asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce what measures are available to ensure the roadworthiness of secondhand cars offered for sale.
109.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Car Sales and Servicing.
108.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if any action in the public interest has been taken by his Department following the "7 Days" report on the servicing of cars.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I shall take Questions Nos. 108 and 109 together.
My Department have no specific function in relation to the roadworthiness of cars, new or second-hand. In general, the sale of cars comes within the Sale of Goods Act, 1893, so that it would be an offence for a seller to describe a car or any other article falsely as in good condition if it were not so; but as far as my Department is concerned there is no prohibition on the sale of cars not in good condition. As regards servicing of cars, it would be very difficult if not impossible to devise effective legislation to ensure that services are carried out satisfactorily.
There are provisions in the Road Traffic Acts for which the Minister for Local Government is responsible, related to roadworthiness of vehicles.
Did I hear the Minister say that the sale of cars comes within an Act of 1893?
That is so.
Since there were no cars at that time, how could that Act be applicable today?
The Deputy should put down a question.
The Minister is being helped.
Also, does the Minister not consider it a frightening position that cars can be sold which are not roadworthy thereby affording no protection whatsoever for road users? Legislation to deal with this matter is needed urgently.
There is a considerable amount of legislation regarding the protection of people on the roads.
Is there any guarantee under the law to people buying secondhand cars that these vehicles are roadworthy?
I have replied to the questions put down.
Is it not ludricous in this context to refer to an Act of 1893. This is a very important matter. Yet, the Minister was prepared to make that stupid statement.
Evidently, the Deputy does not know very much about the 1893 Act.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce knows little about it and, like his colleague who has just left the Chamber, cares little either.
The Deputy is commenting on a particular section of an Act of 1893 but he does not know what that Act contains.
The Act was quoted by the Minister who was stupid enough to do so.
The Deputy has not a clue as to what is contained in the Act.
The Minister should be ashamed to stand up here and display such stupidity and the Minister for Finance is equally bad for taking his part.
The Deputy should not pass remarks like that.
I am appalled at such stupidity.
What is in the 1893 Act? Would the Minister for Finance like to answer that?
In another capacity, I should be very happy to do so.