Reinventing the Wheel
The column for this month changed at the last minute with the publication of a Road Safety Compliance Consultation by the Department of Transport. The Minister, Jim Fitzpatrick, spun this document very heavily.
The stated aim of the paper is to further reduce Road Traffic accidents. A number of different areas have been highlighted with some of the measures to be welcomed. In particular the Consultation is looking to deal with the issue of Drug Driving.
Areas of concern, though, are apparent. Speeding has been highlighted and the Consultation suggests that the number of penalty points be increased for drivers who exceed the speed limit by more than 20 mph. Drivers who exceed the limit by this amount will be liable for 6 penalty points on there licence. If they are twice caught travelling at this speed they will be liable to disqualification.
The press release and interviews that followed concentrated on the drivers who were exceeding the limit by 20mph in 30mph zones.
The fundamental problem with this proposal is that for individuals, who are caught exceeding the speed limit by this amount, in 30mph zones are already likely to receive 6 penalty points. Proposing to introduce this ‘change’ is nonsense; it is already likely the Courts’ will deal with the driver by way of 6 penalty points. If it is a second offence it is almost certain that disqualification will follow.
In our October article mention was made of the guidance given to Magistrates. The sentencing guideline for exceeding the speed limit by 20mph in a 30mph zone is 6 penalty points or disqualification. The Magistrates base sentencing decisions on this. In short the new proposal for this target area is no different.
Much of the attention in the press reporting was on the issue of speed and also new tests for Drug Driving. One area that did not gain much attention was the
proposal to allow the Police to deal with Careless Driving by way of a Fixed Penalty Notice.
The stated aim of this is to reduce the burden on the Police and ensure the amount of recorded information is kept to a minimum. Thankfully this will only apply to drivers who admit guilt.
The first problem with this is that the Police will be acting as Judge and Jury. If the Police were correct 100% of the time this would not be a problem. They are not, but they will be advising the motorist to accept a penalty. As the Officer will be saying the driver has admitted guilt, no doubt on the advice he gives, they will not need to record much information so as to reduce bureaucracy. It hardly bodes well for a fair Trial when an accused takes professional advice. Secondly, it will further strip away the power of the Courts to deal with offenders.
It is also worth mentioning a final section in the Consultation. This is in relation to drink drivers. Currently if an individual provides a low breath reading, which could be borderline, the Police must offer the motorist the option to have a Blood or Urine test as a replacement. It is a fail safe and provides a level of legitimacy to the procedure. The Consultation proposes to abolish this safeguard. The reason – breath-testing machines are infallible. It is a dangerous proposal. Nothing, or no one, is infallible.