Debate contribution: Traffic Collision Sites: Privacy and Dignity

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on 8 December 2025.

MLA

Mrs Naomi Long

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

8 December 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Traffic Collision Sites: Privacy and Dignity

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5284992

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. This is a very important motion. I very much welcome the proposer of the motion tabling it and giving the Assembly an opportunity to condemn the sharing of images and videos of fatal road traffic collisions, which is an utterly deplorable practice. It is also a very important opportunity for us to show unity of purpose when it comes to something that can affect anyone at any time in our community. I commend the hard work of Road Victim Support Northern Ireland-Donegal, the O'Brien family and all the families who have campaigned to raise awareness of the issue and for the introduction of Caoimhe's law, named in honour of Caoimhe O'Brien, who was killed in a crash on the road between Derry and Strabane in October 2016. Caoimhe's mother, Marie O'Brien, has written to me: we have corresponded, and I hope to meet her soon as part of a round-table that we are organising to discuss a way forward. I have also been disgusted, frankly, to hear stories about bystanders photographing or recording images of fatal road accidents and subsequently sharing them on social media, without any thought or empathy for the impact on the families and friends of the victims. I thank Linda Dillon for her powerful intervention. Any road traffic death is traumatic, but it is especially cruel to have that trauma compounded by the capturing and distribution of images of the scene in the immediate aftermath, causing distress to families, survivors and others who may have previously been involved in road traffic collisions. It is difficult to imagine the pain experienced by family and friends who have lost a loved one in those circumstances only to have their dignity and privacy, and that of their loved one, violated by someone else's voyeurism — and you are right that it is voyeurism. Such images, when shared, can also trigger others who witnessed or were involved in serious road traffic collisions. There is no avoiding those videos once they go online: they will be there in perpetuity and will always turn up on people's feeds. I was deeply concerned to read about the experience of Fiona Ferris, who bravely stopped to provide CPR to Dominic McGrath after he was knocked down by a bus in Newry in December 2024. Despite the brave efforts of Ms Ferris and others, Mr McGrath sadly passed away at the scene. In the aftermath, it transpired that Mr McGrath's family had been sent a video recording of the scene, although, mercifully, it was received after the PSNI had informed the family of his death. Nonetheless, the callous nature of that type of recording, and the devastating impact that it can have, is clear. As Ms Ferris's brave testimony demonstrates, the recording and distribution of such images not only causes untold pain for the family of the deceased but has the potential to traumatise people and even discourage potential Good Samaritans who attend a scene from being willing to provide medical and first aid assistance. It is important that we ensure that that type of behaviour is discouraged and identify the best approaches for doing so. As proposed in the motion, one such approach could be the introduction of a specific offence prohibiting the recording and sharing of:

"images and videos of victims at the scene of a fatal or critical traffic collision without lawful authority or family consent".

A similar approach, as many Members noted, was adopted by the German Parliament in 2020. It is important to note that, whilst no equivalent offence exists in Northern Ireland, police recently charged an individual for that behaviour under the Communications Act 2003, which contains offences relating to offensive, malicious and nuisance communications. However, the clarity that would be provided by a change in legislation that makes it an explicit offence would, I think, be welcomed by all. Introduction of the proposed new offence would be novel and cut across the responsibilities of many Departments and organisations, including mine. Sadly, we continue to see lives lost on our roads in the most tragic circumstances. Every family that finds itself in that situation has my deepest sympathy and that of my Department. I would dearly like to see a future in which no family has to endure the loss of a loved one in that way. Whilst primary responsibility for road safety legislation lies with the Department for Infrastructure, my Department and I are working hard to ensure that sentences delivered in the courts reflect the seriousness of the related offences and the impact that they have on, and the sense of loss felt by, victims and their families. To that end, my sentencing Bill will deliver tougher sentencing by increasing the maximum penalty and minimum disqualification periods for the offences of causing death or serious injury by driving. It is important that Ministers work together across the Executive to find timely and effective solutions to these matters. Whilst the Department for Infrastructure has the main responsibility for road safety, enforcement of the related offences and penalties is often undertaken by police. In addition, telecommunications legislation, including the regulation of social media platforms, is reserved to Westminster, and, therefore, the responsibility lies with the UK Government. Indeed, it may be beneficial and even expeditious, following a more detailed consideration, for the Executive to agree collectively to write to the UK Government to determine whether it may be possible to legislate on a UK-wide basis on this issue given that it engages a reserved matter. I agree with the proposer of the motion that cross-border cooperation is important in this, and I am, therefore, happy to raise the matter with my Irish counterpart. As a first step, however, it is incumbent on us all as stakeholders, including DFI, the PSNI and social media organisations, to take a key role in the development of proposals. I am committed to ensuring that my Department engages on a cross-departmental basis, led by the Department for Infrastructure, to consider how best we might provide that support. Therefore, I have agreed to participate in a proposed round-table discussion, convened by Road Victim Support Northern Ireland-Donegal, with the Infrastructure and Health Ministers and other organisations, to consider appropriate measures to prevent the unauthorised recording and sharing of photos of road traffic collisions. It is my hope that, through discussions between all the interested parties, we will be able to identify an approach and a vehicle that will adequately respond to this most serious issue in a timely way, not least because, as John Blair and Stephen Dunne mentioned in their contributions, the videoing of such incidents is not just distressing but often accompanied by speculation that could undermine a police investigation and, where offences are detected, future prosecutions. In the meantime, I want to use the opportunity that we have been given today to appeal directly to the public to refrain from photographing or recording at the scene of road traffic collisions and to refrain from sharing such images without consent in order to avoid further trauma for victims and their families. I will restate what others have said: the only legitimate use of a phone at the site of a road traffic collision is to call the emergency services.

1,210 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:11 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification