I shall go on to some of the other points. I probably will not complete my statement tonight and for that reason I want to go a little further into the Minister's report. I notice that at the end of the report the Minister said:
I have discussions with CIE on rail fare trends on a general basis. I have criticised the management for not considering at an earlier date family fares. I have pressed for experiments in reduced fares in the off-peak season. I have made known any constructive criticism offered in the Dáil during debates.
I am glad to know somebody is making suggestions to them. Probably the Minister is the only person they will listen to. He went into great detail in relation to the situation as it exists in the city at the moment regarding the difficulties of the public transport services and the amount of blockage that exists at the moment in the city which is caused by private cars. I would like to say—I have said this on many occasions before—that the people who are responsible, in the main, for the congestion in Dublin are CIE themselves. A person who wants to travel from Ballyfermot, Bluebell or any of the other outlying areas to destinations within a mile or two must travel into the centre of the city because CIE say so. There are no perimeter routes and no routes from one of those areas to another. Those people must go into the centre of the city first and get another bus to their destinations.
There is no reason why, if CIE want to relieve the situation in the city at present, a bus could not go from Ballyfermot to Walkinstown to Bluebell and right through to Dun Laoghaire and so permit people who want to go to one of those places to get there without having to go into the centre of the city. They could get to Dun Laoghaire or any of the other places on that route at a much cheaper rate. This would avoid a great deal of the inconvenience we now find in the city centre which is irritating people living in the perimeter areas. These are the people who pay the high bus fares. They have to dig down into their pockets because they must go into the centre of the city. If this is the way the city bus services are to be made to pay, there is something wrong.
I have made numerous representations regarding this to CIE but they pay no attention to me. Somebody will have to take it on to himself to do something. We want a realistic bus service in Dublin. We want a service which will serve the people, not CIE alone. The people I represent are daily taken into the centre of the city, when they do not want to go into O'Connell Street or College Green, in order to get to their destinations. Surveys have been carried out from time to time of the bus services in Dublin but I have never seen anything done to help the people in the perimeter areas. There are concessions for the people in the central city area. The ladies going for cups of coffee travel at reduced rates while old age pensioners, unemployed persons and other people travelling to the labour exchange and to the post office are passed by empty buses. They cannot pay the substantial fares from Ballyfermot and Kilmainham while there is a special concession fare for the privileged classes in the centre of the city. There is a worker's ticket at a reduced rate to and from Dun Laoghaire. Why is a special privilege given to a certain section of the community? Those who should get a reduction are the working class people of this city, the backbone of the city.
CIE should do something to alleviate traffic jamming in the city area. Is there any reason why the Dun Laoghaire bus should go into the city centre? There is no reason why it should not stop at Merrion Square and thus relieve the congestion around Westland Row and other areas. A city service should be devised to carry people to their destinations. There is no reason why that could not be used some distance from O'Connell Bridge. One would think everyone wants to go to O'Connell Bridge. This will have to be abolished. We must examine the worker's problem and CIE can alleviate their distress in this regard.
If CIE plays its part, I am sure the motorists can be induced to play their part too. At the moment people are forced to go into the city centre, as it is much cheaper to use a car to go to one's employment in an area adjacent to where one lives than to travel by CIE. It is very unfair that the workingclass people of this city, living on the outskirts, should be required to pay a double subsidy. They pay more than an economic price travelling on the buses and they also have to pay by way of taxation. It is fair enough meeting the situation one way but let there be equity: let the burden fall on the shoulders of each and every person in the city to the same degree.
I fear this is a serious situation. Dublin city bus services pay their way and make a profit. There is no reason why those who avail of the services elsewhere should not shoulder some of the responsibility and take some of the burden from the backs of the citizens of Dublin, particularly in the workingclass areas. Other people have big motor cars or can travel by bus to other areas but it is the working-classes who are paying through the nose. CIE will have to bring forward a realistic scheme and I would impress upon the Minister the necessity for perimeter services in the city.
I am glad to see the Minister has asked the Chairman of CIE to consider approaching Congress with a view to formulating a long-term agreement along the lines of the Aer Lingus agreement that will give a feeling of stability and confidence to the workers. Before any agreement can be concluded, there must be contented workers. An all-out effort should be made to obviate any dissension and unrest there may be. Otherwise, you are paying a price for a time. That is no long-term solution and we want a long-term solution in public transport.
There is efficiency in many sectors of CIE but I am mainly concerned with the workers at Inchicore and with the position in the railway workshops. I have said enough about the fares and the bus services that are jamming up the centre city area but I would say that the existing situation should be examined so that any elements that are suitable and satisfactory will be maintained and improved upon and the unsatisfactory elements cast aside, before a large-scale change is embarked upon which completely disrupts personnel who have been in the railway services for 20 or 30 years. It takes time to attune oneself to a new situation and I would impress upon the Minister that contentment is necessary before any long-term agreement can be entered into. This can be brought about in a short time with reasonable thinking and a proper approach to the existing problems.
I have great sympathy with the Minister. I have listened here over the years to abuse being hurled at his head and it is regrettable also that reference has been made in the course of the speeches of other Deputies to the former Chairman of CIE and to other aspects that are really outside the limits of the discussion.
