Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I welcome to the Committee Chris, Adrian and Pat. I seek agreement from members that the evidence session be recorded by Hansard.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I invite the departmental officials to make an opening statement, and then, I am sure, there will be some questions from members. We are in your hands, Chris.

Dr Chris Hughes (Department for Infrastructure): Chair and members, thank you for the opportunity to brief the Committee. Chair, you did not ask, but I promise that I will be brief. We have covered the subject before. I acknowledge, as I do at the start of a session on road safety, the people who have lost their lives on the roads this year. To set the context for the consideration that we are going through, graduated driver licensing (GDL) is one of the measures that is here to prevent deaths on our roads. This morning, I did the unfortunate thing that I too frequently do when I appear in front of the Committee: cross out the number in front of me and write a higher number. Twenty-four people have died on the roads this year. We were last here 11 weeks ago. Since then, 17 people have died. Since I was last sitting in front of you, there have been 17 more deaths — more than one a week. We had a road safety forum meeting with a PSNI representative. The police are the custodians of the statistics. This year has been the worst start to a year in 18 years. We have people dying on our roads at, frankly, a horrific rate. They are a mixture of drivers, passengers, pedestrians, motorcyclists and vulnerable road users. There have been five deaths this year among those aged 16 to 24. That is the way that the stats are collated. We are losing people in that age group at a rate of more than one a month. On the impact of GDL, the notion is that somebody should do something about this. The "somebody" are the people sitting round this table collectively, and among the "something" is GDL.

Chair, I have no more to say. You know the issues. We will hand over to you for questions.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. Thank you very much, Chris, for that brief opening statement. I reflect the fact that the Committee is completely aligned with the view that you have shared today that road safety is a priority for the Minister. Anything that can be done on road safety is worthwhile. The Committee has been genuinely supportive of GDL. As you will be more than aware, we had our issues about how it was introduced in the Assembly and the method by which people learned about it. Notwithstanding that, that is not what we are here to talk about today.

As for how this is embedding, since your last meeting with us, we have heard concerns from the Northern Ireland Approved Instructors Council (NIAIC) and the Driving Instructors Association (DIA). They have said — I think that this is a fair summary— that they did not feel properly consulted. Let us park that for a second. We agree that that is not something that we can go back on. They also have concerns about how prepared they will be for the deadline in October. What level of confidence does the Department have that driving instructors across Northern Ireland will have enough time to make the necessary adjustments? What level of confidence do you have that we will be ready for October?

Mr Pat Delaney (Driver and Vehicle Agency): In the Driver and Vehicle Agency, we are very confident that we will be ready for 1 October. Remember that 1 October is the date on which GDL will be introduced. The first new driving test on GDL will not take place until 1 April 2027, so we have a significant amount of time to get to that point. It is critical that the legislation be in place before the summer recess to enable us to achieve the 1 October deadline. The risk register that I hold for the introduction of GDL has only one red risk on it, and that is the legislation. That is only there because it is outside of my control. I can do absolutely nothing about that. That is the reason why it is such a high-level risk. All the other risks are manageable, and they have been mitigated. We have developed a communications plan that will involve NIAIC, DIA and all other stakeholders. There is an internal plan. We are holding GDL stakeholder meetings, and the next one is tomorrow.

Following the last session just before Easter with NIAIC, DIA and the insurance company, Mr Dunne very helpfully issued a question for written answer, AQW 43205/22-27, that evening, asking what sort of engagement we had had prior to the announcement and what engagement there had been since the announcement. The Minister provided the answer to Mr Dunne on 15 April. You followed that up with a substantially similar question last week, and I have just drafted the answer to that, which will issue from the Minister in due course. It sets out how much engagement there was with NIAIC both before and after the announcement. There has been substantial engagement, and that will ramp up over the next number of weeks and months. We will meet NIAIC every month, and we will issue it with newsletters. We have a draft newsletter to go to all MLAs. Hopefully, that should be with all of you in the next few days. We will have a dedicated advertising campaign. We have already engaged with the communications company, and I have seen the first iteration of the television advertisement that will be used for the purposes of introducing GDL. All of that, along with a very strong digital presence across the Department and across all our nidirect channels and engagement with road safety partners, means that we are absolutely confident that we will be able to deliver GDL on 1 October 2026.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thanks, Pat. You mentioned that the risks are manageable and can all be mitigated. In your substantial discussions with NIAIC and DIA, have they raised any issues with you that sit outside what you described as manageable risks? In those meetings, have they said that it is all fine and that they will be ready for 1 October? Are any concerns being flagged up to you?

Mr Delaney: The issues that they are raising are practical ones, which is what we expected anyway. The Minister's announcement on 27 January was essentially a strategic direction as to when we will implement GDL. We are now in delivery operations, and we are engaging with NIAIC and others. The questions that they are asking are practical ones about how the programme of training will be implemented. We have brought them in and have given them one-to-one sessions. We have talked them through a module of the programme of training, how that will operate in practice and what it will mean for them as driving instructors. That process has started, and they are engaging with that. That will continue for the next four or five months. We are very hopeful that, by that stage, all driving instructors will have all the information that they need to enable them to commence training new young drivers, mostly, from 1 October on GDL.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. That is fine. I have one practical question — as you said, that is the sort of territory that we are probably in now. It relates to parents in the training and signing-off process of GDL, with particular regard to the logbook. We have had raised with us concerns about whether non-professionals, of whom I am one — I am a parent and will be doing this in two years' time — will use the logbook in the right way, and whether it is appropriate that they will be involved. My understanding — correct me if I am wrong — is that the logbook can be signed off by anyone, not necessarily a driving instructor. The appropriateness of that, to a degree, has been raised with the Committee. I am not sure whether you want to comment on that.

Mr Delaney: Yes, sure. Trust-based compliance systems, underpinned by legal consequences, are not new. They exist across the public and private sector. Some of you may be filling in tax self-assessments; others may be filling in agricultural subsidy forms; others may be having to complete a medical declaration for their driving licence; and I imagine that all of you are completing a mileage and expenses claim. Trust-based systems are not new. They underpin GDL in every jurisdiction. We have a mixture of professional driving instructors and supervising drivers. That is the law in the UK. The provision has to be made for both of those. We want the parents or the driving instructor to take the candidate through their driving. The programme of training is the candidates' programme of training. They have to complete that, and the assessment has to be done by the driving instructor or the parent.

This was touched on in great detail in September 2014 during an Environment Committee evidence session. A lot of these questions were raised then. Most people are compliant with the law. According to the evidence that was given to the Environment Committee by Inspector Leech from the PSNI, 90% of people comply with the law. We are working on the basis that, given that GDL is so important, it is the parents — it will largely be the parents for younger drivers — who will be the guardians of this. They will insist that the programme of training is completed and that the logbook is properly signed off. Chair, you said that you will be doing this in a couple of years' time. I imagine that you will be assiduous in making sure that, if you are doing it, your children will have completed that module.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): My wife will make sure of that; I have no doubt.

Mr Delaney: That is exactly what we have in the legislation. The responsibility is for parents, guardians and instructors. This is not something new. However, if it is misused or abused — if we detect forgery or falsification — that is a criminal offence and may result in the revocation of the driving licence or in other penalties, including the invalidation of their insurance, potentially. There are, therefore, underpinning consequences. We are looking for moral accountability, respect for the law and long-term compliance. We have done our work on this — we did it previously. We are hoping to promote responsibility over surveillance, trust over coercion, education over punishment and culture over compliance.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): You have practised those. [Laughter.]

I will stay on signing off on the logbook for a second. You mentioned the consequences of forgery of the logbook. How would that be assessed? Whose job would it be to look at that and say, "That looks dodgy"?

Mr Delaney: That has changed slightly since we the original legislation back in 2016. At that time, we were looking at a hard copy logbook, with an actual signature. It will now be —

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): An app.

Mr Delaney: — on an app, yes. The app will require the candidate driver to invite their ADI — a share code will be given — or their supervising driver —.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Sorry, "IDI"?

Mr Delaney: No, ADI — approved driving instructor. The ADI will be invited to be their supervising driver. That person holds a driving licence, so we know exactly who that person is, because they have already complied with our identity verification checks in order to get their driving licence. When they are invited on to the candidate's app and are signing off the logbook, we know who they are. Forgery is not so much an issue now, because we are not looking at handwritten copies. We have a digital identity audit trail of who is doing what.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK, that is fine. I may have a couple more questions, but I do not want to hog it.

Mr Stewart: Thanks again, gents. These sessions are always very informative, and you have given very good evidence in respect of this. I appreciate the work that you have done to date. It would be remiss of us not to note the tragedies on our roads. We appreciate the intent of this and, collectively, we want to make sure that it is right. That is certainly the engagement that I have been getting from driving instructors up and down the country, particularly in my constituency. Being the professionals that they are, they see this as a cornerstone of increasing road safety and having better drivers on our roads, particularly among young people. It would also be remiss of me not to say that many of them still feel that there is real ambiguity around the process.

Today has been eye-opening, even around the app and the supervision. However, instructors keep asking me when they are going to find out how all this is going to work and when they will get their training. What is the time frame over the next six months before 1 October, and how will that process be rolled out, so that advanced driving instructors and other driving instructors are going to be fully informed about and fully aware of what is going to happen? Maybe the comms are going out, but they are not trickling down to the men and women who deliver driving instruction at this moment.

Mr Delaney: The stakeholder engagement began shortly after the Minister's announcement with NIAIC, the umbrella organisation. Since then, we have been in contact with information and mass emails to every driving instructor informing them of this. We will continue to do that over the next number of months, and we will be inviting driving instructors to our headquarters to take them through the end-user experience, so that they can see exactly what that is. We will be making those materials available. I understand driving instructors' frustrations at this point that they do not know as much as they would like to know. They will know everything that they need to know about it by the time that this is introduced on 1 October. I ask you to give your constituents and those driving instructors that assurance that they will know everything that they need to know in order to be able to teach new drivers after 1 October under the new GDL regulations.

Mr Stewart: That is good to know, and those who are watching will be glad to hear that. They are getting questions from new drivers and from people who are getting their licence. You may be aware of a letter that the Committee received from NIAIC setting out some of its concerns up to this week. The first one that I picked up on was to do with the transition and the fact that, effectively, there will be a two-tier system for them. They will be teaching drivers who will qualify for a licence before 1 October and others who will qualify after 1 October. Is that right? They will be training new drivers in one system one minute, and their next lesson will be in another system. They believe that that may lead to a two-tier driving instruction system. Do you share any of their concerns that they have about different instruction techniques and the confusion that that might lead to? How might that best be managed?

Mr Delaney: Again, that was covered before the Road Traffic (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2016; that was one of the issues. There will always be a transition period, which, for this, will be six months. During that time, the driving test will be the same up to 31 March. The instruction will be different. Some of the candidates who have entitlement from 1 October will be trained how to drive using GDL and will have to complete the programme of training and the logbook, and will not be able to take their test for the first six months. We will cover that in the information that we are making available to driving instructors, so they will know that. Transition is always going to be difficult. It is never straightforward. There will be some wrinkles along the way, and we will iron those out. Generally speaking, however, this will get us from 1 October to 31 March reasonably painlessly. We will make sure that driving instructors have that information. A lot of the other things that are in the letter that the Committee received from NIAIC we had already covered back in 2014 and 2015. Those concerns are not new to us.

Mr Stewart: I appreciate that those concerns are not new to you, but they may well be new to those instructors who were not even in the industry when this was consulted on a decade ago. If they were not aware of the process that existed when the legislation was passed back in 2016, it is probably being raised in their mind for the first time now. That is my point. Do you share any of their concerns about the impact of test backlogs on pre-GDL learners, given that we know that there have been issues? NIAIC has told the Committee:

Can you give us an assurance that that will not be the case?

Mr Delaney: Generally speaking, it takes 20 hours of tuition for someone to be ready for a test, which ties in with the six-month transition period, so we are asking whether that could be supplemented by parents or supervising drivers as well as by paid tuition. At the end of March of this year, the average waiting time for a driving test across the network was 32 days against a business plan target of 35 days, so we are in and around six weeks of a waiting time.

It is not necessary for them to do this, but we may see an increase in the number of people applying for the driving test before 1 October. That does not have an impact on anybody until 31 March next year. The only people on whom it will have an impact are those who get an entitlement from 1 October when they get their licence, so we may see an increase in the number of people applying before then. Perversely, GDL could result in fewer applications in the latter part of this financial year, because those who get their entitlement from 1 October will not be able to do their test until 1 April next year.

I do not foresee there being an issue with lengthening waiting times. To mitigate the possibility, however, we advertised on Monday past for new driving examiners. Those new examiners will fill the vacancies that we have in the system, but we will have a supply list just in case, and, if needed, we can draw from that supply list to supplement what we have in order to minimise waiting times further down the line.

Mr Stewart: That is good to know. I am sure that NIAIC will be keen to do that. Effective oversight should mean that there will not be any impact. We are not going to be a situation in which someone who has gone through the old system is going to have to begin an entirely new process.

Mr Delaney: I will apply a caveat.

Mr Stewart: Please do.

Mr Delaney: If someone fails their test at the end of March next year, and the earliest opportunity for another test is after 1 April, they will be captured by GDL.

Mr Stewart: Talk about putting pressure on pressure. I remember how stressful I found my driving test to be. If I were to be told today that if I failed my test, I would have to go back to the start under a brand new system for a brand new licence —.

Mr Delaney: I am sure that the driving examiner was more afraid of you. [Laughter.]

Mr Stewart: That is true. You have not seen me driving. [Laughter.]

It is therefore right for NIAIC to flag that, as there may well be a situation in which we see people having to go back to square one.

Mr Delaney: That scenario is an outlier. We do not expect it to happen, but it is a possibility.

Mr Stewart: No problem. My final question is a geographical one. The issue does not affect people in my area, but the requirement for motorway driving has been raised with me. Some people, and their driving instructors, live 40, 50 or 60 miles from a motorway.

Mr Delaney: There is no such requirement.

Mr Stewart: It was Maolíosa who raised that. There is a requirement for people to drive on a dual carriageway but none at all to drive on a motorway.

Mr Delaney: Motorway driving is an optional module in the training programme. It is optional because of where motorways are located in this part of the world. For example, people cannot easily access a motorway from Enniskillen. There are dual carriageways and stretches of roads with overtaking lanes on which people can drive up to the posted speed of 60 mph. That is not to say, however, that a lesson or a test will involve driving at that speed. The instructor or supervising driver needs to be aware of the road conditions and instruct the driver to drive at the appropriate speed. There is therefore no requirement for motorway driving. It is optional under GDL, but if someone wishes to take lessons with a driving instructor — only a driving instructor — on the motorway, they can do so.

Mr Stewart: That was the question that I was coming to. I was aware that it is optional, but it is optional for the candidate. The candidates decide whether they want to do it. The instructor cannot say, "I feel that, in the interests of road safety, it would be best to get you on the motorway".

Mr Delaney: The instructor could suggest that, but, yes, the candidate would need to agree. It is not mandatory.

Mr Stewart: No problem. Thanks, gents.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I will bring in Stephen in a second, but, following what John asked, I have a question. Pat, can you give me a ballpark figure for how many driving tests are taken every month in Northern Ireland?

Mr Delaney: Overall, there are around 6,000 a month. That is in private cars. The figure for the whole of last year was 70,023.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. You are talking about a ballpark figure of 6,000 a month.

Mr Delaney: That is for all categories, not just category B.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. If it were for just category B, the figure would drop.

Mr Delaney: Yes, the figure would drop.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Roughly, what percentage of people pass their test?

Mr Delaney: It is 57%.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): I am trying to quantify what John was driving at. If the 6,000 figure therefore drops to 5,000 —.

Mr Delaney: It is not as high as that for category B.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Give me a ballpark figure.

Mr Delaney: About 4,500.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Give me the percentage again.

Mr Delaney: It is 57% or 58%.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK. If young people do their test in March 2027 and fail it, they will be moved on to the GDL scheme and cannot do their test for a year. Is that right? Based on those figures, roughly 2,500 people will be affected. Is that right?

Mr Delaney: To be absolutely clear about the process, Chair, if they fail their test in March, they will move on to the GDL scheme. They do not have to wait six months. They will move on to the GDL scheme to do the programme of training and complete the logbook, after which, because they will have held their licence for longer than six months by that stage, they can apply for the test.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): OK.

Mr Delaney: Potentially.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Once they have completed those two aspects, they can take their test again.

Mr Delaney: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Great. That clarification is useful.

Mr Dunne: Thank you, folks, for your presentation and your answers so far. In February, Pat, you said that you were very confident that you would have everything in place by 1 October. Do you still have that same level of confidence?

Mr Delaney: After conversations with my team yesterday, I have a higher level of confidence.

Mr Dunne: OK. On 5 April, the Minister said in a press article that she acknowledges that there is still work to be done to ensure that the time frame is met, but I appreciate your confidence about that. The sector —.

Mr Delaney: The work on the legislation is probably to be done in this room. That is really the only red risk that I have on the risk register. Work on the other risks, which relate to the IT platform, the app and the materials, is almost complete.

Mr Dunne: OK. The sector is keen to see more of that confidence. It is fair to say that some members have already engaged with different bodies, including instructors. I know that there have been media articles on the sector's readiness, but we acknowledge and note that you are actively working to achieve that readiness, and we encourage you to continue to do so, particularly around engagement. You referred to 2014, and I appreciate that you may not have been in post then. Youth Assembly Members told us that they were not even born when those things were being considered. There is therefore a feeling that there has been a lack of consideration of the views of young drivers. I appreciate, however, that there is a need to make progress, and that is why we support in principle anything that will improve road safety.

Mr Delaney: Tomorrow, we will have one of our major stakeholder engagement sessions, at which we will bring together stakeholders such as NIAIC, the DIA, the PSNI and road safety organisations. They will all come together tomorrow, either in person at Hydebank or online. The purpose of that major stakeholder engagement session is to educate the industry.

Mr Dunne: OK. That is positive to hear. I encourage you to keep at that. Some concerns have been raised about the potential unintended consequences of the legislation for both learners and instructors, including concerns to do with legalities and liabilities. The module issue in particular has been highlighted. Have you any thoughts on that?

Mr Delaney: The issue with the legality of the logbook was addressed in the correspondence from the Association of British Insurers (ABI) to the Committee. There is no legal basis for that concern.

Mr Dunne: Yes, I read that, but that feeling is still out there. Where information is perhaps in a vacuum, that concern can often be accelerated —.

Mr Delaney: We have made it clear to NIAIC and others that that issue will be addressed.

Mr Dunne: I imagine that it may well come up tomorrow.

Mr Delaney: We will cover the fact that there is no basis for that concern in our update newsletter. You are right to say that such issues did come up previously. It is just a matter of reiterating points to stakeholders and making sure that everyone is aware of them.

Mr Dunne: About the liability?

Mr Delaney: About the liability, yes. There is no liability.

Mr Dunne: You have no concerns.

Mr Delaney: We have no concerns.

Mr Dunne: OK. Insurance premiums were also talked about. One of the positives was potentially the impact on insurance costs. Has anything more been done on that since February, when we last talked?

Dr Hughes: Any impact that graduated driver licensing will have on insurance premiums will be a by-product. As I set out at the start, the main thrust of introducing GDL is to prevent collisions, deaths and injuries. Reducing insurance premiums has never been central to our consideration of graduated driver licensing. Rather, it is about saving lives. It did come up as a side issue, and it is relevant to people, because money matters.

To be clear, the evidence that the Association of British Insurers gave and what we have been saying all along are exactly the same, which is that, in the long term, GDL may have an impact on insurance premiums if it reduces the number of collisions and deaths, all other things being equal. The witness from the ABI made the point very well when describing push-and-pull factors. It is a complex, moving thing, so to keep it simple, more collisions and more deaths will, all things being equal, result in more insurance claims, and that will exert an upward pressure on insurance costs. Although the world does not work in this way, fewer collisions and fewer deaths may, in due course, exert a downward pressure on insurance costs.

That was the experience in Wales. Whenever it brought in a 20 mph limit, which reduced the number of collisions, that happened as a consequence. It does not necessarily mean that that will happen, because, as you know, we have seen changes in the world, and, as the witness from the ABI set out, a bumper that was a lump of plastic 15 years ago now has sensors, cameras and all sorts of other sophisticated things. That cost independently can go up, so look at it in this way: all things being equal, fewer collisions and fewer deaths, resulting in fewer claims, is likely to exert a downward pressure on insurance costs, while more collisions and more deaths will definitely exert an upward pressure on insurance costs, if other changes in the world do not happen. If we do not do anything, and people continue to die at high rates, apart from the social cost, there will be a financial cost, because an upward pressure will be exerted. It may therefore be a side-effect. Hopefully, that has clarified for you where we are at.

Mr Dunne: I appreciate that. I have a couple of final points to make. There have been discussions about how the mandatory six-month transition period may have the unintended consequence of engagements with instructors being reduced. Candidates who feel that they are up to speed will have to wait a number of months and will therefore not have that close engagement leading up to their test. Have you any thoughts on that point?

Mr Delaney: I am not sure that that is what happens in practice even now. As I said earlier, on average, it takes 20 lessons for someone to be ready for their test. Our advice to driving instructors has always been, "Only apply for the test when your candidate is ready so that those lessons that come after the point at which you feel that they are ready for test are reinforcing the learning as opposed to providing them with new learning". One of the reasons for introducing GDL was to get away from what is called the "crash course" — an unfortunate term — where individuals took intensive driving lessons over just a couple of weeks. Yes, they were mechanically and technically competent to drive a car, but they may not have driven in the rain, at night or on an icy road, so they were not safe drivers. We want to get away from that happening so that learning happens in a structured way over a period to reinforce good practices, particularly around attitude and behaviour, so that people understand what it is that they are feeling when they are on the road and how that affects their behaviour when driving a vehicle.

Mr Dunne: For clarity, does the theory test as it is today change?

Mr Delaney: No.

Mr Dunne: Does it stay exactly as it is? Do people still go into the city centre or wherever on their seventeenth birthday or whenever to sit it? When can —?

Mr Delaney: The rules around the theory test have not changed. As soon as people have entitlement, they can —.

Mr Dunne: They can book it on their seventeenth birthday.

Mr Delaney: Yes, they can book their test then

Mr Dunne: The six-month transition period therefore does not have an impact. Thank you, folks.

Mr McReynolds: I have been ticking off questions that I had, based on the excellent evidence that the Committee has received today. Thank you very much for that. It has been really informative, concise and clear. That demonstrates the importance of officials being so accurate.

I am very supportive of GDL. I chair the all-party group on road safety. I am on the Policing Board, so I speak with Sam Donaldson fairly frequently, so I get the importance of GDL. The impact of GDL is going to take time to see. Hopefully, further down the line, it will bear fruit in the number of lives saved and such things. You mentioned, Chris, that this is the worst start to a year in 18 years on our roads.

Dr Hughes: Yes.

Mr McReynolds: A big thing for me is the education of young people. It is about really targeting people so that, in a lot of respects, they get it almost subconsciously. When I was a councillor, I went along to the road safety shows at Belfast City Council and other events. The Committee has received a response from the Minister of Education about our request to get road safety on to the curriculum. Is there merit in doing that so that, as young minds make their way through the education system, they become conscious of road safety, instead of, hopefully, GDL making that apparent to them once they hit 17 or 18? Is there merit in starting that education at a younger age?

Dr Hughes: I am not the only Department of Education alumnus in the room. I worked there for almost 10 years. There is a lot of pressure to add all sorts of things to the curriculum, including CPR and learning how to swim. I was not surprised by the proposal. The point to make about graduated driver licensing is that, when the young person has the maturity and understands the relevance, it takes them through that. The message cannot be reinforced early enough or often enough. I do not know whether road safety will feature in a curriculum review. My job in the Department was to try to get young people out the door with GCSEs in English, maths and three other subjects, which was a big challenge. When they will do GDL, they will mostly be ready for it, but, as young people become aware that those at the top of the school are doing GDL, it will become part of what happens, and there will be discussions about how it all works. My answer to your question is obviously yes, but I can understand why teaching about road safety did not make it through the jostle to get on to the curriculum.

Mr McReynolds: I did not know your background, Chris. That is really interesting.

Out of curiosity, is there anything else on road safety that we can do for young people during their formative years?

Dr Hughes: GDL is one aspect of what we can do about teaching road safety. Other aspects of road safety education are supported through primary schools and post-primary schools, including road safety calendars. Schools have discretion to teach about it. My wife worked in a school, and she would say, "On Friday, we got somebody to read the calendar", so it does come up.

I hope to appear in front of the Committee more often to talk about other issues on which we can do something. One such issue is mobile phones. Other jurisdictions have found that successful messaging around mobile phones involves young people applying pester power, in the same way as they used to do about smoking. They would say to their parents, "You're smoking, and I've heard in school that that's a bad thing". They can now say, "Don't use your mobile phone while driving, because I hear that that's a bad thing". In the same way as parents are custodians of GDL, young people can be custodians of challenging behaviours. There is a whole conversational dynamic to take place in a family about all of that. It should not happen in isolation. Rather, it should be part of the conversation as we deal with what are, frankly, grim figures.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thanks, Peter. Those were good questions.

No one else has indicated to ask a question. Pat, Chris and Adrian, thank you for coming along to the session. The Committee will have a good look at everything. I am conscious that Pat has a big red mark against the Infrastructure Committee on his risk register. We will take that as a badge of honour, Pat. Today's answers have been really useful and fairly informative.

We will not dwell on the past, but I would have loved this all to have happened over six months, with it all being ironed out before being announced. As you said at the start, Chris, the purpose of GDL is to reduce the number of road deaths. It is sobering to hear you say when you come to the Committee, "Since I was last here, this is how many people have died on our roads and how many families have been affected". That is a life-changing experience for them. I hope that I speak on behalf of the Committee when I say that we will welcome anything that reduces that number and support the introduction of such measures in the Assembly. As you are aware, we have to consider all your evidence, and that is what we will do. Thank you for your time today.

Mr Stewart: We appreciate it.

Mr Delaney: My preference would have been for GDL to be introduced on 1 July rather than 1 October, because my granddaughter will be 17 on 2 July. [Laughter.]

Mr Stewart: She will love to hear that.

The Chairperson (Mr Martin): Thanks very much, folks.