they are out in the required-----

They are not out often enough. Ask anybody when they last came across a checkpoint or were breathalysed. It is all fine and well every year. I am at this now for 19 years. The same was being said then: "We will be out in force." The long weekend passes and nobody sees gardaí out.

I thank the witnesses. As I said to the Irish Roads Victims Association last week, I thank them for campaigning, especially in the context of their own loss and the tragic stories they have shared with us. I will focus on something the committee has looked at with other groups previously, and get the opinions of the witnesses, on the need to expand technology on our roads to augment enforcement of road traffic law. The Garda is very professional but needs to expand that piece. Where do the witnesses see the role for technology in increasing and augmenting enforcement across the roads network?

I will just repeat the question because the sound is not as crystal clear as it should be. Deputy Moynihan is asking about the use of technology - variable speed cameras and so on - in enhancing enforcement.

Anything that saves lives has to be welcomed but speed cameras will never catch drink drivers, somebody on their mobile phone or somebody without a seat belt. We need roads policing to be increased - full stop.

There is a proposal for graduated penalty points for speeding. We cannot see how that would work and we will not be backing it. Until we get the penalty points system, which is a shambles in many ways, sorted and until everybody who goes to court and is convicted gets five penalty points on their driving licence, any other proposals would make the system even more complicated than it is at the moment.

Are there any other comments from the witnesses on that? I take the point on the limitations of technology.

Does Ms Bolger want to comment on the use of technology?

It is about a general improvement to technology. As PARC has been saying, it is right across the board. It is not just technology on its own.

A huge number of cyclists are involved in accidents. We have not mentioned that during the meeting but that needs to be addressed.

I thank the witnesses.

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee and thank Ms Gray for all of the work she does. I am based in Sligo and am familiar with her work. I am a new Senator, but since I have been elected I have discovered how little confidence people have in the RSA. We have heard from all road users, including cyclists, hauliers and bus and taxi drivers. We heard from Headway last week and many other groups have come before the committee. Nobody seems to have confidence in the RSA, as far as I can see. The Chair asked questions about overall responsibility. In my mind, there needs to be an ombudsman, commissioner or a body to which all of the Departments feed into, including health, transport, education and justice. What are the thoughts of the witnesses on that?

We have discussed this. We would never and could never endorse anything until we see the fine print. We need to know what power such a person would have and who they would have power over. Ministers would not like a commissioner to tell them they are not doing their job. We cannot see the Government allowing this. What would it cost the State? If it saved one life, that would be brilliant, but if is just a matter of recommendations like the Indecon report where no action was taken and it was ignored-----

The role would be to implement the findings of the reports.

Until we see the power such a body would have, we could not decide. The fine details need to be worked out. In theory it is a great idea, but in practice I do not know if it will ever come about.

What would Ms Gray like in an ideal world? She said we need more gardaí and in Sligo the number has been reduced to 14. We discussed breathalysers. I do not know the last time I saw gardaí carrying out such work or when I was last breathalysed on the road. I do a good bit of driving. It is very obvious.

First of all, we would like a senior Minister in charge of road safety. For last four or five years we had the Minister, Deputy Chambers, and then the Minister, Deputy Lawless. They were junior Ministers at the time. Let us have a senior Minister in charge and keep that person in charge. When a Minister comes into office it takes time for them to educate themselves. If the Government is serious about this, it needs to appoint a senior Minister and change the leadership in the RSA. We carefully watch the laws being passed but we seem to be the only ones doing so. We often see loopholes which we report to the Government. There should be no need for PARC if the Ministers and RSA do their job. We are families that have suffered.

We would like to see people doing their job. We would like to see the RSA doing its job. We would like to see gardaí doing their job. We are critical of Garda management, but the application of the 649 gardaí on the roads involves three shifts. Gardaí attend court. We go to the District Courts and every one is full of gardaí waiting for cases to be heard. Given the preparation of cases in their offices it is a miracle that there are any gardaí on the roads.

I 100% agree.

We would like to see Commissioner Justin Kelly. We met Drew Harris when he was new in the job. He did not promise the sun, moon and stars, but was shocked by the road policing numbers. We would like Commissioner Kelly to put an emphasis on increasing that number. It is no good having new gardaí solely to replace gardaí who are retiring. We need the number to be above 1,000.

Ms Gray said that in order to be assigned to road policing a garda has to be qualified for three years. Why is that the case?

Gardaí have to be experienced in every section and get training everywhere.

Is three years too long?

We will not even go there. We have enough issues.

When gardaí qualify they have to work for three years before they can work in roads policing. What sections do they have to work on before they can go into road policing? One would wonder where the three-year period came from.

They have to get experience and then apply to join the roads policing section.

The amount of detail a garda needs, especially at inspector level, in the prosecution of cases in the District Courts is mind-boggling. It goes back to the consolidated road traffic Act. I understand the 1961 Act, as amended down the line, applies. Solicitors say in court they can see there is an issue, but the person concerned should have been charged under the amended 1997 legislation rather than the 1982 legislation and cases are thrown out. Some 500 cases across the country could be thrown out on that basis. We have seen that happen.

We would like the RSA to do its job under its current or new leadership. It is not doing its job. Ms Gray identified a loophole for learner drivers in 2013 which is only being closed now. I had absolute war with Moyagh Murdock about why it was not being closed. Maybe I have a theory as to why. When we add the numbers for 2023, 2024 and 2025 together in respect of the €85 everybody paid to apply for a test they were never going to sit, the figure would be €2,082,000. That was money that went into the RSA that would not otherwise have gone to it if the loophole was in place.

I thank the witnesses for being here. Road safety is a major issue for all sides. There is the fatalities side. I have met a lot of people with acquired brain injuries and spinal injuries. It is disheartening to see how we were doing so well but then went the other way.

I agree that the road policing numbers are abysmal. It is more than ten years since I was stopped by a garda on the road, and I am on the road a lot. I have never been breathalysed. I would not even know how to do it.

I see speed vans. I am very cynical about this and could be completely wrong, but I feel as if it is a money thing rather than a road safety matter. The vans pull up just off a motorway where drivers hit a speed of 80 km/h. Not all are in places where there are a lot of accidents. Some are put in blackspots. I sometimes feel that there is a money side to road safety and that is more important than the safety side. I think it is strategically done.

I have issues with driving lessons and the driving test. I have adult children and none of them ever did a lesson on a rural road. All of the lessons are on main roads. We live in rural County Limerick. When they passed their test, I had to show them how to drive on a country road because there are no lines and heavy machinery can come around corners. People have to be a lot more vigilant and drive much more slowly than the speed limit on country roads. I had to teach my children how to drive on back roads because they did not learn that during their driving lessons or driving test. This is a major problem because many people living in rural Ireland do not have the experience of those roads.

The statistics show there are quite a high number of accidents and fatalities on rural roads compared with main roads. There is so much wrong. Where does one start? I commend all of the witnesses on the amount of work they put into this because it drives me crazy thinking about all of the different issues. The first issue is visibility on the roads. I am a culprit and will go slightly over the speed limit if I need to get somewhere.

However, I would not do so if I thought for a minute that there might be a Garda checkpoint above. The average speed cameras are great, but they will not catch drink drivers or people driving erratically. All they will do is catch people speeding. I have to commend the witnesses; they are fighting a great fight but they are constantly hitting barriers.

We have good people helping us-----

That is true. It is just that it is so slow.

-----and the media is excellent at reporting our facts and figures, and they then ask for comments from the Minister. It seems to move it a little bit further but we need the media and the committee to always-----

Have it at the top of the agenda.

Yes. Once it slips-----

I just feel that if the progress goes that slowly, it is another death or another injury. It is something that cannot be put on the long finger. The legislation cannot take longer than the cause.

The legislation needs to be forwarded right through-----

It does, and the loopholes need to be closed.

When legislation is passed, it is sometimes the Government saying that there is an issue as road deaths are going up, so it brings in another law.

Yes.

Nobody follows that law to see when it is enacted, if it is enforced properly or what is happening in our courts. It is everything.

Follow-through is what is really needed.

The visibility of gardaí on the roads is an issue. I came up last night and stayed with my daughter in Rathmines. When drivers come off the motorway at Naas, the road is the same, but the speed limit is now 100 km/h. I knocked my cruise control down to 100 km/h and I was swamped with traffic. Cars were just whizzing past me. A garda with a camera on the first overpass north of Naas would fill their summons book in an hour.

The only thing is Google Maps now gives drivers an alert saying that there is a garda checkpoint ahead.

There were cars with 251 and 261 number plates passing me and those cars have high technology.

We also need to teach people a sense of individual responsibility and that education starts at a very young age with people. Spinal Injuries Ireland's ambassadors go and speak to secondary school students, in particular, and into workplaces to talk about sustaining an injury and the impact it has on their lives. Education needs to start earlier as well.

I completely agree. It would be nice to see a programme put into secondary schools, even if it is for transition students, so young people have that knowledge because they are the next drivers. Within a year or two, they will be going to do their theory tests and driving lessons. It would be nice to see a bigger emphasis on education while they are in school.

Sorry, can I just butt in on that point there? We had fantastic gardaí assigned to our case. We had our court case last year in Limerick. They came to us afterwards - it was in Limerick as well - and told us that they were going around to secondary schools with a road safety programme and asked for permission to read out our victim statements.

That is fantastic.

When we went back for sentencing, they told us they had done it in one or two classes, and it had an impact on teachers and pupils. They said that until people realise the impact that this has on the lives of families-----

They could put a video on for them and they will just watch it and go on, but when they have the victim impact statements-----

They commented on the power of the victim impact statements.

Good morning, everyone. Senator Collins discussed road safety on rural roads in terms of her own experience; I am going to bring us back to urban roads for a moment. Key to the witnesses' submissions is the issue of enforcement. One of the issues that I and colleagues in the Green Party have been trying to highlight is the use of cameras for enforcement, particularly the introduction of red-light cameras to catch people breaking those red lights. I know from living in a very urban area that it is a big concern for parents, older people and anyone with some sort of mobility issue when they come to the bigger junctions. There was a piece of work done over the last number of years on a national camera enforcement strategy and it was submitted to the Department last May. I have asked Minister of State, Deputy Canney, and the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, for an update on when it will be published. That report has been sitting on the Minister's desk for almost a year now. In the course of PARC's work, have the witnesses come across the report? Have they been doing work on the use of cameras as part of enforcement strategies? Have they had any engagement with the Minsters about this particular report, which seems to have been drafted and completed but has not come out yet. We cannot take the next steps until then.

We generally concentrate on ten issues, and that is quite enough for a small group like ours which has no funding whatsoever. Of course, we would welcome speed cameras if they deter people from breaking red lights or whatever. However, I go back to my main statement at the beginning and roads policing. Speed cameras will never catch somebody drink driving. There are so many issues that have to be sorted.

If the people at the back of the room want to chat, could they go outside?

Could we let Ms Fehilly speak on an issue she is campaigning for to make the roads safer?

My husband was killed by two people in separate cars during a high-speed chase. Both had previous disqualifications and were uninsured. Catherine Killalee and I met with the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, last year. We were looking for an increase in the maximum sentence for dangerous driving causing death or serious bodily injury, from ten years to 14 years, in line with best practice in Northern Ireland. Without stricter penalties, there is no deterrent. The chance of someone even getting a custodial sentence for killing somebody on the road is minimal. We were lucky. Our two guys got custodial sentences. They are appealing them and we are back up in court in June.

We were also looking for the disqualification period to commence on release from prison. I was told that it could not be put in place retrospectively, which is not what we were looking for. A case in point on that was the student Joe Drennan who was killed in Limerick in 2023. On appeal, the DPP got the driver's sentence increased and also got his disqualification of 20 years to commence on his release from prison.

May I come in on that because I am interested in that point on disqualification? Was that a once-off in terms of the case Ms Fehilly cited?

It is the first time we have seen that. We included the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, in our appeal to get the legislation changed. I do not think it happened before. This was the first case that we had noted.

Was that because of a legislative change or was it just down to the discretion of the judge?

I have no idea. I think it was at the discretion of the judge on appeal. It should not have to be on appeal that this comes into place.

No. When Ms Fehilly met with the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, he informed her that the disqualification after release could not be imposed retrospectively and that is fair enough. What did he say about her suggestion about introducing it going forward?

I got an emailed reply basically saying that it could not be changed retrospectively but it did not give any indication on changing anything in the future.

The courts are almost jumping ahead of where the politicians are in terms of actually responding to this, but it is on an individual basis rather than a consistent one.

Most people given custodial sentences have half their disqualification period completed by the time they are released. More than likely, they are going to get behind the wheel of a car while they are still disqualified, which was our case, but if there was something in legislation it would be a deterrent because there would be a stricter penalty. In Northern Ireland, it is 14 years. It is ten here, and they never get the maximum sentence.

Finally, does Ms Bolger know whether the HSE or the regional hospitals collate data and provide a discrete number for the spinal injuries that are caused by car crashes? Is it possible to get that level of data? How many of all the spinal injuries that happen every year are distinctly linked to road traffic accidents?

We have our own data. Obviously the data is historic in a lot of cases and is not always particularly accurate. My colleague who is sitting at the back might agree with me. My understanding is that the exact figures are not broken down. Is that correct? Yes. Is that through the National Office of Clinical Audit, NOCA? Yes.

I again thank all the witnesses. The hearing we had in October has played a key role in guiding us since then. We heard about the ten-point plan. We have done a lot of work in the meantime around enforcement, policing, data capture systems, the learner driver loophole, courts and sanctions, uninsured drivers, legislative reform and victims support.

I would like to fully support something that Ms Gray touched on in her opening comments. Subject to the agreement of members, the committee proposes that PARC's Finding Your Way guide be formally integrated into Garda procedures. That is something we will consider in the context of a key recommendation at the conclusion of our hearings.

On a personal level, I fully support Ms Fehilly. This comes back to point 7 of the opening statement around aligning with laws in Northern Ireland. We talk a lot about enforcement and preventative actions, etc. Accountability is important as well. We will seek more clarity, particularly in light of the Limerick case that was referred to. I fully agree that driving disqualifications should only commence when the offender is released from prison.

I made a note about another issue that was touched on in the opening statement. I refer to mandatory joint appearances by the various agencies, maybe on a biannual basis. I agree with Ms Gray that the October meeting was very effective. An Garda Síochána and the RSA, which are two key actors when it comes to road safety, were in attendance along with PARC. We should consider mandatory joint appearances.

I wish to give Ms Gray an opportunity to talk about the urgent need for change with regard to the surrendering of licences. There has been a systems failure whereby just 6% of disqualified drivers surrender their licences.

The failure starts with the RSA asking the disqualified drivers to put their licence into an envelope and post it back to an RSA PO box in Cork. I could not believe that the RSA put such a system in place. When a driver is disqualified in Northern Ireland, he or she must hand in his or her licence on that day. We have pleaded with the RSA and numerous Ministers for transport to abolish this farcical way of doing things, but our pleas have fallen on deaf ears. Before the RSA took charge, the person would be asked to hand his or her licence into the court. In Northern Ireland, it is done on the day.

On the question of people coming to court and not having their licence, we fought long and hard to get a law in place whereby the judge would have to ask the driver to present his or her licence so that the driver licence number could be recorded and any penalty points added to it. If a driver is disqualified, the licence number could be got from that. There are so many things that I do not where to start or end with them. Very few of these matters have been resolved and we do not understand why. We have supplied facts and figures. The media have reported on it time and again, but here we are.

When law-abiding drivers are caught speeding, they must pay their fixed-charge notice and accept three penalty points. Hopefully, they change their driving behaviour before their insurance premium goes up. A huge cohort of drivers in these circumstances decide not to pay the fixed-charge notice and take the case to court. The poor gardaí must summon people to court. When these drivers appear in court, the summons says that they must have their licences on them and present them. We have attended courts and we have discovered that very people present their licences. These people should get five penalty points for speeding if they go to court. We suggest an increase of two penalty points for those who do not pay their fixed-charge notice. Loads of people walk out of court without being awarded penalty points on their licence or learner permit. By law, a learner permit holder with seven penalty points is disqualified.

What is happening is just unbelievable. Nobody has taken responsibility. We have seen every agency blame another agency. We would love all of the agencies to sit in a room together, including the Courts Service, the Department of Transport, the RSA, the Department of justice and the Garda, to sort this out. It should not be a blame game. People are losing their lives on the roads and all the agencies must sort this out.

I reflect on this issue a lot. I feel great frustration. I repeatedly ask myself who is in charge and who should be in charge. I have learned that road safety, even from a Government perspective, intersects with many Departments such as justice, transport, housing and local government, and health in the context of emergency response. It also interacts with all the other agencies such as the RSA, An Garda Síochána and other NGOs. I find it all so fragmented. I ask myself who is in charge and who should be in charge.

I will put the witnesses on the spot. While I prefer to leave names out of it, I would like to mention Gay Byrne. Great progress was made in his time. Does Ms Gray believe that the RSA should ultimately be in charge? The RSA does not have a clear leader. Who is the leader in the RSA?

We have talked about the Indecon report and, potentially, a road safety commissioner. Does Ms Gray believe that if there was proper leadership in the RSA, somebody would co-ordinate, demand and drive accountability? Is that what is required?

I am going to name names. Noel Brett and the late Gay Byrne were great leaders. We need a senior Minister in charge of road safety to be in charge of road safety totally. Those elements together should make a difference.

I wish to put it on the record that we received a communication from the RSA this morning that gave clarity on the issue of disqualified drivers surrendering their licences or permits by post to an RSA PO box, resulting in a compliance rate of just 6%. The RSA responded that this is a requirement in law, and that abolishing it would require a revision in law. It suggested that the matter should be directed to the Department of Transport for response. We will follow up on that.

Yes, this is what we are being told all the time.

Yes.

It is a case of passing the buck. The RSA should be fighting for this, not victims or victims' families.

That point is well made. I wanted to read the communication into the record. I call Deputy Crowe.

It is so typical of the RSA. It is a case of "not our problem, move on". Can we discuss a matter?

Sorry, Deputy Crowe is next.

I am okay, if Ms Gray wants to discuss something.

Is there something specific she wants to rise? It might shape a question from Deputy Crowe.

No, it is okay. It was the issue the Chair brought up about the fees being charged for-----

I will ask about that in the next round if that is okay.

I thank the Chairman and all of our witnesses for being here. I was following the meeting remotely as I was coming up this morning on the train. As I think I said the last day, unfortunately our family is part of these awful statistics. My dear mother-in-law was killed in a road traffic accident in November 2024. It does not leave the family. I know all of the witnesses have had very personal and harrowing experiences of all of this. They have shown great fortitude, beyond the grief of it all, to come in and advocate and do battle, which is what they are doing. It is obvious that there are systematic failures here.

I do not think the RSA counter-statement is good enough. I do not accept what the RSA is saying. We have seen in the opening statement - it is very shocking to see it laid bare - that there is 6% compliance with the requirement to surrender licences. The law is very clear; the enforcement is not. The 94% who are in total breach of this law continue to drive dangerously and precariously, putting all lives at risk. That is a matter for An Garda Síochána. The RSA has its own internal analytics on this. It should be passing over the names of those 94% who have not been compliant with the law. There is no change, as far as I am concerned. I looked at the RSA statement and I looked at the law, which is crystal clear here. It is down to a lack of enforcement. There are many laws in this country - I do not want to go on a tangent, but horse control is another one - that are very robust but are not being enforced. If the law is there, I do not think the buck should be passed back to this House to amend it. In the name of God and in this day and age, with the number of deaths spiralling - I think there were five just last weekend - just enforce the bloody law. If people are not compliant with the existing laws, let the gardaí arrest them. That is where we have to get to. It is an absolute insult to the families of victims of road deaths, and those who have sustained life-changing injuries, including spinal injuries, in serious road accidents, that people continue to drive like this.

I know the figure is quite alarming. Are there regional disparities here?

I do not have the figures at the moment.

Can I inform the Deputy of something else about disqualified drivers? This was admitted by the RSA in response to a parliamentary question asked by Deputy Currie last year. We found out that a driver who went to an RSA office to renew his ten-year licence was told that on the RSA's database he was disqualified. The RSA would not renew his ten-year licence. He was disqualified for something like seven years. He argued the point. He had not been disqualified. He had to take the RSA to the High Court. They realised there that it was not him but somebody else who was disqualified. We refer to such cases as "mismatches". We wrote to the RSA, through Deputy Currie, to ask how many times the RSA, which has responsibility for putting disqualified drivers onto the national driver file, had matched the wrong driver with a disqualification. The reply that came back admitted that it had happened on some occasions, but claimed that they were very few in number. In any event, the RSA said that it does not keep a record of the number. We asked the RSA whether it discovered this through people coming to the RSA and telling it they had been matched with a disqualification that was not theirs. We asked the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, to give us the figures and to set out what he is doing about it. We are getting nowhere with it. The RSA said that there have been a few mismatches in the past, that it does not keep records in this regard, and that they are rectified the minute they are discovered. Is it not absolutely appalling that there are some people on the transport database, on which gardaí rely when they stop drivers at checkpoints, who could wrongly be identified as being disqualified?

A lady in my constituency has been leading a solo campaign to have the databases more integrated. There are people on the road whose car tax might be out, or whose car may have failed the NCT. Indeed, the car may have been deemed to be too dangerous to drive away from the NCT centre. There are people on the road who may be disqualified from driving. There are all sorts of databases, but they seem to exist as silos. We have had promises down the years that all of these systems will be integrated in a way that ensures that when a modern Garda car passes a vehicle on the road, the gardaí can see that the car is out of tax or has failed the NCT. It could be one or a combination of any of those things. Does Ms Gray have a view on that?

In the time remaining, I ask her to comment on another matter. This may be harder to quantify. We can quantify speeding because it can be measured. Unfortunately, we can quantify road deaths and casualties. We can quantify the number of people arrested for drink driving. I cycled today but on other days I drive. I see the whole time on the road that driver aggression has gone through the roof with people undertaking, overtaking and cutting people off at roundabouts. Does Ms Gray have any comment on that? It is a harder thing to quantify. Very often, it is putting people under huge pressure and causing unnecessary accidents as well. My questions are on the idea of integrated databases and on driver aggression.

We often see that the databases are not talking to each other. It is a huge problem. In an ideal world, we would love to see the Garda databases and all of the databases actually sharing information in real time and making sure the information they are giving to other people is complete. Otherwise, the system is broken. Sometimes, transport cannot share the information because it knows the information being given out may be wrong. That opens up a whole new can of worms.

I will jump back in if that is okay.

I apologise to Mr. Clancy but we will give Deputy Currie two minutes.

Mr. Clancy can jump in on this question if he likes. I think that the RSA intervention we heard about is a real-time example of a lack of leadership that is-----

I was only reading it into the record. I am not advocating for it but it was important to read it into the record.

Yes, but it is a real-time example of the lack of leadership that is coming from the RSA. This issue has been highlighted for years, and the reaction is to pass the buck. I see it. I have been working with Ms Gray and PARC now for 18 months, God love her.

God love the Deputy.

The lack of joined-up thinking across the different agencies-----

And leadership.

-----and Departments is incredible. It is mind-boggling. We first came across the issue with the fixed charge notices for illegal number plates. According to the Courts Service, we are seeing a 15-year delay in addressing the capturing of driver numbers in the Courts Service. It boils down to the fact that the summons says that the person must "bring" the licence but it does not say that he or she must "produce" the licence in court. The requirement is for somebody to be asked to do so. As Ms Gray rightly said, it is coming down to campaigners to identify exactly where the issues are in order to get them addressed. I hope we will see progress on that today in our meeting at the Courts Service. Will Ms Gray speak on the disjointed nature of the agencies, where she has experienced it, the worst examples of it and why it is so important that we change the structure that exists at the moment.

Very briefly, Ms Gray.

Where do I start? The agencies need to work together. We should not be discovering stuff and giving it to the powers-that-be only for the powers-that-be to say "that is terrible", and for nothing to be done. We need joined-up thinking. We need the agencies to work for safer roads. We do not believe a lot of the agencies are putting road safety as a priority. They are not.

We can hear the real frustration the witnesses are voicing about their engagement with the RSA over many years. There has been a lack of leadership in dealing with the very real issues that are coming up, such as the issue around driver disqualification.

There was a big piece of work done on the RSA two years ago by Indecon. There was a major report. It recommended very significant restructuring of how the organisation operated. Ministers took a decision earlier this year not to go that route. Would there be any benefit in us getting Indecon before the committee to talk about the report? We are kind of doing what others have done already. We are looking at all the problems and are going to bring forward a report that will have our solutions. Is it worth taking one day or a half day to look at the report in detail in terms of solutions that are on the table for influencing what we decide to bring forward in the end? I wish to put that forward as suggestion. I am not sure if any of the groups present would have engaged with that piece of Indecon work. I wish to get their views on if that is a better model for how we could oversee and deliver road safety in the country.

It is a good idea to get Indecon in here to find out about all the hard work that it did and what conclusions it came to - the conclusions that the Government ignored.

We were excited when the then Minister of State, Deputy James Lawless, announced that nearly two years ago. We would like to see the CEO of the RSA, Mr. Sam Waide, think about road safety 24 hours a day. He does not. He has other jobs on his hands as well, such as driving tests, NCTs, testing of lorries and vans and all of this stuff. We were delighted that it was going to be split, with the business side on one side and maybe taken back into the Department and the RSA focusing on road safety.

We can discuss that in private session, but I have no issue with that in principle.

I agree with the point that Mr. Clancy has made. Air aviation falls under the remit of this committee. About three years ago, the Irish Aviation Authority was separated. One side of it now deals with air safety while the other side deals with regulation. It makes good sense because it cannot, as an organisation, be watching everything at once while also leading out everything at once.

I propose that we invite the Garda Commissioner, Mr. Justin Kelly, here because there is a very serious lack of a certain type of enforcement. Some roads policing has increased and that is to be welcomed. In terms of the non-surrendering of licences, it is a matter for An Garda Síochána to pursue each and every individual who is doing that.

I wish to go back to a point that was raised earlier. We ran out of time. Driver aggression seems to be very much on the up. It is hard to quantify. Do the witnesses have any comment on driver behaviour? A report on RTÉ Radio 1 on Sunday morning said that Sweden did not need to have any of these shock TV adverts because driver behaviour there was generally good. They adhere to the rules of the road. It seems that everything that we have brought in is being ignored by many motorists at this point.

It is because of the lack of enforcement. People are not scared of getting caught. After Covid, they took chances. They saw that they were getting away with it. It has escalated to a new level. That is our opinion.

I agree with the Deputy's comments on the databases working together.

In relation to aggression, education from a young age is important on our roads. With aggression, I can see it on motorways that people do not know how to overtake and that causes huge aggression on our roads. Education will have to play a huge part into the future.

Before we wrap up on this very important point, we have talked a lot about how, in December, 3,000 vehicles were impounded for different reasons during a Garda operation. Some 65% of them did not have insurance. It is important to put on the record that the release fee for an impounded vehicle has not changed in 30 years. It is currently €125. Does Ms Gray wish to briefly comment on that?

I had a meeting the assistant commissioner for roads policing, Ms Gunne, in February. I alerted her to the fact that we were seeing more unaccompanied learners' vehicles being impounded and a few days later An Garda Síochána would have up on Facebook that gardaí had caught the same person again. Is the €125 release fee a deterrent? It obviously is not. I asked Ms Gunne to find out when the fees were last increased in Ireland. I looked at Northern Ireland, where the fee seemed to have been increased a few years ago. I asked her if the €125 in 2026 was covering the charge of towing the vehicle away and storage. She said she would look into it. I asked if the Garda would make a submission to the Minister for justice to get it increased. It was reported this week that the number of unaccompanied learner drivers being caught was up by 10%. The fee is not having any effect on them. We would like to see if it covers the cost and when was it last increased.

The Minister of State, Deputy Canney, replied to the Cathaoirleach and said it was not his Department. Rather, it was decided by the Minister for justice, who then changes legislation. An Garda Síochána has to make a submission to the Minister for justice, though. We noticed with the scrambler bikes a few weeks ago that the Minister approved a law significantly increasing the fee to retrieve a scrambler bike. We do not understand why he could not do it for every vehicle. We now have to fight to get it for every vehicle. I firmly believe that the €125 goes nowhere near paying the costs. Increasing it would be a deterrent. I ask that the committee keep asking the Minister for justice. Yesterday, I contacted the assistant commissioner and asked for the latest update. I am waiting on a reply.

I met with officials from the Department of Transport on that and a number of other issues. We are going in the right direction, but I impressed upon the officials that we had been waiting long enough. It was 1998 or 1993 that the €125 fee dates back to. It has not been increased since.

Has it not?

It has not been increased in more than 25 years.

I am conscious that the witnesses have another commitment with Deputy Currie, so I wish to bring this first session to a conclusion. I sincerely thank all of our witnesses representing PARC and Spinal Injuries Ireland. Individuals who have long-lasting and devastating injuries are very much part of our deliberations. It follows on from our engagement with Headway Ireland last week. I thank Ms Gray in particular from PARC. She has had a lot of engagement, particularly since October. We note everything that she has had to say on roads policing units, court-issued penalty points and disqualification, learner drivers, non-surrender of licences on disqualification, the Bill on the National Vehicle and Driver File and the consolidation of road traffic legislation.

Coming back to Ms Fehilly's personal testimony, I fully support what she has said on penalties for dangerous driving causing death aligning with our counterparts in Northern Ireland and the issues around disqualifications only taking effect when offenders are released from prison.

I thank all of the witnesses for their evidence.

On behalf of the committee, I welcome from the school of architecture, building and environment at Technological University Dublin, TUD, Ms Jordana Corrigan and Dr. Sarah Rock, who are both lecturers.

I will read a note on privilege for our witnesses. I remind them of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks, and it is imperative that they comply with this direction. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or against an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I invite Ms Corrigan to deliver the opening statement on behalf of TUD.

I thank the committee for inviting TU Dublin to contribute today. My colleague, Dr. Sarah Rock, will also speak to this statement.

We acknowledge the committee's focus on road safety. Many of the witnesses to date have already addressed critical factors such as enforcement and data transparency. We support these, and today we will focus on additional points that we feel are essential to address. We will focus on cities, towns and villages, where the emphasis of our research and practice has been to date, including research undertaken by the Road Safety Authority. This is where the majority of serious injuries and the vast majority of pedestrian casualties occur. The mechanisms to improve road safety in urban areas are context specific and dependent on stakeholder co-ordination. Both push and pull approaches are necessary. Strong leadership and championing social acceptance are key.

The first point we will focus on during today's discussion is the opportunity to increase the visibility of, and support for, the goal of Vision Zero and a safe systems approach to road safety in our strategy and plans. The Government’s goal for Vision Zero is a clear one. It is also easily communicable, measurable and, as we have seen in Pontevedra in Spain and Oslo in Norway, achievable. Policies that reduce car dependency, increase accessible and affordable public transport and safe active modes of travel, and promote compact growth also improve road safety outcomes. These policies are often framed around promoting sustainable mobility, quality of life and climate rather than road safety. However, the connection between the form of our towns and cities and the potential for safe and healthy communities is clear. An initial review of transport and planning policy suggests that there is little reference to Vision Zero. There is an opportunity to reinforce the connection between road safety, places and communities, the need for accountability and the co-ordination of stakeholders, and to measure progress across cities and towns. This broader visibility can potentially motivate support for policies that promote road safety, including some of the measures we will discuss today.

The second point is that we need to put people first and promote a focus on pedestrians and a culture of respect. In Ireland, there is a disproportionate impact on pedestrians and cyclists. Most of these collisions are with a person driving a car or other vehicle. This does not have to be the case. For example, Pontevedra has been transformed from a city with many road deaths and serious injuries, like our own cities currently, to one where Vision Zero has been achieved for many years while at the same time regenerating the city. This was accomplished through a variety of ways, but key to it was a shift to focus strongly on pedestrian safety and comfort, a substantial reduction in through traffic and speed, and an emphasis on a pedestrian-friendly driver culture. For Ireland, we recommend an emphasis on a culture that supports and prioritises walking as both a mode of transport and a key catalyst for vitality and community in our cities and towns.

Third, we need to reduce speeds in urban areas. Reducing speeds in cities and towns will reduce deaths and serious injuries considerably. There is a large evidence base to support this. On average, across 40 British and European cities that have implemented 30 km/h speed limits, there has been a 37% reduction in road fatalities and a 38% reduction in injuries. This alone would go a considerable way towards achieving our interim 2030 road safety strategy target of a 50% reduction in deaths and serious injuries.

There is a significant opportunity to improve road safety outcomes, as well as the interlinked objectives of increasing quality of life and vibrancy in our towns and cities, through the upcoming implementation of reviewed urban speed limits.

This will require the majority of trafficked urban streets to have a 30 km/h speed limit. The more consistent the 30 km/h zone, the more effective it will be. The case for reduced speed limits is even greater now that there are bigger and heavier vehicles that cause even greater harm in collisions.

It is acknowledged that reducing speed limits requires political leadership. However, without it, Vision Zero will never be achieved. Recognising the important role elected representatives have in speed limit reviews, we recommend priority training on the interrelationship between road safety and urban design to assist with setting impactful urban speed limits and with public engagement.

Finally, change has not been easy in other places. Change is nearly always hard everywhere but we know we have to do it. The timely collection, monitoring and evaluation of detailed data across a variety of outcomes, including deaths and serious injuries, traffic volumes and congestion, air quality and footfall, for example, is necessary to communicate the wider societal benefits of proposals to all stakeholders. It can also be used to support the holding of ground in the face of resistance to change.

I thank Dr. Rock. Today's meeting continues a focused programme of committee work in this area. Of course, it comes against the backdrop of a continued increase, regrettably, in road fatalities. There were 190 lives lost last year and 53 so far this year. Of course, this committee is conscious that every one of those statistics represents a family and a community dealing with loss. This committee is trying to provide leadership by identifying concrete actions with a view to making strong recommendations to the Government and other relevant agencies.

We had a earlier session today where we met representatives of PARC, which advocates very well on behalf of road victims, and Spinal Injuries Ireland, because it is important that people who are dealing with catastrophic life-changing, life-permanent injuries are part of the debate as well.

We will start with questions from members.

I thank the witnesses for their presentation this morning and for their submission. I am interested in this idea of working in silos. One of the things that has come across to us in all these hearings is that too many parts of Government and the State more widely such as the Department, the Road Safety Authority, RSA, and An Garda Síochána, are not working together on this particular issue. The witnesses are reasonably complimentary in their submission on Vision Zero for the RSA but they state that its principles could be better adopted across strategies and maybe done by other parts of the State. Could they give us any examples where they feel another part of the State, for which road safety may not be its primary focus but is still important to its work, could be better integrating parts of Vision Zero into its work?

I thank the Deputy for the question. Our first point is about the idea of integrating an understanding of the relationship between the built environment, places, safety and community. During the course of our study where we looked at different cities and different contexts, we saw that there are a lot of similarities in terms of how cities are approaching this such as policies for sustainability mobility, car reduction, safe and active modes of travel and quality of life. What struck us, however, is that the visibility of road safety at a city level or a metropolitan level in terms of data, references to the number of fatalities and the number of serious injuries is quite visible at the city level in these policies which span wider urban governance. That is the basis for the first suggestion or identification of an opportunity to use the Vision Zero target and goal as a means of communicating that this spans across the safe system's approach in terms of safe streets and safe modes of transport. Looking at it at that kind of city and metropolitan scale and integrating the wider quality of life indicators with the road safety statistics has value.

Perhaps I can expand on that through a few examples. As Ms Corrigan said, it is a range of plans and policies that road safety outcomes and objectives can be interlinked with given the common objectives across a lot of these plans. Metropolitan area transport strategies, such as the Cork metropolitan area transport strategy, are clear places where we should expect to see the goal of Vision Zero and the safe systems approach integrated in a meaningful way. Other examples are the greater Dublin transport strategy, the county development plans and town centre first plans.

It can be integrated across the range of the spatial scales. Of course, it has to be done in a meaningful way as opposed to just maybe an objective, as long as an objective can lead through the system and actions can be taken upon it. A meaningful way that could happen at a plan level, such as a Dublin transport strategy level, would be the integration of, say, a hot-spot analysis. Under the road safety action plan, there is a network safety analysis objective. Effectively, that is a hot-spot analysis for want of a better term. That is a practical application at a spatial scale where we can see where the problems lie and then target investment towards those areas as well.

Very good. One of those examples of urban areas that have taken big steps is Pontevedra in Spain. Could they talk us through how they integrated policies to make roads safer with that wider degree of public buy-in and political leadership that they spoke about in their presentation? Could they talk about what they did and maybe what were the outcomes for people, particularly for vulnerable road users living in that city?

The path towards Vision Zero for Pontevedra began in the 1990s. It was in response to a city that was in need of urban regeneration. They adopted a city-first approach. They had a step-by-step approach of reducing car priority within the city centre and then broadening it out. The idea was to put the pedestrian first. The message was that the city really was for people, that there is obviously space for a car and there is a need for people to have access to a car within the city and to park in their buildings, but that this is done in accordance with a specified and quantified need.

In terms of the leadership, they have had a mayor who has been in position for a long time. Also, one of the learnings from the study is that change is difficult and you need this kind of step-by-step approach and commitment to the measures over time.

Perhaps I could add to that as well, if that is okay. The mayor that Ms Corrigan referred to has been in place for seven elections and is actually a doctor. He was a local doctor in the area. He had felt his city was a sick city so he wanted to do something about it. He had seen this city that was declining around him, that had increasing road deaths and serious injuries and that really was not meeting the goal of how he knew a city or a place should be. The mandate that he ran on was this need to fix this sick city.

One of the key aspects this leadership has brought is the whole concept of mutual respect or, in a bad translation from Galician, how the strongest must protect the weakest. That is the kind of culture and messaging that has been very much part and parcel of the transformation of the city. In that regard, people in a vehicle have a responsibility to protect and look out for pedestrians, cyclists, people in wheelchairs or those using other mobility aids. People on bicycles also have a responsibility to look out for other people. There is a hierarchy of a culture of respect, which very much aligns with the policy of pedestrian first. Everything we do needs to focus on that whole idea of pedestrian comfort and experience.

In terms of cities in Ireland, the debate around the 30 km/h limit has become controversial in some places. When I was on the council, housing estates were dying to have it implemented but Fingal could only do a certain number every year and there was real frustration when estates did not get designated. However, when it comes to slightly larger roads outside of estates, it does become a little bit more controversial. Does Dr. Rock see the 30 km/h limit in urban areas as a really important step in achieving the Vision Zero goals but also in terms of ensuring vulnerable road users are made more safe?

Yes absolutely, we will not achieve Vision Zero without it. The evidence across the world, but particularly across Europe, is really strong in this regard. Around 200 French cities have already implemented it. There has been a huge number of recent studies that have looked at all of the European cities that have introduced it and it is a really fundamental way to achieve a reduction in serious injuries and deaths and to protect the most vulnerable in our society but also to increase the vitality of, and regenerate, our communities. It enables us to meet other goals such as sustainable mobility and emissions reductions. A wide range of outcomes can be achieved with it but it is an absolutely fundamental and essential part of vision zero. There are other aspects to it as well, like reducing the volume of through traffic in city centres. That is also a very important aspect. There is an acknowledgement that change is difficult but every city and town in Ireland is no different to every city and town in the rest of the world that has gone through this. It is a difficult process that requires leadership and community engagement, as well as the ability to hold the line and work towards a vision and achieve that.

In terms of where the burden of responsibility falls for maintaining safety in the context of the motorist versus the more vulnerable road user, I had a debate with the Tánaiste a couple of weeks ago about what looked like an attempt to introduce mandatory bicycle helmets. In fairness, the Tánaiste clarified that was not happening but in the last week or so, a local authority brought forward a motion that all non-motorist road users, including cyclists and pedestrians, should be mandatorily wearing high-vis clothing. In terms of the research and best practice that Dr. Rock has seen around the world, where does that balance lie between the responsibility on vulnerable road users and on motorists to try to bring the number of deaths down?

Essentially, international best practice and research all points towards the concept of Vision Zero and the safe system, which I am sure the committee has heard others talk about. People will make mistakes but our road and street system has to be designed in such a way that if there is a collision, the severity of that collision does not kill the person or does not result in the person being seriously injured. There is that aspect of it. There is also the user hierarchy aspect of it. Even thinking about how the Mayor of Pontevedra referred to it, he said that the strongest must protect the weakest. That may not be the best translation but we can all understand what that means. There is a responsibility on those travelling at higher speeds to protect and be careful of others who are travelling by foot or bicycle, for example.

Regarding things like mandatory high-vis vests or mandatory helmets, I understand that these suggestions generally come from a good place. People generally want to do their best to come up with something to help and of course, in the dark winter months it is advisable for people in our cities and towns to light up and be bright. If people are on a bike, they are supposed to have lights on but if we shift the blame to those people then we do not address the fundamental issues, particularly speed. Speed is the most important issue that has to be addressed. There are also a lot of unintended consequences. In fact, if we ever did introduce something like that, what would probably happen is there would be an element of risk compensation. What I mean by that is we could get drivers driving closer to people on their bikes who have a high-vis vest or a helmet on because they think it is okay. We all know how the whole thing is supposed to work but that issue of risk compensation is real. Another thing that can happen is that we can actually turn people away from the very activity that we want them to do.

That is the issue I raised in the Dáil. We would be criminalising somebody who did not wear a helmet. Nine times out of ten when I cycle I put on my helmet because I feel safer with it but the idea that the one time that I did not, I would be risking criminal sanction, would make cycling less attractive. In the same way, the idea that if one is going for a walk one has to wear a high-vis vest and is committing some sort of offence by not wearing one is a fairly-----

Yes and we really want people to go out for a walk.

Yes, of course, for a whole range of reasons.

We really want people to hop on their bike.

I put a question to our witnesses earlier about the issue of camera enforcement strategy, a report on which has been awaiting publication for quite some time. In her research, does Dr. Rock see a benefit to using red light cameras as a key part of homing in on those road users who are not obeying the law? Would she welcome the rapid publication of that report?

This was not a significant area of the research we have undertaken but I would say that to support our policing, there needs to be some form of automation. Red light cameras and speed cameras are an essential component of that. We looked at Brussels, for example, and that is an important part of its system. Brussels has introduced a 30 km/h zone and has improved its public transport and the design of its streets but it has also added red light cameras. They are part of the bigger picture and one of the tools that we need in our toolbox to address this. I would absolutely recommend the publication of a report on this and a recognition of its role in supplementing our policing in this area.

Thanks.

I have looked at so much data in the past six months, including for example, the number of fatalities in 2025 by age, whether they were cyclists, pedestrians, e-scooter users, or motorists and by location.

In my county of Tipperary, we had ten fatalities last year, compared with four the previous year. I do not know if I have seen a lot of data on fatalities in the rural environment and urban environment.

I assume the vast majority or higher percentage of pedestrians and cyclists occur in the urban environment. Has the witnesses' research given any additional information that could be provided to the committee today on the percentage of fatalities in urban versus rural? I come from a very rural constituency and public transport in Tipperary is lacking. Car pooling and car-sharing are not an option. Will the witnesses comment on that first?

Certainly there are more deaths and serious injuries in urban areas, particularly serious injuries. For example, 89% of serious injuries in urban areas, the largest group, are children. They are pedestrians. Pedestrians are disproportionately impacted in urban areas.

What we do not have, which is probably an extremely important issue being raised by the Chair, is disaggregated or detailed data, especially on serious injuries. We have a considerable amount in the area of our data access, transparency and availability as regards understanding the extent of the problem we have in Ireland. There has been a data gap for probably about a decade now, which is a very significant issue that needs to be addressed. We might be able to tell the committee broad-brush figures about the number of serious injuries and deaths in a particular county, but we cannot currently tell it where they have happened. We cannot tell the committee if there are a lot of them happening in the same place and the conditions in that place, or if we could do something about it. What we do know is pedestrians and cyclists are disproportionately impacted in urban locations. We also know that children are disproportionately impacted. I am not sure if there is any information my colleagues wish to add to that.

Going back to the idea of the visibility of the data, as Dr. Rock said, there is a real need to disaggregate the data. In Brussels, we saw the Brulocalis which is an agency that supports the work of the municipalities. Along with Brussels Mobility, it publishes a road safety monitor - I think quarterly - which provides very good data relating to fatalities and serious injuries across the modes of transport and disaggregates it by age and gender. There are also other places where there is access to disaggregated data at the city and metropolitan level.

Something I reflect on a lot is the fragmented approach to road safety. The question is who is in charge and who should be in charge. At present, we have the Road Safety Authority, RSA, and stakeholder after stakeholder who have been very critical of it. Road safety intersects with many different departments, including transport, justice, local government, health from the point of view of emergency response, An Garda Síochána, local authorities as regards local government, and other NGOs. This is not at the heart of TU Dublin's research, but do the witnesses have a view on that fragmented approach?

Some people have spoken about the idea of a road safety commissioner. The evidence from Cycling Ireland and Ciaran Cannon in particular, was very interesting. It would be somebody who would co-ordinate, demand action and call all the various stakeholders to account. Would the witnesses have even a personal view on that?

That is not something we have examined as part of our research but I have heard other people talk about it. Our view is on the importance of leadership, accountability and timely data access. I recognise there was a study done on the RSA and there were conclusions regarding that. We would not really have an additional view beyond the work that has already been undertaken. However, having leadership and accountability is very important to be able to achieve the outcomes we need across several policy areas.

I am a newly elected Member of the national Parliament, but I spent 15 years at local level and ten years on the European Committee of the Regions trying, to the best of my ability, to shape the policy and legislative agenda. I have been involved in a specific number of opinions on planning and transport policy, and then during my time as a councillor I was very involved in trying to shape the most recent regional economic and spatial strategy. There were numerous local development and local area plans, and, speaking honestly, I do not know if Vision Zero was ever at the back of that, so I am trying to understand where the fault lies there.

Councillors at the local level are so important for shaping policy at the local level, county development plans in particular, as well as regional, economic and spatial strategies. There is a failure there, is there not? Is the onus on the officials? Do the witnesses have any thoughts on that?

Speaking to the Chair's question on fragmentation, regarding dealing with the issue of road safety, our study was focused on the mechanisms to reduce speed and volumes of traffic, but that was in the context of understanding this was related to climate and other policy areas. While we did not look in detail at the kind of governance of these different places, there is an acknowledgement that they are different.

The learning from that is there is potential to really drive this at specific spatial scales, as the Chair referenced, like in a city or town, and that speaks to the point about having visibility of road safety data within that and the message of the path towards Vision Zero, which is integrating transport and land use policy. We already talk about Vision Zero and a safe systems approach in terms of that integration of transport and land use.

Do the witnesses have any particular concrete example of urban design that has led to, for want of a better word, a black spot for road accidents, fatalities and injuries?

Most of our research and practices have been in urban areas.

Yes, in an urban setting.

In an urban setting, the psychology of street design is very important. How a particular user feels and behaves in a street-----

My time is limited. Can Dr. Rock give an example of a design that jumps out?

Anything that is a wide street without-----

I am going to put the witness on the spot. Is there a specific place in Dublin that would make you tear the hair out of your head?

You can take any of the distributor roads that are located in any of the numerous suburbs. All of them are very poor in terms of the combination or interlink between urban design and road safety.

Anything that is a wide street with wide roundabouts-----

Give me one example in particular. What is one example that makes Dr. Rock want to tear the hair out of her head?

There are so many.

Dr. Rock would make a great politician. I tried my best.

I want to ask about British cities in particular. A lot of our town centres are similar to those. I will not ask about specific British cities, but could Dr. Rock expand further on the 37% reduction? If an area is pedestrianised, there are obviously not going to be road traffic collisions. Would Dr. Rock expand a little more?

There is an approach to the reduction of speeds that a number of cities across the UK have implemented, including, for example, Edinburgh. Across Wales, default speed limits have been introduced.

That limit is 30 km/h.

The speed limit is 30 km/h. Let us take Wales as an example. It introduced that limit as a default principle, through signage mainly. The approach was to introduce the default and then to have additional interventions that could physically restrain the speed of travelling. In those areas-----

Dr.Rock is referring to speed ramps.

That is it exactly, but not just speed ramps. It is more about how the whole street looks and feels. It could involve narrowing certain aspects of the street, widening footpaths or introducing street trees. There are a range of interventions that you can undertake. In locations that use signage only, there has been found to be approximately an 11% reduction in deaths and serious injuries. Cities that introduce more physical interventions as well as a wider campaign on public engagement are the cities that would get to a higher percentage reduction.

Is it important that cycle lanes are a different colour or are elevated from the street?

There are different aspects to it and it depends where your cycle lane is or if you need one. In some streets, you may not need cycling infrastructure at all because the volume of traffic passing through or the speed is not so great that you need to segregate or because you are not in a particular location that you identify as an important strategic route. However, in locations where you do segregate, there are certain best practice design principles that can be undertaken to make that design of a cycle lane appropriate.

What were the grounds for pushback in the towns in Wales and how were they overcome?

I did not study this particular town in detail and it certainly was not the subject of the study we are mainly referring to, but there was a lot of pushback. There was a need to hold the line and defend the vision for what they were trying to achieve. There was pushback on the appropriateness of some of the roads on which the limit was converted to 30 km/h. By and large, the limit on most streets is 30 km/h, although some have reverted to a higher speed limit. By and large, the limit on most streets is 30 km/h. When you come from the past 40 or so years of being used to driving a certain way, and as cars have got bigger and people have driven more than they would have a number of decades ago, a certain culture has developed and it takes a bit of time to unwind. It takes leadership and selling a vision. It takes understanding the benefits across not just road safety but also regeneration, liveability and sustainability. The benefits are across a whole system. Change is hard.

Did Dr. Rock consider or study the commercial consequences for businesses?

Not in this particular city but certainly in others. For example, in another study undertaken in recent years within Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, we looked at the impact on businesses of the redesign or the reallocation of the design of the main street. This particular example was the main street in Blackrock. The design of the space changed from a two-way road to a one-way road with wider footpaths and the introduction of one cycle lane. The businesses, by and large, are quite happy with the outcomes. What has happened in that case is that the street has become a much more social space. People are using it and spending time there. That whole aspect of dwell time is a really important part of economic vitality. The shop units are very well rented. There is high demand for them. In terms of the economic indicators, it is a real win-win for people.

Blackrock is quite an affluent area. Is it the same in other areas?

Absolutely. Those findings go across the sector. It is about how you design it so it is about getting the balance right. The sense from the businesses was that they really got the balance right in that location and in other locations. It is about getting the balance right.

I am sorry I missed the start. There was mention of accident black spots. In the centre of Sligo, for example, there is a lot of work being done in respect of public realm projects and shared spaces, which is brilliant. I cycle around the town and it has not fully expanded yet. There are often ways that I go contraflow to the traffic, which I know I should not do. Is there a need for cycle lanes in those shared spaces within towns?

It depends on the context. I will use the Blackrock example because we have studied it for five years and it is interesting. A one-direction contraflow cycle lane was introduced.

That is brilliant. It is a great idea.

You do not always need to do that. It depends on the type of street it is. In that case, there was a reduction to a one-vehicle lane in one direction and the contraflow in the other direction. That allowed accessibility. It connected the cycle lane to a wider network. In the case of Blackrock, there is a strategic or wider amenity cycle lane, as well as commuter cycling, that is really popular with people. That allowed a link. Cycle tourism is an important part of the local economy.

Signage is really tricky. If you are cycling within towns, you do not know where you are going. It is very hard. There could be a lot of work done on signage for cyclists, particularly in town centres. Is that something Dr. Rock has seen in other countries? Is there specific signage for how to navigate from one street to another? If there are one-way systems and there are not segregated cycle lanes, how do you navigate?

There is an element of simplicity that is needed. If we get so complex in our urban environment, it gets hard to read things. There is a balance that has to be achieved with that as well. In some places, you will have to get off your bike and walk if it is not appropriate to cycle through that location.

Does Dr. Rock think we have improved? I am again thinking about Sligo. A link road was built. I cannot remember how any years ago it was built. There were no cycle lanes on that road. There is a new western distributor road now and there are really good segregated cycle lanes and a footpath. However, no one cycles on the link road which cuts through the town because the traffic moves too quickly. There is a wide footpath but should people be cycling on the footpaths? Does Dr. Rock think things are getting better?

I think things are definitely getting better. If we think of where we were even ten years ago, things have improved an awful lot. We are moving in a much better direction than we had been. We still have lessons to learn. I do not know about the particular case the Senator mentioned, but if you are going to cycle around a link road, you have to be able to get on to somewhere else. It must be a part of a network. The case is similar if you are walking. It must also feel pleasant. There should, for example, be street trees. Those street trees are also used to slow down the passing traffic and to encourage people to walk.

There is a whole set of other urban design elements that also need to be integrated. That leads to an improved sense of community and vitality for the whole town. It is important that it is linked all the way through in that way.

I missed what Dr. Rock said about parking. Will she talk a bit more about that? Is that about the park-and-ride idea? What did she say about identifying and implementing within the Irish context and car parking being an important consideration?

Car parking is always a contentious issue. Where this recommendation came from is in the context of Pontevedra where they rolled out to the wider province the actions and philosophy they had taken to their city. They looked at rationalising the parking for the town centre. The spatial dispersal of towns and villages there is similar to Ireland so people need cars to access their town centres. However, what they did there is an interesting approach. They provided car parking lots.

Are they multi-storeys?

No, in the two places we saw, they are quite informal. The idea is that cars are not driving through the town. It is possible to reclaim that as public space. There are squares and so forth.

How can they ensure that there is enough parking around the town?

The study did not get into the detail or an evaluation of how that works. It pointed to the fact that parking is a consideration.

It is realistic. That is often used as a thing though, where there are no parking spaces because the space has been given over to the public realm.

I will expand on some of the examples. It is about the concept that the Senator mentioned, of park-and-ride. Park and Stride is a really important part with park-and-ride in the bigger cities where there is good public transport. However, in the smaller cities and towns Park and Stride was a really important part of it. They would have some priority car parking closer to the town centre for people who particularly may need it, for example, disabled parking or service car parking that will allow deliveries. Outside of it and within walking distance they have communal parking areas. That allowed those town centres to be freed up for better uses that are more economically and socially valuable than car parking. A number of studies have looked at the whole concept of cruising for a car parking space. We all know the frustration of searching a town looking for a car parking space. There could be 30% or 40% of traffic at any given time just doing that. That is phenomenal. Integrating the car parking strategy as part of any plan for a town or city can greatly improve how the streets are used and therefore road safety outcomes-----

That is great.

-----by managing it and taking the volume of traffic out of the town or city centre.

Especially in towns and villages where public transport is not quite what it should be, people have to bring the car.

Certainly, a lot of the rural policing in towns we looked at use that model.

Do the witnesses share their research with local authorities and regional assemblies?

Yes, absolutely.

The report is publicly available. We have been talking about it and we are happy to be here today.

Do you make submissions to various parking proposals by Dublin City Council?

If we make submissions, they are always on a personal basis.

That is not the question I am asking. I mean in terms of your role and your expertise and in terms of the research you have done as experts in the field.

We try to disseminate and share this knowledge as much as we can. We welcome the opportunity to do that. We have certainly used every opportunity we can, such as being here today, to do that.

I will now bring this meeting to a conclusion. I thank both Sarah and Jordana, if I may use first names, for taking the time out. It has been really interesting because we have not had this perspective. We are really anxious to have all perspectives. It is not just about preventative measures or enforcement - all the usuals. There has been added value and, of course, we will have further engagement. The aim is to produce a practical report containing clear recommendations to submit to the Government. We are due to hear soon from the Road Safety Authority, RSA, from the assistant Garda commissioner and from Ministers. This has been really useful.