Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

I support many of the points made by Deputy Shortall, particularly with regard to random testing, my main area of concern. The Bill refers to giving a person the power to oblige employees to provide samples and refers to "reasonable grounds for suspicion". From outside, it seems reasonable to discuss such matters, but as we know the difficulty is that there has been a poisoned relationship in the railway sector between management and many of the workers. There has been a public perception and a worry that this element of the Bill would be used by a less than perfect management as a tool of harassment or bullying. This concern has been expressed to me.

Random drug and alcohol tests are a violation of civil rights. The Minister mentioned the workers in Connex but the only other workers whom I know of who are subject to such tests are those in the Defence Forces. I am uncomfortable with this. I was also uncomfortable with the fact that the last Minister for Transport was pushing the notion of this random testing. As other speakers noted, there is no evidence to suggest that in the past 30 years, drugs or alcohol have been involved in any railway accident. That is not to say there might be such involvement in the future but it seems odd that this legislation supposedly had to be rushed through. The issue of random testing seemed to jump out at one. I did not get an answer from the Minister as to his reasons for its proposed introduction.

I object to random testing because of the thought process behind it. Such testing is invasive, and doubt hangs over its effectiveness. Driver fatigue is a bigger issue but it did not arise in any of the discussions. It certainly was not raised by the Minister. However, people who work in this area regularly talk about the long hours involved.

Random drug testing removes the assumption of innocence because the person subjected to the test must prove he is innocent by providing a clear sample. Where random drug testing is carried out, the person giving the sample is forced to strip and urinate into a cup in the presence of an observer to prevent cheating. I welcome the fact that the Minister has in mind a partnership approach with the unions and I hope that is not the type of random testing that will be undertaken. It would create major difficulties and human resources problems.

Random drug testing can also disclose information of a personal medical nature. It can inform an employer if an employee is on medication for a heart condition, epilepsy or other illnesses. It can also reveal if a female employee is pregnant, even if she is unaware of it and might not want to be aware of it. These are genuine and legitimate privacy concerns and the legislation has not taken sufficient account of them.

The test, if it produces a positive result, provides no evidence of present intoxication or impairment. It merely indicates that a person may have taken a drug at some time in the past. This issue arose in the United States. The American Civil Liberties Union has carried out a great deal of research on this issue in the face of attempts to spread random drug testing into the workplace and schools. Commonly used drug tests have yielded false positive results of between 10% and 30%, according to the ACLU.

I do not believe there is a problem with drug and alcohol abuse in the rail industry. There is probably a bigger problem with driver fatigue and people being forced to work long hours. Perhaps the Minister will explain the partnership approach further. It appears that this section has delayed the Bill. I welcome the fact that there are ongoing discussions with the unions on this matter because people have a genuine concern that we are moving into new territory. I do not know where this move originated. I await the Minister's comments.

See this speech in context