The Garda commissioner is apparently keen to enforce a proposed new law that would compel all drivers to carry an emergency kit in the car, consisting of a hi-vis vest, first aid pack, torch, warning triangle and a fire extinguisher.
The new law was proposed some time ago, and the Road Safety Authority carried out a public consultation into it. "Initial feedback from specialists in the area of emergency management suggests that the use of high visibility vests and warning triangles in particular are likely to have road safety benefits" said the RSA. "Every year they manage a number of incidents where a person/vehicle involved in a break-down at the roadside is subsequently struck by another vehicle resulting in a fatality or injury."
The RSA further carried out a cost-benefit analysis which indicated that the cost of equipping all new vehicles (including HGVs and buses) with emergency kits would be around €79-million. Expensive, but it's about a tenth of the total cost of accidents, both fatalities and those that cause serious injuries. "Not all collisions could be avoided by the introduction of emergency packs. However, it is possible that a number of fatal collisions could be avoided altogether, or a number of potential fatal collisions could result in less severe collisions, serious or minor injury or material damage. If, for example, over a five-year period, the inclusion of emergency packs in all vehicles prevented 29 fatal collisions or 221 serious injury collisions or 2,241 minor injury collisions the introduction of emergency packs would pay for itself. The cost of providing these to all vehicles would balance out the financial cost of these collisions."
The cost of a kit to an individual motorist has been estimated at around €30-40.
However, there is controversy over the Gardai's apparent enthusiasm for enforcing any new law that would require the carrying of such a kit. It has been suggested that failure to carry one would result in a €50 fine and one penalty point. Renua TD Terrence Flanagan has criticised the Gardai's position on the matter, telling the Irish Daily Mirror that: "I am deeply unhappy with the proposals to create a new road traffic offence with on the spot fines to penalise drivers who fail to carry these items in their cars while driving. It does not appear to me to be an appropriate use of scarce Garda time that officers may soon be expected to search cars to ensure drivers have a working torch, breakdown triangle, high-visibility vest, first-aid kit and a fire extinguisher at all times while driving.
"Frankly it is impractical on some occasions to have that much equipment whilst you are out doing the shopping. The new proposals are excessively intrusive and look like the latest case of the nanny state gone overboard in its dealing with ordinary motorists. They are being chased out of our cities by county hall bureaucrats and now must face what is in the views of most sane people an excessively intrusive set of new rules. Road safety is important and should be respected but driving a car should not attract as many rules and regulations as taking a space-rocket to the moon. Excessive legislation and regulation possesses the real potential to damage relations between the Gardai and law abiding motorists who will start to feel they are being picked upon if they don't have fire equipment in the car."
Other critics include the AA, which has suggested that making drivers carry a fire extinguisher could encourage 'have-a-go heroes' to try to tackle a fire which should be best left to professionals to deal with - a point which the RSA raised in its consultation document.
For now, it's all in proposal land. Speaking to UTV News, a spokesperson for the Department of Transport said: "The Minister and the Department work closely with the RSA and Gardaí in the interest of developing policy that will enhance road safety and help reduce the number of deaths on our roads. The measure will be considered within that context when proposals, in respect of the matter, are made from the RSA. Any new compulsory requirements will, of course, need to be justified on safety grounds."