Comment & Analysis: While road deaths and injury collisions involving motorists have spiked this year, there has been a classic moral panic against e-scooters and the winner is not road safety but the Government, which has been allowed to pretend that it is acting on road safety. Im in a better position to say this than most, as Im not exactly a fan of e-scooters. But I still think the undue attention they have received, at a time when road deaths were increasing, shows it was more political pantomime than real road safety action. On face value, as just a road safety measure, its not logical and doesnt make sense. The effectiveness of e-scooter users not wearing bicycle-like helmets and high-vis is questionable, especially when most e-scooters can travel way beyond the speed bicycle helmets are designed for, and the main problem with e-scooters in the first place was the lack of enforcement of widespread use of illegal devices. So, again, that doesnt make sense. But not only have fines for not wearing personal protective equipment been set at 100, the fines for all e-scooter offences have also been increased from 80 to 100.If we care about road safety overall, how does acting on this in isolation make any sense when far more serious offences for motorists have lingered at 60 or 80 (plus penalty points) for years or decades? Dont tell me the points make up for it as if the fines have not decreased in value since they were first introduced; the points were also always there. Again, it does not make any sense. The following are examples of motoring offences that have less than 100 fines:Driving a vehicle on a motorway against the flow of traffic 80 + 2 pointsFailure to obey traffic lights 80 + 3 pointsDriving on a footpath or cycle track 60 + 1 pointFailure to obey traffic rules at railway level crossing 80 + 2 pointsUsing a vehicle with defective or worn tyres 80 + 2 pointsProceeding beyond no entry to vehicles sign 60 + 1 pointParking a vehicle in a dangerous position 80 + 3 pointsFailure to drive on the left-hand side of the road 60 + 2 pointsDangerous overtaking 80 + 3 pointsFailure to yield right of way at a yield sign/yield line 80 + 3 pointsIllegal entry onto a one-way street 60 + 1 pointThe fines for a range of motoring offences have been increased in recent years including speeding and holding a phone but why were they not all increased given inflation alone? So, yeah, if the Governments position is that fines are a deterrent, all of this still doesnt make sense. Even with the data being used to act on e-scooters its based on childrens hospital data, and the number of children in ICU beds due to scooter collisions. Its shocking. But the action of increasing the ban on under 16s to under 18s does not make any sense, as childrens hospitals are for under 16-year-olds (who were already banned from using e-scooters), and the main problem was parents buying them and then a lack of enforcement. I previously ran the headline: Please make it make sense: A 16-year-old will be able to drive a tractor or a 90km/h+ light motorcycle, but not a scooter locked to 20km/h. In response to this, some people said, but they are tested. The problem with this is that 16-year-olds are legally allowed to drive farm vehicles on the road when they have just passed the theory test for a general provisional learner permit. Thats not much of a test to be able to drive something as powerful as a tractor anywhere. Again, you guessed it, it does not make any sense. Then yesterday we had the Irish Independent reporting that the Road Safety Authority (RSA) has said that theres not enough data to justify the introduction of NCT-type tests for tractors and other agricultural vehicles. The newspaper reports this despite RSA data showing that only 20% of tractors pass roadside inspections. Sense has left the building a long time ago.This is the Government which scrapped default (not blanket) 30km/h speed limits in urban areas the very least they could have done is mandated 30km/h at the front of every school, but they did not even do that, and many councils are going a lot of effort to put on a show by putting in tiny town centre 30km/h zones and putting 30km/h limits in front of some schools but not others for no reason that makes any sense. To be clear: Main roads were excluded from the plan before it was watered down to a shadow of what was planned.This is also the Government, which is slowly and silently defunding active travel which includes not just cycle lanes but the bulk of the yearly allocation to projects such as raised zebra crossings and safe routes to schools. And within nearly every active travel project, there are traffic calming measures which make streets and roads safer.The only thing that makes sense here is that the Government is not really interested in road safety. Sean Canney, Minister of State at the Department of Transport with responsibility for road safety and also too many other things to be focused on it, has become a bit of a target in this regard I dont think road safety is advanced by having him in that position, but theres also collective cabinet responsibility. The blame can be shared across Government. Populism ahead of saving lives and limbs seems to make sense to them.