Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 6 Nov 1962

Vol. 197 No. 3

Adjournment Debate. - Waterford-Tramore Bus Service.

Mr. T. Lynch

I put the following question to the Minister for Transport and Power to-day:

To ask the Minister for Transport and Power what are the latest returns from the CIE Waterford-Tramore service over the last twelve months (1) in passengers carried and (2) in gross revenue taken; and whether the service is showing a profit or a loss.

The Minister was not in his place and the reply was given to me by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, Mr. Jack Lynch, who said:

I would refer the Deputy to the reply given by me on 28th February, 1962, to questions about the numbers of passengers carried between Waterford and Tramore on the CIE services, to which I have nothing to add.

On 28th February 1962, I asked the Minister a question with regard to the number of people who travelled on the Waterford-Tramore bus service; I mentioned a figure of 40,000 people and I asked him was that an official estimate. The reply appears at column 734, volume 193, of the Official Report of 28th February 1962, where the Minister for Transport and Power said:

The figure of 40,000 referred to by the Deputy is an estimate made by CIE at my request.

As I indicated in my reply of 14th February, 1962, the number of bus passengers carried by CIE in the period 1st April-30th October, 1961, showed a small increase on the number of rail passengers carried in the same period in the preceding year. The balance of the estimated increase of 40,000 represents an estimate of the numbers carried by the private bus service operating between Waterford and Tramore.

I protested later that what the private bus service carried had nothing to do with the Minister and he should not put the number of their passengers in with these figures. The discussion went on and the Minister gave me no figure. At column 735, I said:

I am asking a question, Sir. Will the Minister tell us now why he will not give us the figures?

The Minister did not give the figures but he says in this answer to-day that he gave the figures.

However, there was a sequel to this because on 13th March, nearly a fortnight aferwards, I asked your permission to raise this matter on the Adjournment in relation to Questions Nos. 46 and 47 on the Order Paper of 28th February, 1962. I brought the Minister in on the Adjournment and it was only then that he gave any figures. I do not say I am very grateful to the Minister for giving me the figures in such a manner. We are entitled to ask for the figures and, as you know, Deputies are continually putting down Questions to the Minister and the Minister rises and says he has no function. Deputies are continually sending questions to the Dáil office for the Minister for Transport and Power and getting back the famous reply. We all have thousands of them from your office, Sir, such as the following:

I regret I have had to disallow the question addressed by you to the Minister for Transport and Power regarding the dismantling of the railway line where a branch railway has been closed, on the ground that the Minister has no official responsibility in the matter.

I take that for what it is worth and I abide by your ruling, but the Minister to-day would not allow either me or anybody else to say a word about the Chairman of CIE because the Minister protested to us that he was responsible. The Minister says he is responsible and even though he might produce the old excuse that he has no responsibility for the day-to-day administration of CIE, I am not asking him about any day-to-day business. I am asking him for the figures over the past 12 months in relation to Tramore. I am entitled to ask for these figures and I know these figures are available because in the CIE report to which I referred earlier to-night, it is said that operating results during the year showed that the financial betterment from the substitution of road services for the West Cork, West Clare and Waterford-Tramore railway lines was approximately £90,000. I know West Clare was losing a packet of money. I have the word of Dr. Andrews himself for it; so was the West Cork line, but the Tramore line was supposed to be losing £3,000. Here now it is boxed in with all these.

I am asking the Minister now to supply me with the figures. It is obvious that CIE are keeping a record of these figures. If they are not doing so, what they are publishing in this report is false. The Minister says he is responsible. If he is the responsible Minister, it is his duty to give these figures to Deputies. We have to vote the money for the deficits. Dr. Andrews says in his paper or lecture that the substitution of a road service for a rail service does not mean giving a worse service. I say it is a worse service. We have the proof of the pudding. The unfortunate Waterford people have to pay 2/8d. to go to Tramore by bus, while they could go by rail for 1/5d.

Mr. Geoghegan

You did not travel on the train.

Mr. T. Lynch

The best thing the Deputy can do is to keep out of this. According to the Minister's figures, there were only 424,000 people travelling on the train in one year. The line was torn up at 24 hours' notice. They dragged it up in the rain and paid men extra money to do it. I am convinced that if that line had been left there, it could have been made to pay but it had to go. It was a try-out. Surely no Deputy can justify the butchering of our railway line.

Mr. Childers

That does not arise in this debate.

Mr. T. Lynch

It will arise. There are many matters on which I shall bring the Minister into this House before this session is over. As the Minister is such a stickler for order, I say it does arise. I am asking the Minister—and I expect he should answer me—for these figures. I want them for my constituents. The Question I put down must be answered. I do not want the Minister to say these figures are not readily available. I know that CIE do not send a couple of their officials or of their staff into a room at the end of the current year and just get the figures. The returns come in from month to month. We all know that and we all know that the returns are made available. We know now that station masters are told that these are top secret and must not be given to anybody who asks for them. We know that the returns are sent to Kingsbridge and it is no trouble for the Minister to get them.

I gave the Minister due notice of this question. It was in the Dáil office since last week. The Minister would save himself a lot of heartache if he recognised that this is the Parliament of the country and that when Deputies ask a question about any of the, shall I say, enterprises, that he says he is responsible for, they are entitled to be answered, whether it is about CIE, Bord na Móna, the ESB or Aer Lingus. I have heard him answer questions about Aer Lingus regarding the number of passengers carried and the number of people who passed through Shannon and yet he will not give us this information. Is it discourtesy or is it through "cussedness" I asked that question? I expect the Minister to answer it.

Minister for Transport and Power (Mr. Childers)

It is quite obvious from hearing Deputy Lynch that he has never bothered to read the observations I made speaking on the Estimate for my Department on the 13th July, 1961, at column 909 to column 916 in the Official Report in which I clearly outlined the work of the Department, my responsibilities in that regard, and in which I made it perfectly clear that the line would have to be drawn somewhere with regard to giving information on fractions of the operation of a particular company and that in the public interest. The information regarding the Waterford-Tramore line was given in greater detail because at that time there was a controversy over the closing of the railway line. I was not compelled to give the information then. According to legislation, which Deputy Lynch supported, there was no need for me to give any explanation at all but in order to satisfy the House that I was undertaking the general surveillance of the 1958 Act, and to make quite sure it operated to the national interest, I gave a great deal of information at the time of the closing of the three lines he has spoken of to indicate the general position. I made it quite clear that I was taking a great interest in the operation of the Act and would continue to take an interest in it until the time comes for the re-shaping of the transport policy at the end of the five year period.

In the course of the Estimate speech, I outlined in great detail the work of the Department, making it perfectly clear that I have functions and responsibilities. I never yet heard a single Deputy constructively, or even destructively, criticise what was a very carefully prepared statement about the duties of the Minister whose Department was mainly concerned with the operation of State companies.

Mr. T. Lynch

May I intervene? Will the Minister get back to what he referred me today, the Dáil Debates of 28th February?

Mr. Childers

The Deputy may interrupt as often as he likes but he is not going to put me off my track.

Mr. T. Lynch

The Minister will have no track one of these days.

Mr. Childers

I am not going to create a precedent regarding the operation of a State company in regard to giving fragmentary information in relation to a particular section of the operations of the company when there is no question of some acute conflict of opinion such as the closing of a line, when the matter has been disposed of, when CIE have reported on the general financial position in relation to the three lines in their annual report and the betterment effected. There might, indeed, be an exception to that if I were to listen to the Deputy with regard to the character of the Waterford-Tramore bus service in substitution for the railway. If I was to take his advice alone regarding the alleged dissatisfaction in Waterford City and environs, I would have the duty of making quite sure that when CIE said they were going to provide an adequate substitute service, at least they had done so and it would be proper and right that I should defend CIE——

Mr. T. Lynch

You can defend the 2/8 a head instead of the 1/9.

Mr. Childers

In regard to the charges made against the efficiency and character of the service, I happened to be in Waterford on a number of occasions and I asked a good number of people of varying political opinions about it and they were completely satisfied that the substitute service is all right and that it is being availed of. The idea that the service is deficient is entirely wrong and the fact that the bus gives closer access to the beach is an advantage to the people of Waterford.

Mr. T. Lynch

The man does not know what he is talking about.

Mr. Childers

There is no question of there being any new problem which would justify my intervention and I am not going to create a precedent whereby Deputies from all over the House can ask for the gross revenue and the number of tickets sold on separate segments of a CIE line. I am not going to create a precedent in a similar way that Deputies can ask for the revenue and expenditure of some particular lines of the ESB in a particular region. The same would apply to other State companies over which I and other Ministers have control and, if ever Deputy Lynch finds himself in charge of a State company, he would realise the chaos——

Mr. T. Lynch

That the Minister created.

Mr. Childers

—that would result if he started to give answers of that kind and he would realise the difficulties in which he would find himself and the confusion there would be as a result of answering a multiplicity of questions regarding the operation of State companies in a particular area. It is time Deputy Lynch did some thinking about the Parliamentary control of State companies and the distinctions that have been made as to what constitutes day-to-day activities. I agree that there has been a great deal of controversy about this, from the right and from the left in politics all over Europe but I take the pragmatic view on this, that we have State companies which on the whole have been very successful and there have been very few scandals associated with them. I recommend that if the Deputy is not satisfied with my comments on the duty of a Minister in regard to a State company, he should read the Taoiseach's address to the Institute of Administration——

Mr. T. Lynch

I read his pledge that the railways would not be torn up.

Mr. Childers

He should listen to commonsense talk on this subject and he would realise that fragmentary information could serve no purpose. As I have said the information which I gave on the Waterford-Tramore service was given because at that time there was a controversy and there was a debate in the Dáil on the CIE accounts. I spoke for a very considerable time and at very great length indeed on the whole position of branch lines and the financial position of CIE and I am prepared to do it again in connection with the Bill the Second Reading of which is now being taken.

Mr. T. Lynch

You will do it.

Mr. Childers

Nobody can say that I denied to the House both general information and detailed information enabling the House to form an opinion on the whole matter. That is quite a different thing from giving fragmentary information when there was no current matter in dispute and which would serve as a very dangerous precedent for the future.

Mr. T. Lynch

There is.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.50 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 7th November, 1962.