Vol. 742 No. 1
1 Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport when he intends to make a decision on the future of the three State airports following receipt of the three individual submissions from the airports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26787/11]
The State Airports Act 2004 provides the framework for the establishment of Shannon and Cork as independent airports. As part of the restructuring process at the time, the boards of Cork and Shannon airports were required to prepare business plans for eventual separation. These plans were necessary in order that the then Ministers for Transport and Finance could be satisfied as to the financial and operational readiness of the airport authorities before assets could be transferred.
While the three State airport authorities commenced work on the preparation of their business plans, with the Dublin Airport Authority, DAA, co-ordinating the process, a range of issues delayed separation. These included the need to build up the DAA's distributable reserves, the discussion on the allocation of debt to Cork in return for the transfer of assets on separation, the negotiation and implementation of measures to address Shannon's cost base and the funding of the DAA's capital investment programme. While some of these issues had been progressed in 2008, by then the impact of the global recession had begun to be strongly felt in the aviation sector.
In December 2008, the chairmen of the three airport authorities forwarded business plans to the then Minister and drew attention to the impact of the recession on the viability of airport separation. The Minister considered the business plans of the three airports and the opinions of the boards and accepted their overall conclusion that it would be best to defer the separation of the three airports. He took the view that it would be appropriate to provide a reasonable period to enable the boards and management of these airports to address the significant challenges facing the aviation market at the time. Accordingly, he decided to defer a decision on separation to 2011. The Government agreed to this proposal.
Pending a decision on separation, the boards of management of Cork and Shannon airports continued to carry out devolved responsibilities in respect of the day-to-day management, development and promotion of their respective airports with appropriate accountability to the DAA. Under these revised governance arrangements, the chairmen of the Cork and Shannon airport authorities have been appointed to the DAA board and DAA senior executives have been appointed to the boards of the Cork and Shannon airport authorities.
In May, I asked the boards of the three State airports for their opinions on the question of establishing Cork and Shannon as independent airports under the State Airports Act 2004. The three airports have responded and their submissions are being carefully examined. In the context of that examination, I am considering all available options for the future of Cork and Shannon airports. I hope to be in a position to make an announcement on the issue before the end of the year. The critical issue is that, with falling passenger numbers, both Cork and Shannon are loss making and would not be sustainable without the support of the DAA. Given the current financial position of the DAA, this cross-subsidisation is not sustainable in the long term.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Fianna Fáil wants to see three strong State airports. They should not be separated, as none could survive on its own. This is not merely a profit and loss situation. We must consider the airports from the perspective of regional development and their importance to tourism and jobs.
The Minister confirmed that he received the submissions from the three airports that he sought in May. When does he intend to consider the various boards' submissions fully and when will he make a public decision? Has he had a chance to examine the submissions yet?
I am interested to hear that Fianna Fáil is now against the separation of the three State airports, as it was that party's original policy. Was it properly thought through at the time? Was there ever a realistic prospect, given the fact that Cork and Shannon airports are losing so much money every year?
I favour separation and breaking up the DAA's monopoly, but this can only be done on a sustainable basis. There is no point in separating the airports only to see one or two of them going bust in a short period. Ideally, the decision must be made by the end of the year. There is no point in appointing boards in Cork and Shannon if separation is not to proceed. I have received submissions from Cork and Shannon airports and from the DAA. It will take time, study and consultation with politicians and interest groups in the region before a decision can be made.
2 Deputy Dessie Ellis asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport when the recommendations of the review of the proposed capital projects of metro north, BXD, the DART airport linkup and the DART underground will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26873/11]
As the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I have responsibility for policy and overall funding in respect of public transport. Following the establishment of the National Transport Authority, NTA, on December 2009, the implementation and development of infrastructure projects in the greater Dublin area, such as metro north, the DART underground, a DART link to the airport and Luas BXD, fall under the remit of the NTA.
Regarding Government policy on public transport investment, the comprehensive review of capital expenditure is under way. This review is being overseen by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and takes place against a background of new funding realities. It is examining capital programmes and projects, taking account of their overall economic impact and job creation potential. The level of funding available for public transport investment from 2012 to 2016 will depend on the outcome of this review. A major consideration for transport investment during the next five years will be the need to prioritise funding to protect investment made to date and to maintain high safety standards.
Regarding large public transport projects in the Dublin area, the availability of funding, both from the Exchequer and private sources, will be a key consideration in the capital review, as will the contribution to transport objectives, including the potential to add value to existing services and create employment. The outcome of the review should be available in the next few weeks.
We are still waiting on the review, but signals have been given out to the effect that metro west will not go ahead. There is merit in the idea that at least one of these projects should not be scrapped. The one that would deliver the most would be metro north. More than €200 million has been spent on these projects, some €150 million of that on metro north. This money was spent on consultants, architects, residents meetings, etc. The Minister has attended meetings, but I have attended more meetings about metro north than anyone.
I hope we do not go down the road of scrapping everything. It has been hinted that the DART link-up would be a better, more deliverable and less expensive project, but metro north would deliver the most jobs, have the most impact across the city and link the north and south sides with the airport, Ikea, Ballymun, DCU and new areas with large populations, such as Swords. Metro north would take traffic off the roads and create jobs along ancillary routes. We are in economically difficult times, but we must continue to create jobs via capital projects like metro north.
Metro west has not been scrapped. It still exists as a long-term project. The railway reservation will be maintained. It is not appropriate to spend more money on consultants, lawyers and so on if we must repeat the process in 15 years time, given that there is no visibility as to when the project can be funded.
I agree with the Deputy on metro north. It is very good project and would benefit my constituency enormously. I would love to be able to deliver it to my constituents during my term in office but it is the most expensive project by a mile and requires both private and public finances, neither of which are available, apparently, although this may change.
We will not do anything to prevent metro north, the DART underground and the Luas BXD line from going ahead in the future. If it is not possible for all, or any, of those projects to proceed during the term of this Government, we will ensure they get to the end-of-railway-order stage and have planning permission such that they will be shovel-ready when it is possible to proceed. We will protect the reservations to make sure nothing gets built in the way.
I hear what the Minister is saying. One certainly gets the impression that money will be a big problem. The Government is talking about raising €5 billion, some of which will go towards job creation. I am not necessarily saying I agree with the selling off of State assets — because I do not — but I believe this project would deliver a lot of jobs and benefits to the people of Dublin. I refer in particular to the link to Dublin Airport. Dublin is the only major city that does not have a rail link up to its airport.
I expressed my view previously that I would be in favour of the sale of State assets if the money could be reinvested in the economy. I would very much like to see that reinvestment in transport projects. If one considers the cost of metro north, for example, and to a lesser extent that of the DART underground, one will conclude that if we sold assets worth €5 billion, the only project the money would be invested in would be that project.
3 Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will clarify the expected cuts to Dublin Bus subvention rate after the next budget; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26925/11]
The funding of public service obligation, PSO, services is governed by public transport contracts between the National Transport Authority, NTA, and the three CIE subsidiaries. In 2011, Dublin Bus will receive, through the NTA, an estimated €72.4 million in Exchequer subvention.
Decisions on the overall level of subvention available for PSO services in 2012 will be made following the comprehensive review of expenditure currently being undertaken by Government. It is inevitable that, in the current fiscal environment, there will be a significant reduction in the level of subvention in 2012 and the following years. I support a continuation of the efforts by the company to improve its efficiency and reduce the costs of providing PSO services.
In 2000, the then Department of Public Enterprise produced a report on subvention. Dublin was ranked third lowest by comparison with other cities in terms of what it received. Its percentage was 4% while that for Bergen in Norway was 1.5% and that for Belfast was 2%. In Belfast 98% of revenue came from fares and in Dublin 96% of revenue came from fares. Dublin is the biggest city in Ireland and is supposed to be competing with the modern cities in Europe, yet its subvention is one of the lowest in Europe. Other cities have modern railways, bus services and other transport services, yet Dublin Bus has experienced cuts in the order of €60 million to €70 million over recent years. There is talk of certain projects not going ahead, yet the subvention is being cut.
Buses will be key to transport in Dublin in the coming years. Some 120 buses are gone. This is not good enough and we must think outside the box. I cannot accept that we must accept the troika's decisions in this regard such that we cannot invest in our bus and transport services. Investment is crucial because services are at full capacity at peak times and we cannot make further cuts. The next cuts will affect wages and staff. Does the Minister of State believe this will be the case?
There are no decisions made on the subvention that will be in place in the next few years. I have some sympathy with what the Deputy is saying about Dublin's subvention being one of the lowest in Europe. The Deloitte report on Dublin Bus showed it was a superbly run organisation. It offers a great service and has delivered for its customers. The Network Direct programme has proven to be very efficient. Noteworthy savings have been made in this regard. Given the economic circumstances, we have no choice but to re-examine this matter.
The percentage of subvention has not been defined but in the next few years other efficiencies will be achieved that I hope will help Dublin Bus. Many will be technology driven. We recently launched various technology tools that will help improve efficiency and increase the customer base. It is a question of doing this and then considering the cuts that will be necessary over the coming years. We are left in an unenviable position so we will have to achieve greater efficiencies. I am in favour of retaining as many services as possible.
Dublin Bus has already lost 120 buses and this has had an impact on efficiency. I had a meeting with Dublin Bus this morning about bus route Nos. 19 and 68. The cuts have had an impact and people are returning to their cars. The system is not efficient. We will face charges of up to €1 billion over the next five years under the Kyoto protocol if we do not honour the agreement, yet we are reducing the number of buses. Does the Minister of State not believe we should be retaining buses rather than reducing their number? If the next level of subvention will be such that there will be cuts to wages and staff, it will have an even greater impact. Does the Minister of State believe this will be the case?
We will try to retain the maximum number of services. In doing so, we will try to lower costs, drive more people onto the buses and create efficiencies so people will be more interested in using public transport. We will exploit every opportunity to encourage this and lessen the loss of services. Greater efficiencies are being achieved through Network Direct and there are greater interchanges. People are getting around more quickly than before. I have seen the reports myself and acknowledged the gains that have been made. Not everything is perfect but progress has been made. I am happy progress has been made. It is our intention to achieve what we must, unfortunately, achieve over the next two years but retain as many services as possible.
4 Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he is committed to funding the rural transport scheme in view of a recent value for money and policy review and the introduction of a new pilot scheme; when he intends to publish the value for money and policy review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26788/11]
There is recognition within the programme for Government of the importance of the rural transport programme. My Department is currently exploring efficiencies that can be achieved by bringing together aspects of HSE transport, school transport, the rural transport programme and other transport services. A study of a pilot scheme on the integration of transport services has been carried out and I intend to publish it shortly. A value-for-money and policy review of the rural transport programme has been completed. I have received a copy of this report, which I also intend to publish shortly, following consideration by the Government. The findings of both the value-for-money review and of the pilot scheme are being considered in the context of developing plans for the future delivery of integrated rural and local transport.
Unfortunately, no real answer has been provided to my question other than that a review is being carried out. The rural transport scheme is a very significant and important scheme, especially to smaller communities, from which I come myself. The scheme is of great advantage to the less well-off, the marginalised and elderly. It gives them an opportunity to travel that they would not normally have if the scheme were not in place. Could the Minister be a little more specific and state when the reviews will be published? People are worried.
Will the scheme be protected in the upcoming budget? People are worried about this. It is a good idea to consider amalgamating the various travel schemes but we need to have answers. I am disappointed that the Minister said today I should wait another few weeks, at which time he might revert to me.
I probably come from a smaller rural community than Deputy Troy and, therefore, am very conscious of and passionate about this issue. I fully intend to support transport services in rural areas because I know their value very much.
The two reports will be published very shortly. The issues that will transcend not just the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport but also other areas are being considered. In particular, we are examining school transport, transport related to health services, particularly HSE transport, and issues pertaining to voluntary and community transport services that are being provided. In that context, the issues transcend the Department and the need to consider this.
The commitment is in the programme for Government and the Government is determined to deal with it in the short and medium terms. It is a priority for the Government.
The rural transport scheme has provided great services in rural Ireland, which have been quite successful in some areas and less successful in others. Many of the people who operate these services are determined to provide rural areas with good transport services. However, it is necessary to examine how we can bring together bus services, whether provided by Bus Éireann or community or voluntary groups, and examine all other services in an area so there can be greater connectivity while we make the money we have go further.
I must interrupt the Minister of State because Deputy Troy is entitled to ask another question.
I am glad the Minister of State shares my opinion that this is a very worthwhile scheme and that he will do all in his power to protect it. He has gone from publishing the reports soon to publishing them very shortly. I would like an indicative timeframe. Are we speaking about three weeks or three months? Where is the pilot scheme being carried out and what are its findings? How has it worked so far?
The reports will be published in the coming weeks. The pilot schemes are in the north west and north east. The findings are contained in the reports and when they are published the Deputy will see them. There is value in integrating services in rural areas and there is value in examining school transport and HSE transport. I would have preferred if the previous Government had considered a different range of questions as part of the programme but I intend to address this matter in a renewed pilot scheme.
5 Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will remove the land freeze operating in Wexford in relation to the proposed Oilgate to Rosslare harbour motorway, County Wexford, in view of the fact that the National Roads Authority has confirmed there is no available funding for the project for the foreseeable future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26564/11]
As Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding for the national roads programme. The planning, design and implementation of individual road projects is a matter for the National Roads Authority, NRA, under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Within its capital budget, therefore, the assessment and prioritisation of individual projects is a matter for the NRA.
It is the case, in the context of the capital review, that there will be limited scope to progress new road development projects in the short to medium term and the Oilgate to Rosslare scheme is one of a number of projects which have reached route corridor selection phase but which will not progress to construction for some time. As I indicated previously, I am reluctant to cancel such projects given that they are designed for their long-term benefit to the State although I am conscious of the potential implications for development in the area.
For now, I think it has to be a matter for the relevant local authorities in their capacity as planning authorities to assess how best to balance development needs in the area with protecting route corridors for future road upgrades.
When I challenged the county manager on this issue, he was very quick to state it was being driven by the NRA, that it had nothing to do with him and that he merely takes instruction. I do not know how familiar the Minister is with the project, but very few people of sane mind in the county believe it should go ahead. It is difficult to understand from where the thinking is coming given that hospital beds in Wexford hospital are closed.
The project is to build a motorway to bypass the one already bypassing Wexford town, although there are no hold-ups worth speaking about on the roundabouts, and this is pure nonsense. There was a fanciful notion that some day Rosslare might become a port to rival Rotterdam, but given that the five berths there are not deep enough and that it would cost €200 million to make them a sensible option for large boats I do not see it happening in the near or long-term future. Does the Minister think this would be a complete waste of money? If this is the case, why does the Government not make the sensible decision to abandon it now? The notion that it might be done in 20 years has been mentioned but God knows what route might be taken then. More than likely, at most the existing route would be expanded.
I will travel to Wexford this evening to attend a dinner and I will speak at a conference in Rosslare in the morning so I will have two opportunities to travel the road tomorrow and have a good look at it and see what condition it is in. There is a good case for maintaining long-term reservations. The Harcourt Street line was maintained for 40 or 50 years and we are glad it was because we were able to build the Luas. The same can be said about the Dunboyne and Navan line. I would be very reluctant to cancel reservations where motorways may be built, even if it were in 30 or 50 years time.
However, we do need planning authorities to be pragmatic, and the NRA needs to be pragmatic about planning along these routes. Certainly, I do not believe that construction such as farm buildings, temporary structures, sheds and greenhouses should be barred along these roads if the road will not be built in a reasonable period of time. I will have to do some work on this in the next while.
Is the Minister stating there should not be a freeze on building along the 300 m corridor? Depending on the NRA to have a sensible approach to this might be stretching it and asking a bit much, given that it is a self-sustaining body which is probably a little out of control at this stage. It would cover the island in concrete if it had its way without there necessarily being any sense behind it.
There is no such thing as a freeze in planning law. Local authorities and the NRA should be pragmatic in how they deal with these reservations. They should not allow a shopping centre to be built but there may be forms of low-scale development that could be permitted on these routes.
