As a former teacher of road safety and moderator of examinations in that subject, this is one of the most serious topics that the Assembly could debate. In my role as teacher — and since — I have mourned the deaths of pupils and past pupils, and I understand something of the grief of parents and families. Perhaps that is why I am disappointed that an amendment has been tabled and that all parties will not vote collectively on the motion. I understood that, following the St Andrews Agreement, all parties supported North/South bodies, increased co-operation between the PSNI and the Garda Síochána, the harmonising of penalty points and joint advertising on television. Deaths on the road know no political boundary. Members who are in the House and who are from the North have lost loved ones on roads in the South, and others who are from the South may have lost loved ones in the North. Those people will not understand the need for division.

Road deaths and serious injury in road accidents have haunted us since the Locomotives Act 1865 — known as the “red flag” Act — was passed. That restricted the speed of horseless carriages to 4 mph in the countryside and, believe it or not, to 2 mph in towns. The Act also required someone to walk in front of the carriage carrying a red flag, as the Act’s nickname implies. The Act was not repealed until 1896 following serious lobbying by the Royal Automobile Club (RAC), which subsequently organised the London to Brighton run in celebration at being allowed to speed.

Seven years after the “red flag” Act was passed, another road traffic Act made it an offence to be drunk in charge of a horse and cart or a horseless carriage. Today, unfortunately, speeding and drinking and driving are still two of the main reasons why so many people continue to lose their lives.

In modern times, road fatalities peaked in the mid-1970s, when 375 people in the North lost their lives. In 2006, the figure dropped from 150 to 125, which is good news. However, it provides no cause for celebration, especially for those families who are grieving for the loss of their loved ones. The Republic also reported its lowest number of road deaths for 40 years, but that figure fell far short of targets. A total of 500 people lost their lives on this island — that is not a cause for division.

In Britain, the number of fatalities last year was over 3,100, and, despite a proliferation of speed cameras and fixed cameras that affect over one million drivers each year, that figure has not fallen significantly. The Northern Ireland Assembly doubled the number of road traffic education officers from nine to 18. Presumably, they have had an impact in the schools and have contributed to road safety education. However, little has been heard of them in the public arena.

Looking beyond these islands, it is useful to note that France has had considerable success in reducing its road fatalities.

It is claimed that much of that success can be attributed to the French President, Jacques Chirac, who made road safety an election issue. The result is that road fatalities in France have been halved in three years. Scandinavian countries are also better than we are at dealing with road safety, and there is much to be learnt from them.

It is often pointed out that during the Troubles more people lost their lives on the roads than through violence. As Members know, enormous efforts were made by people from all over the world to solve our political problems and to identify the causes of those deaths. Enormous sums of money have been spent on security — perhaps billions of pounds. By contrast, much less has been done to bring an end to the slaughter on the roads, and precious little has been done to create an overarching body to deal with road safety issues.

I acknowledge the work of the Road Safety Council of Northern Ireland, which is unique to these parts. Believe it or not, the total resources of that body are a full-time chief executive, currently acting up, and one part-time member of staff. The new organisation in the Republic, the Road Safety Authority, has 309 full-time staff and the power to bring together all Government Departments with responsibility for road safety. No one can tell me that there is not a lot that we can learn from that. Is it not time that we had a similar body, with powers to knock heads together to make road safety the issue that it is in those countries where the death toll is considerably lower?

Over the Christmas period, there was a high-profile campaign about drinking and driving, yet a huge number of motorists were caught over the legal limit — some of them by a considerable margin. Unfort-unately, most of the publicity went to the police officers who, I regret to say, figured in the overall list. Little has been said about the others who were on the roads with excess alcohol in their systems. How many were caught the morning after, when they thought they were safe to drive? Can drinking and driving be viewed purely in isolation, when Members know that there is a serious problem relating to alcohol generally? That issue must be examined.

Reference has been made to the driving test, which, apart from the introduction of the theory section, has changed little over the years. New motorists have no experience of the horror of road accidents, and these are not simulated in any training programme. On the contrary, the test is no more than a meander through the suburbs, on routes that most candidates know like the backs of their hands. No part of the test is conducted on the motorways — or after nightfall, when the greatest number of young people lose their lives. After the test is passed, there is no follow-up to measure the new driver’s skills, attitude and progressive experience. There is the advanced driving test, but few take it. That does not apply to any other skills programme, where there is much less risk of causing death or of being killed. That must change. There must be a progressive programme to ensure that young people are nurtured through those difficult years and that they remain alive.

Let us hope that this debate lays a foundation stone upon which we can build a new approach to an issue that affects so many families and worries so many parents sick as they lie awake at night until their sons and daughters return safely. Many here understand what that is about. When I was young, I certainly did not understand it, but as a parent I do.

Together, North and South, we can create a new partnership and harness our experience, knowledge, and grief to follow the example of others and have this island talked about not for the number of people who are killed day and daily, but for our success in addressing a scourge that is largely ignored by the motor manufacturers. Some of the advertisements for leading manufacturers on television are a disgrace. They encourage decent young people to become boy racers. Someone must take control of that.

The insurance companies have a role to play as well. Young people might be more encouraged if they were charged a reasonable premium when they began an insurance policy so that they had something to protect, rather than being charged exorbitant premiums which would have no effect in the case of an accident.

Breweries also have a role to play. If there were fewer happy hours and promotions, fewer young people might be goaded into doing the wrong thing. Many people — and I have named some of them — are making vast fortunes out of motoring and motor sport, but they contribute little to protecting those who end up in the morgues awaiting identification by distraught relatives.

The fatalities for 2007 have already begun, and, in fact, one of them was from my constituency. Let us hope that a new Assembly — which I expect at the end of March — will give top priority to making improved road safety essential. We can do it, and I hope that it can be achieved collectively with the co-operation of all parties.