Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Dec 1970

Vol. 250 No. 5

Transport Bill, 1970 : Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed : "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Under this Bill, CIE require to be further subsidised to the tune of almost £3 million or, to be absolutely precise, £2,980,000. In his statement the Minister outlined the necessity for this which basically comes down to the fact that in the past several years the position of the railways has been declining rather badly.

For the period ended 31st March last, according to the annual report of CIE, the railways lost a total of £4,212,000 which was an increase of £1,100,000 over the previous year. The only other losses sustained in that year were on the operation of canals which lost £95,000, an increase of £23,000 on the previous year, and on the operation of vessels which lost £30,000 which was £3,000 less than the deficit for the year ended 31st March, 1969.

On all other operations, city bus services, provincial bus services, tours, road freight and hotels, the accounts to the end of March of this year show a profit. It is true to say that even though profits were made on the city bus services, they had declined markedly from £177,000 to £61,000. Only on the provincial bus service was the profit maintained up to the level of the previous year's operations and there there was a substantial £632,000 profit shown for the year. Smaller profits were made for the other operations but hotel profits were up for that year and apart from the railway operations and canals and vessels there was a profit in that year. The Minister suggests that for the present year, as a result of inflation, which takes the form mainly of increases in wages, city bus services will show a loss of about £¼ million on the current operation. I do not recall whether he mentioned what will happen to the provincial services. I imagine their profits too will be affected, as will tour buses.

People using the bus service in the last year have been asked to pay very substantial increases in fares. I should like to know from the Minister whether this is a further subsidy towards the railways being paid by the people who use buses. Deputy O'Donovan mentioned that here in the city of Dublin very sharp increases in fares have been imposed on passengers on buses for very short runs. This has also affected rural travellers for either long or short distances.

In my constituency the provincial service and the city bus service operate. The city bus service operates into Bray and as far south as Kilcoole so we are affected under both headings by the increases. The increases in the city fares particularly have been noted and the hazards involved in city travel are causing problems for commuters on the busy roads north and south of the city. If there is to be a continuous fall off in travel, then the problems involved will have to be grappled with, the problem of parking in the city, particularly, where the motor car seems to be taking up an increasing amount of the available space at the expense of travellers on buses. An extra bridge or two bridges are necessary here to provide for a free flow of traffic over the Liffey from north to south and vice versa. This problem will have to be tackled very soon or for long periods of each working day traffic will come to a complete halt.

For as long as I can remember the time taken to travel from Wicklow to Dublin was 1½ hours. This was the position for anything up to 20 years. In spite of the fact that a great deal of road straightening and widening work has been done between Wicklow and Bray, the journey now takes between 1½ and two hours so not only is bus travel becoming increasingly more costly but it is also becoming much more difficult to arrive on time for work or appointments in the city of Dublin in the mornings or to get out of Dublin between 5 and 7 in the evening.

The Minister said he intends to bring in consultants to look at the railways. Judging by the losses sustained on the railways, a very hard look will have to be taken at their operations. I can see clearly in my own town why people do not travel by train. The passenger station for Wicklow town is situated 1½ miles from the town centre so one must get a taxi or some other form of transport to reach the train. Recently, due to pressure from local organisations, CIE started a passenger service from the goods station which is almost in the centre of Wicklow town. This has proved a great boon to commuters. It has enabled them to make the trip from Wicklow to Dublin inside an hour and also to get back to Wicklow in the evening by about 6.30. It now takes less time to travel from Dublin to Wicklow by train than to travel by bus from Dublin to Bray which is 20 miles nearer to the City. If all passenger services were to be shunted into the goods station in Wicklow I believe by that one small act the popularity of the passenger service would increase immensely. I do not know if there are many places with this problem but this is one area where great pressure could be taken off a very busy road-the Dublin-Bray road—if commuters in the Wicklow area were to have all trains leave from the goods station in Wicklow.

I make no apology for introducing another local issue—the bus service from Bray. Deputy O'Donovan mentioned that the Harcourt Street line was closed some years ago because it was not being used enough and was incurring a loss of something in the region of £50,000 or £60,000 annually. That now seems very little but in those days it appeared to be quite a large sum. A bus service to facilitate the people who used that line was put on between Bray and Dublin. It was the number 86 bus and it went from Bray to Dublin via Cabinteely and Dundrum. Recently a decision was taken to curtail the distance travelled by this bus and the terminus on the Wicklow side is now Cabinteely which means that people from Bray are unable to make one journey from Bray to Dundrum. and areas on that side of the country. Because of the necessity to make two journeys the fare has gone up by something like 1s 5d a journey. It costs Is 7d to travel now to Cabinteely and a further 1s 9d from Cabinteely to Dundrum whereas it was 1s 9d for the whole way through previously. It is possible to buy a weekly ticket at no extra cost but it is unfair, having first of all removed the railways, to curtail the bus service further so that people who regularly if not daily make the journey between Bray and areas such as Dundrum and into Dublin are no longer able to do so. I have been in touch with the office of the city traffic manager and although I have been treated with courtesy in this matter I have been unable to get what the people of Bray want, namely, that transport be provided at the same fare as on the previous service. This is a reasonable request by those who formerly travelled on the No. 86 bus.

Perhaps the Minister would have a word with CIE to see if this service can be provided at the previous rate. There cannot be any great saving achieved in curtailing the journey by three miles and I do not think the decision in this case has been a wise one. The excuse given was that the bus was not used very much but if the service is to be maintained for most of the route the extension of three miles to Bray will not cost very much.

I realise that all of us can see the problems that exist in the various bus services. The area of north Wicklow provides a large number of workers for Dublin city but no inquiry has been made regarding how the workers are commuting to the city. In this way CIE are losing considerable revenue by not revising their timetables. The working day is becoming shorter—in many factories the termination hour is 4.30 or 5 p.m.—but the transport services are not being adapted to cope with the changed working schedule.

The number of people working in the Bray area who travel from Ashford and Kilcoole each day is considerably increased but there has been no change in the bus timetables for those areas. To illustrate this point, I would mention people who work in an electrical appliance factory in Bray. They finish work at 5 p.m. but the bus from Bray towards the Wicklow areas leaves at 4.45 p.m. The next bus arrives in Bray at 6.30 p.m. and shortly afterwards three buses to Arklow, Wexford and Wicklow town arrive practically together. However, from 5 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. there is no service available for the factory workers; they have to wait around in Bray or else try to get a lift. CIE should cater for these people who are in need of transport. By their failure to do this they are losing considerable revenue.

There is an overlap in this area between city and rural transport and it may be that one management is leaving it to the other to do the job. However, I shall take up the matter with the traffic manager again although nothing was done in regard to my previous representations. In the areas I have mentioned there are several hundred people involved and this case illustrates just one area where revenue could be increased if CIE had local information regarding the numbers who need transport facilities and the changes in the working schedules of people. I hope the Minister will take up this matter because I have not been successful in getting any changes in the bus timetable.

Most of us would not like to see the railways closed, or any further closures being carried out, and this is not only from the point of view of profit but also for sentimental reasons. The growing loss that is met each year by taxpayers must be a cause for concern. Nevertheless, as has been illustrated by the closure of the Harcourt Street line, the removal of bridges and the selling of land along the line, this is a dubious procedure to adopt without taking into account the long-term prospects. The Harcourt Street line could be very profitable had it been kept in operation. Those of us who travel daily on the Bray road would be much happier to go by train if this service were available at suitable hours, and I am sure people living in the area between Bray and Dublin would travel by train if the service were available.

There is a social necessity, particularly in the western parts of the country, for railways and it is difficult to judge in monetary terms the advantage of railway stations being located in those areas. In addition, some provincial bus services are necessary because people in outlying areas have not any other means of transport. There is much talk about the losses incurred by CIE and such losses must be considered when one sees the bill that is presented to taxpayers each year. However, it would be a grave disadvantage to have any further rail closures. We must ask ourselves if we are prepared to continue meeting this mounting deficit or whether we want our railway system completely closed. The Minister more or less hinted at this in his document——

That is the issue.

I do not like to see any closures and, as a taxpayer, I am prepared to pay my contribution to keep the railways in operation.

There would not be any necessity to bring in experts from abroad to examine this problem if there was greater liaison between local areas and CIE. The business is there if an effort is made to look for it and I imagine the examples I have given are repeated throughout the country. I am sure that more people could and would travel by CIE if the service was available; if the service was made more efficient by more room being provided for buses in built-up areas and if trains were made available as near as possible to where people reside, and as I already suggested, by using stations, perhaps now being used for a different purpose but which could be adapted for use by passenger trains. In this regard railways near the city of Dublin could score over road traffic.

The Minister's speech in relation to this Bill is a repetition of what we have heard over the years-that additional sums are required for CIE. More than a consultant is needed to put CIE right. A lot of commonsense within CIE, from the managerial level down to the ground floor, could bring about a completely different situation from that which now exists. We know about the commissions and groups who at various times were brought in to examine CIE but still CIE continue to lose money. Over the years there have been many changes made in regard to management and many new schemes have been developed but still each year we have to inject further moneys into the CIE system. Nobody would oppose that because CIE is a social service and it is desirable and necessary to have a State transport system.

Let us examine first of all the Dublin city service, which is an important service. I should like to quote one example for the Minister's benefit. Recently a person phoned me from Dublin Airport and indicated that he was seeing a friend off to London and that he himself wanted to see me afterwards. I told him that I would be at home for the next two hours and he said he would come to see me at my home in Tallaght. He came to see me 35 minutes after I received a phone call from the person who had gone to London, so that it took 35 minutes longer to come from Dublin Airport to Tallaght than it did for that person to go from Dublin to London, and have his breakfast on the way. This gives some idea of the situation and confusion that exists within the service.

Was that London city or London airport?

London airport. He 'phoned from the airport. He could have been there for a considerable time but he was 35 minutes ahead of the person who was only travelling from Collinstown across the city. The Minister can verify what I am going to say about Tallaght. There is a two hour time lag in the service in this rapidly developing area. When CIE test a route they put on either a double-decker bus or a bus which will carry 60 to 70 passengers and if they find that it is only one-quarter full they say it is not economic. This is crazy. If there is a demand for a service in an area the size of the bus should be taken into consideration and not just the particular bus CIE send out when they examine the viability of a route. CIE could have a number of smaller buses. A mini-bus possibly could serve Tallaght effectively in the off-peak periods and it would provide a much needed and valuable service for the workers and residents in the area who could commute to Walkinstown Cross and other adjacent centres in the area to get buses from there. If people have no transport of their own they are tied up in the area for two, three or four hours. Other Deputies will support me in what I have to say about this area.

This is only one area a few miles from the centre of the city in which people have to stay at home for several hours and yet CIE are supposed to be providing an effective and efficient service. To my mind bus routes are examined by people who have no notion of how a system should operate. Over the years I suggested the introduction of perimeter services in the city but CIE always wrote back to say that there was an insufficient volume of passenger traffic to justify perimeter services. However, perimeter services were established and CIE found out that they were viable. Because a suggestion comes from a Member of the Oireachtas or an ordinary passenger on CIE it is discounted. The suggestion must come from a person who has been asked to examine the system. He probably uses my brains and the brains of others who make these suggestions for the betterment of the system and he produces these as completely new ideas. Nobody else gets any credit. It is not that people are looking for credit but they want recognition of the suggestions they put forward and not to have them discarded just because they come from people outside CIE.

If CIE listened to their own workers and to their passengers they might have a more effective system for their railways, their other works and for their bus services. They have a crazy system of assessing routes. I say that a variety of different sized buses is necessary and desirable because of the built-up nature of the various areas, of bad roads into areas which are being developed, because some of the roads going into these new areas which are now being developed are not suitable for full sized buses. Industry is also being developed in these areas and smaller buses would serve their requirements. I would ask the Minister to suggest to people examining bus services to the perimeter areas to use a little commonsense, particularly in regard to those areas which should be served.

In the industrial estate in Tallaght we have the situation that buses pass workers and other prospective passengers as they travel empty to the estate. This is a crazy situation. CIE have buses running to Tallaght to pick up people from Urney's and other industrial concerns and these buses will not stop to pick up passengers on the way. No wonder CIE lose money. If a bus is proceeding from one point to another and there are passengers on the route they should be picked up. As I say, it is no wonder that CIE are down several millions of pounds each year if you have this kind of gross neglect and incompetence in relation to their services.

The city service as a whole is completely inefficient because the whole system has been blocked by congestion, the congestion mentioned by the Minister. This congestion is brought about by CIE themselves. Up to a few years ago there was no perimeter services and everybody travelling to a given point within two or three miles of his house had to take CIE transport to the centre of the city and then take another bus from the centre of the city. CIE have this centre of the city mentality —buses must go to the centre of the city, they must be parked in O'Connell Street and they must take up room there. They would never think of parking them outside the main streets in places like Smithfield where there is ample parking space. This to my mind is done to extract the last halfpenny from the passengers. They know that a worker must get from one point to another to his work and they also know that if they provide a service then that is the service the worker must avail of: otherwise he can walk to work or get there by any other method he likes.

No wonder CIE have lost a vast number of passengers over the years. Seven million fewer passengers were carried on the Dublin city services in 1969-70 than in the preceding year and compared with 1964-65 the number was down by almost 28 million. This indicates that no serious attention was given by competent persons to this problem. The people responsible for this decline should be moved out of their particular departments and people with new ideas, people prepared to assess the value of passengers' suggestions and if possible put them into operation at the earliest possible moment, should replace them. Otherwise, we will have a continuing decline and the Dublin city bus services will not pay their way. It is an effective service in so far as it produces the goods but CIE have extracted the last halfpenny from the workers. The workers cannot afford to pay any further increases such as the disgraceful increases which have been imposed in recent times.

These unfortunate people are now being forced into considering alternative methods of getting to their places of employment. CIE have created for themselves a very serious situation by these increasing stage fares—a situation that has been brought about by bad planning and by lack of attention to the needs of those who use the transport services.

There is plenty of scope for perimeter services. CIE may say that there are at present a few such services but these services were only provided because the company were forced into providing them by the consistent demand for such services. Year after year we were told that these services were not feasible but now that they are in operation we are told they are very good.

It is about time CIE introduced a worker's ticket and a transfer ticket so that workers might change from one bus to another while using such tickets. While some workers in Dublin city and county are lucky in regard to transport, others are victimised. If workers' tickets are provided at all, they should be provided for everybody. If a person comes from the Dun Laoghaire area or if he must go to work in that area, he will be able to get a workers' ticket. I wonder if it is because of the fact that some of those people are from the highly residential area of Monkstown that this area was selected or was it because of the number of managing directors or other people of importance in the area who were in a position to bring pressure to bear on the company and thereby qualify for special concessions? The people in areas such as Ballyfermot and Drimnagh must pay the full amount. Also, there are women who go for their cup of coffee every morning in the centre of the city and who are able to avail of the reduced fare across town while housewives in Ballyfermot and other areas must pay the full fare in the off-peak hours.

The same applies to those who can afford to drive to the edge of town in their Jaguars. These, too, can avail of the reduced fare at off-peak hours. Why should there be selective treatment for any particular section? Until such time as there is equality for all, there will be no encouragement for many people to use this service.

Hear, hear.

I ask the Minister to ensure that workers' tickets and transfer tickets are made available as soon as possible. I am aware that this matter was considered by CIE. There is no reason why it could not be introduced. Because a high fare is charged between any two given points, it does not necessarily follow that CIE will have a greater income in the long term than if they made available workers' tickets and other tickets at a lesser rate. On the contrary, this would entice more people to travel by bus.

There are many aspects of the bus service to which I should like to refer but I shall not do so on this occasion. Perhaps I shall have an opportunity of speaking again on this subject on the Estimate for the Department of Transport and Power. However, I ask the Minister to bear in mind that a man can travel from Dublin to London and have his breakfast en route in less time that it would take a person to travel from Dublin Airport to Tallaght. The Minister might have a look at the Tallaght bus timetable. If he does he will find that three or four buses to that area leave at almost the same time and then there is no bus for several hours. This is not good enough in the case of a service to an area such as Tallaght which is a vast expanding area, where there are a large number of industries and where the Minister has told us there are a further 38 acres available for the development of another 28 or 30 industries.

The use of the big bus that is too wide for our streets is not the answer to the problem. It would be better to put smaller buses on the route and to ensure that there would be a frequent service. It is commonsense, not consultants, that is required in CIE. The Minister should seek the views of the man in the street before bringing in the consultants.

There are various types of persons in CIE—psychiatrists, time-study experts and others—but there is still no effective system. Recently a £2½ million contract was placed with a firm outside the country. This came about because of bad industrial relations. The management and the unions should have been able, during a period of years, to work out a system whereby there would be flexibility and whereby questions of the demarcation lines could be broken down on some basis, whether on the basis of additional flexibility allowances, as is done in some firms, or otherwise. But, again, commonsense did not prevail in this regard.

It is evidence of gross incompetence on the part of the management of CIE that this contract was placed outside the country. I worked in the workshops of CIE and I am aware that the workers in that company are second to none. The best tradesmen available are employed by CIE. These men are competent to do the work that is now about to be done in Britain perhaps by Pakistanis and others and probably by some of our own people who have emigrated in the past. The Minister must examine the position in relation to this valuable contract.

If some Irish firm were to capture a £2½ million contract from abroad it would be given much publicity and we would be told about the valuable employment that such a contract would provide for Irish workers. Here we have a concern which is costing the tax payers more than £2 million but which is now allowing a £2½ million contract to go abroad.

The unions and the management must get together and work out a system. I am well aware of the way in which men have been harassed up there from time to time. I know the mentality of the management, as I know also the mentality of the workers. As I have said in this House many times before, there is something wrong with the whole industrial relations situation within the company.

Since this contract is being executed abroad, the company must depend on cross-channel shipping companies and on other people who are outside this country. They are at the mercy of the employment situation abroad and over which they have no control. They would have some control over a minor disruption here but now they will be at the mercy of these outside interests.

If there is a problem, CIE must examine that problem and they must report back to the Minister and, in turn, to the House and justify themselves in relation to the placing of this valuable contract abroad. There is no reason why whatever problem existed could not have been overcome between the company, the workers and the trade unions involved. Perhaps they did not wish to have the responsibility of carrying out this job. Perhaps this was the easy way out. I do not know but I want to know and I want an answer from the Minister before the Estimate for his Department is introduced here.

Personally, I have certain ideas as to why this contract went abroad. A lot of people have no wish to tackle certain jobs. Instead, they allow the work to be done outside the country so that if any questions are asked afterwards as to the workmanship or otherwise they can say the goods were manufactured abroad. CIE have a responsibility to their workers and to the taxpayer. For that reason we want to know about this £2½ million contract.

There is absolutely no reason why CIE should not move into other fields. There is plenty of scope for them in tourism. They have to some degree, with credit, moved into the European tour business. I went on one of their European tours this year to France and Spain, and this aspect of their activities impressed me. This is a money spinner and if they approach other problems in the same manner as they did this one, then there might be some future for CIE. This tour activity is one of which I have practical experience. Maybe there were a few minor problems but both myself and those who travelled with me found the tour very enjoyable, fairly extensive and very good value for money.

I wonder could we get a breakdown of the subsidy figures. I should like to know what sections benefit from the subsidies. To what extent do the Dublin city services, the road haulage services, the locomotive section at Inchicore, the provincial bus services, benefit? To what degree do the management and workers benefit by the subsidies? There is no doubt that the management get more by way of income increases than some of the workers of CIE. The labouring classes in CIE, who are competent men, are badly paid, by any standards, for the work they do, and while such conditions persist, there will be confusion and disruption. It is only when there are good industrial relations, where the workers have confidence in the management and the management have confidence in the workers that the system as a whole will work effectively.

I would ask the Minister to consider the points I have made and to let me know, by letter or otherwise, if inquiries have been made into this matter of the £2½ million contract, whether it can be salvaged, whether even £1 million worth of it or even £500,000 worth of it can be retrieved. If the whole lot of it has to go, then it is a disgrace and it calls for a vote of no confidence in the people responsible for relations between workers and management. The workers realise that the loss of this contract must mean that jobs are in danger, and no worker wants to lose his job. I know there are problems but these problems can be solved and will have to be solved at some stage. This is not the last contract to be undertaken. I am quite sure we shall be allocating similar sums to CIE in other years when it is required. Therefore, this is a recurring problem. I do not know whether the unions can be blamed for the present situation— perhaps to some degree they can—but there are people in the trade union movement with enough commonsense to know that we must arrive at a solution to the problem that has lost us this contract to a British firm.

I do not agree with everything Deputy Dowling has said. However, I must say he knows his Dublin—he speaks for the south side, while I speak for the north side—and a few of the points he made were quite good. In regard to the £2½ million contract lost by Inchicore, he said the unions and employers must be to blame. I would agree with him on this, but I would also blame the Minister for Labour. At that time he must have been told by the Minister for Transport and Power that this contract would be coming up, that the unions and employers were not agreeing, particularly when the employers were a semi-State body. Surely the Minister for Labour should have said at that stage : "Let us fix something up. Let us bring in semi-skilled workers and train them. We have two years in which to do it." We have spent something like £1 million on the Department of Labour and as far as I can see it would be far better to put it back into Industry and Commerce. They did nothing in this regard. The Minister for Labour is merely a rubber stamp and head of the Civil Service in that Department. We have seen also that the Minister for Transport and Power did not bother lately when a question was asked about Hibernian Transport. We are losing £2,500,000 in the balance of payments as a result of goods being made in England instead of being made here; of course some of the material would be imported but the labour content could have been preserved. In the case of Palgrave Murphy, we could have saved the profits now being made by Dutch companies.

I would not go as far as Deputy Dowling in blaming the management of CIE in regard to subsidisation. I would blame the Minister for Transport and Power for not checking up on things during the last few years. There is no point in blaming the officials. They work away as they have done, just improving a little. If a businessman-let it be a grocer, tobacconist, publican or draper—sees at the end of the year he is losing money and he is not allowed to put up his prices, what will he do? He will spend more money in renovating his premises in order to make his business more economical, to reduce the labour content or to bring in more business. CIE have not done any of this.

Deputy Dowling mentioned there were no perimeter buses on the south side of the city or that they were only about to arrive. I do not think it would take any great brain to have worked this out. On the north side Cabra has been built up for quite a while. Blanchardstown has also been built up. There are an enormous number of factories in Finglas and Cabra and the Ballymum Estate is near Dublin Airport. A number of factories have been built in Coolock and one or two factories have also been built in Sutton. There are between 20 and 30 acres in Coolock reserved for factories.

In all those areas corporation houses have been built. Those houses were given to families with four young children, but it was not possible to give people houses near to where they worked. This meant that people had to travel several miles to work and as CIE did not operate a perimeter bus service people bought cars on hire purchase in order to get to and from work. The owner of the car would arrange to give lifts to three or four friends who would pay for the petrol. I do not know how things would have worked out with regard to insurance had there been an accident.

I know of people living in Coolock who work in Cabra and people living in Cabra who work in Coolock. This is because it is not possible for the corporation to give people houses in a particular area; yet until a month ago CIE did not run even a skeleton service to those places. The point I am trying to make here is that people were forced into buying cars because there was no bus service. It seems to take nearly two years, and I am sure public representatives are sick of writing to CIE about it, to get CIE to put on bus services to those new estates.

The Minister has said that this extra subsidy will come from bus passengers, which means that fares will go up again. I think the Minister said at some stage today that he expected fares to go up in the New Year.

I said that either increased fares and rates or an increased subsidy must result from an increase in wages and salaries.

It looks as though fares are to be increased unless there is an increased subsidy.

Yes, if there is a 13th round. There will have to be an increase in either fares and rates or subsidies.

It looks, from the Minister's statement, as though it is to come from the fares. In his speech the Minister said:

These estimates did not include any provision for the 12th round increase in salaries and wages on the grounds that it was appropriate that national wage rounds and other increases in labour costs which might arise during the five year period should be recovered by way of increases in fares and rates...

The Minister also stated that:

No one could have foreseen in December, 1969, that the 12th round settlements would be of such magnitude that they would cost CIE almost £5 million...

The maintenance strike was well over at that time. There was not an employer or union which did not know what the scale of wage increases would be. After the first case the Labour Court knew what was about to happen. Later claims always get more than the original claim and anyone in CIE could have seen what would happen. Probably there was an election or something on at the time and it was decided not to show it then: it could be shown eventually and if the others got in they would be stuck with it. The Minister went on to say :

...the overall increase in the board's labour costs would amount to an estimated £6.7 million in a full year.

What is the difference between the £5 million in a full year and the £6.7 million?

Increased holiday periods, shorter working hours and other extras.

What is the £5 million doing there at all?

That dates back to the 12th round settlement, but apart from that there were other improvements effected by CIE in regard to holidays——

Those are wage costs.

Apart from the 12th round there were separate wage and salary arrangements in regard to fewer hours and more holidays. The £1.7 million relates to holidays and other fringe benefits.

The Minister also mentioned in his speech that when CIE put up fares because of wage increases the wage increases had already been granted and there was sometimes a lapse of three or six months between the time the wage increases were granted and the time the fares were put up and this has an added effect. Every business which makes a retrospective payment has to pay for it out of its profits. This is not peculiar to CIE but there is one difference this time because no matter what wage increase was awarded prices were to be increased by only seven per cent, yet CIE in the last increase put an 11d. fare up to 1s. 3d. which amounts to an increase of roughly 40 per cent. No one else is allowed to do that but a State body can. I agree that strikes, such as the cement strike, affect CIE and cause a drop in their income.

The Minister referred to the continuing decline in the number of passengers carried in Dublin. As I pointed out before, because there are no perimeter buses people have been compelled to buy cars instead of using the buses. The traffic situation in Dublin is chaotic. People going to work spend three hours at least waiting for buses or just sitting in buses. As many as three buses may arrive simultaneously and then there may be no bus for another 30 minutes. Most people now try to get lifts or they buy cars. The traffic situation should have been handled years ago. Deputy Dowling was, I think, a little severe on the higher staff in CIE. I do not think they are perfect, but they are doing their best in a very bad situation. That bad situation has come about because there has never been any proper planning.

There have been two increases in CIE fares in one year. I do not know any other business which has had two increases in the last year.

Cement Limited.

Some semi-State combines may have had two increases. We had, of course, the Post Office, another Government Department. The Minister referred to wage inflation but I think the Government are the greatest cause of wage inflation. The increased fares have considerably increased costs on parents who have children going to school. There was a time when the Opposition here warned the Government about inflation. As far back as 1964 I remember the former Deputy James Dillon here in this House warning about inflation. He was laughed at by the Government. Now the inflation is here. The Minister has admitted it. Of course Fianna Fáil change when it suits them. We hear nothing now but inflation; we must stop inflation. The Minister for Finance has brought in measures to stop inflation, or so he says; a good deal of it is designed, I think, to collect more taxation.

The Minister said in his opening speech that he wants this money immediately. He must get it before January. I wonder where the Minister for Finance will get the £7 million he talked about. Is this just another gimmick?

Deputy Dr. O'Donovan referred to the fact that no real planning has ever been done and there has been no thinking ahead. There are no targets. No business could hope to operate effeciently if it did not set targets. The target may not be reached, but at least it is there. All we get here is a return from CIE, the sort of thing any shareholder gets from a company. No details are given. Deputy Dr. O'Donovan also referred to the fact that we have Ministers who are not doing their job; they are fighting with each other. I do not blame CIE entirely. I know some of the higher officials in CIE and they would get good jobs in private enterprise any day. I was at school with one or two of them, excellent people. The trouble is they can do their work only within certain limits.

Any real overall improvement must be brought about by the Government as a whole. There should be collective responsibility. The Department of Education are involved because no effort is made to ensure that schools are built in the right area and at the right time. The Department of Local Government are involved because of the road situation. The Department of Finance are involved. So are the Department of Transport and Power. A constituent of mine could not get her child into the schools in Coolock and now she has to bring the child four times a day to and from school. There are two other school-going children and her husband also has to travel to work. Bus fares are an important element in that family's budget. That kind of expenditure could and should be prevented. Travelling is a waste of time and, to a certain extent, a waste of money.

The Department of Finance could help to solve the problem in quite a big way by staggering working hours. Hours are staggered in London with quite beneficial results. Civil servants could start work half an hour earlier in the morning and leave half an hour earlier in the evening. This would relieve traffic congestion considerably. It might also help to improve the financial position of the Budget. Recently, travelling into town, I got a bus at the junction of the two Howth Roads at five minutes to nine and I reached Dáil Éireann at five minutes to ten. It was a wet morning and people took out their cars. The following day I left at half past nine, when traffic had eased off, and I reached Dáil Éireann at ten minutes to ten. There was no rain. If hours were staggered, there would be a clear run. There are certain people who do not work in offices and who cannot do this. If you are working on road works or on an outside job you have to try to get the light of day. However, if you are working inside I do not see why the hours could not be staggered.

Consider, for example, the civil servant who gets a bus to his office. At peak hours, he often has to stand in a queue for 20 minutes or so and, if there is a traffic jam, it may take up another 20 or 30 minutes apart from the normal time it would take him to reach the office by bus. There is a great waste of time. CIE do not keep an even run of buses. You may see three Clontarf buses, one after the other, at one period of the morning and there may not be another one for half an hour. With an even run of traffic, there would be a longer medium period and CIE could make more money. Furthermore, people would be happier to travel with them. It would cut down on the waste of time on the roads and get people to their places of work much quicker. To break up working hours would be of great advantage here, as it has been in London. It is the only immediate solution I can see to the problem. Otherwise, we should have to ask the local authority to provide new bridges and new roads and more people would give up the buses.

Here is something which makes me wonder. A man came to me about a job. I wrote to various firms, of which one was CIE. It was only a store-keeper's job. They told me they had no job. Nevertheless, the following week, a Fianna Fáil Minister got a job in the same place for him. If this happens to any great extent then we cannot trust CIE. I am not saying it is a general thing but if I knew that it happened another time then I would say so. Is this an isolated case or are we feather-bedding just to suit political pull?

Let us go back again to the subject of the buses and consider a man who works a 40-hour week. Suppose it takes him 1½ hours to get to work-queuing for 30 minutes-and another 1½ hours to get home again. He is on the road 15 hours a week. You are in desperate trouble until that figure is cut by half. The only way to do so is to stagger the starting hours of business.

The train between Amiens Street and Howth is a profitable enterprise involving the Killester area and Sutton. It would be well if this were done for the Cabra area. I do not know if it could be done for Finglas. It cannot be done now on the south side because Fianna Fáil sold land and broke down bridges on the Harcourt Street-Bray line although they should have realised that Dublin would expand. That line would run via the back of Mount Merrion, out to Brewery Road, and take up people from a huge built-up area. It would have been a lot more successful than the train to Howth. Even the Rathmines Road is worse in the morning than the north side. This traffic will get worse on the north side, not so much on the south side although they are building on the south side too.

I agree with Deputy Dowling's remarks about CIE's package tours to Europe. It could be very successful. I suppose we shall have to join up with Aer Lingus in London because it would be very difficult to keep it going the whole summer.

Consider, again, the bus fares involved if a mother has to bring, say, three children to school—apart from what her husband must spend on bus fares to and from his work. Whether the child goes to school in town or near town, the fare is the same. If the husband does not come home for lunch, his fare will be 2s 6d per day. If the wife goes with the child on the bus, it will be 2s 6d and if she has to collect one or two of the children it is another 2s 6d. That comes to 7s 6d per day for the adults. For, say, three children at half-fare it would be 4s. If they have to come home during the day it is another 4s. These fares come, therefore, to 15s 6d per day. Some people may be lucky enough to have a school beside them. With that sort of set-up, is it not easily understandable why there has been a loss of £7 million on the buses? You can get a car on the hire-purchase, and petrol with it, for that sort of money. Would it not be more convenient to have a car and to have the wife to drive it?

ClE's costs are going up too quickly without a proper service in return. I would not expect CIE to be 100 per cent efficient—I do not think anyone in the world could be that—but a better effort could be made to grapple with this problem which will not solve itself.

Ministers have not given leadership in the past in the Department of Transport and Power. This is why wages have gone up so much. They criticise workers for seeking so much money, £4 or £5 a week extra, but when you have this kind of fare which has to be paid five days a week, five guineas out of the wages, you find the increased bus fare takes nearly one-third of the increase in wages.

This very elegant report from CIE impressed me very much. I wonder how many of these are distributed and to whom? Does every worker in CIE get one? Are they sent abroad? What justifies this elaborate technicolored production which would not be equalled in Los Angeles or Hollywood? This is the CIE Annual Report for 1969-70. Who authorised money to be spent on this and what was the cost of it? It is very important that we should know this. The Minister comes here to seek money for CIE. We want to know where is the waste. This report is the start of it, as far as I am concerned. Is this on sale? Is there revenue from it? I do not think the Minister should treat it as a laughing matter. It is serious; it involves taxpayers' money.

There are many printers in the country.

They have lots of work producing things other than this.

It is the colour you are paying for.

There is a beautiful photograph which gets almost a full page here of Mr. F. Lemass, Director and General Manager, announcing his intention to retire. We want to know how much this publication costs. It is elaborate waste. I see we have a sales office in Los Angeles. The one in New York was not good enough; we had to go to Los Angeles.

That concerns one of the most commercially profitable sections of CIE-bus tours.

I do not doubt we made a lot of money on bus tours but I am asking if this country, whose transport service cannot manage without heavy subsidy, can afford large, elaborate offices in Los Angeles and in New York.

The offices in America are related to the commercially viable bus tours.

How much per seat do you make? That is what it comes down to.

If the Minister wants this House to vote money for CIE he should come in with some details which we are entitled to get. How much do those offices in Los Angeles cost? You cannot have them at the Dublin rates in Los Angeles. We made money but how much did those offices cost in Los Angeles and New York? Have we any offices in Birmingham, London and such places? We have to go to Los Angeles for elaborate offices for our national transport system which is heavily subsidised and which is uneconomic in its own country. We are a wonderful people for going abroad and opening elaborate offices like our embassies.

The railways are being subsidised and nothing else.

Who is paying for the offices in New York and Los Angeles?

The Deputy is only a fool.

That is a fine statement by a Minister.

Unless I get an apology from the Minister——

I apologise.

He apologised.

I did not hear him.

I withdraw the statement.

That is better.

There is no need to get excited.

I am upset that the taxpayers' money is being spent unnecessarily abroad. We are discussing a transport service that is barely holding together and yet it must open up offices abroad. I know that our transport service is essential and it is important that it should be maintained within the confines of the country. I think the policy of CIE may be wrong. In his introductory speech the Minister said :

A study in depth to establish what measures might be taken in the long term to achieve a reduction in CIE's losses will also be undertaken.

CIE were established in 1943,1 think, and now 27 years later we get this beautiful expression that a study in depth will be undertaken. After all those years we have decided to do that. That is fantastic, incredible. Last year's statement by the then Minister contradicts this. He said :

CIE are continually striving to lessen the impact of rising costs and they have achieved considerable success in increasing productivity and attracting new business. I have asked the Board to maintain their efforts in this respect so that the amount of the annual subvention may be kept within reasonable limits.

I think that was Deputy Childers, who was then Minister for Transport and Power. We now have a new Minister and he finds that nothing was done for 27 years and he has decided that a study in depth should be undertaken to establish which measures might be taken in the long term to achieve a reduction in ClE's losses. I should like the Minister to explain that. It is a revelation to the House. He found out his predecessors were doing nothing and he decides to do something about the situation. I hope I shall be here next year to ask the Minister for Transport and Power what resulted from this study in depth.

We shall have it in a few months.

That will be eagerly awaited. We are told that as a result of this, the Government will be better informed as to whether any change is necessary and, if so, of the various options open to them. There seems to be no limit to the endurance of the citizens of Dublin. They accept things with resignation regularly. They have given up complaining because they know it is no use and, in view of the Taoiseach's intention to introduce section 2 of the Offences Against the State Act, there will be no purpose in any demonstration from now on. So, they had better give up forever.

This is hardly relevant.

Protest meetings will be forbidden and so I think it is relevant.

Who said they would? The Taoiseach did not say it.

There is great talk about protests now, particularly down in Cork.

(Interruptions.)

That is where you will see democracy in action.

You can be assured you will have police protection.

If we had to wait for the Deputy who has just spoken for protection for anything we would be in a pretty bad way.

You are in a bad way.

We were here a long time before Deputy Dowling.

Will Deputies allow Deputy Dr. O'Connell to make his speech?

We have seen mistake after mistake at the top level of CIE. There has been lack of planning and lack of policy-making. The signs on the buses are printed in Irish in England. I noticed on one bus they have "X Arald". I do not know how that could be interpreted for Harold's Cross. Some time ago CIE decided that the bus signs were not good enough. They decided to take away the signs with "Bus" on them and erect those new signs all over the city. I wonder what will come next? This is the management in CIE which we are tolerating. Those people are squandering the taxpayers' money while the people are being fleeced by them.

Most of them are trade unionists.

That is very interesting. We see that Mr. Frank Lemass, the general manager, has announced his intention to retire.

Most of them are very good trade unionists.

The workers are constantly being blamed for the increased costs of CIE. The people who say this do not take into consideration the mental strain of the bus drivers in this city. They are under great strain travelling across the city in the chaotic conditions which we have. I do not know how they could do it for even £50 a week. We are told they are now looking for a shorter working week, which is merely looking for a 40 hour week. It was suggested it was criminal that they should look for this. They should have a much shorter working week. If the Minister were to take over the job of one of these bus drivers for two weeks he would end up in St. Brendan's, because he would not have the stamina of those men.

He would end up in a ditch somewhere.

I have no doubt about that. The Minister's colleagues are wonderful. We should seriously consider those men who have to work under such strain. The accident rate among our bus drivers is the lowest of any. They do a magnificent job under trying conditions. They have to contend with a high level of carbon monoxide in their blood.

There was a survey taken of bus drivers in Great Britain and the rate of heart attacks was higher among them than among any other section of the population. It is no wonder this should be the case because of the severe strain imposed by their work. I do not know if the Minister ever heard of circadian rhythm.

I have no doubt the Minister will agree with me that the workers in CIE have their circadian rhythm adversely affected by the work they do. I read a letter in the Evening Herald a few weeks ago which was a heart cry from a housewife. She said her husband comes home to his dinner in the evening, soaked most evenings because of the bad weather which we get for eight months of the year. He has to wait a long time for a bus each evening. This woman said our natives do not matter with CIE. This was a very pathetic letter. I have often seen workers standing in the rain without any shelter provided by CIE. CIE are only interested in the tourists but they only come in the summer months. We should give some attention to our people who are compelled to wait long intervals for buses, who arrive home soaked and have to dry their clothes before the following morning when they have to face the bad weather again. Proper bus shelters should be provided particularly for Dublin people who have to stand for long intervals waiting for buses.

Some weeks ago I wrote to CIE about the No. 23 bus service. I am sure Deputy Dowling will agree with me that the people in Drimnagh are very badly affected by this bus service, which is the worst in Dublin. The reply I got back was very sympathetic. I was asked had I any suggestions. That was a fair enough answer because he had none. He agreed that it was terrible.

I looked into this problem and the trouble is that the No. 23 bus has to try to get out from the quays and across the bridge, and it cannot. I am moving into another area when I say this. This is due to the fact that there are no traffic lights on the bridge. I went further and I found that they were approved three years ago but nothing was done about them. This is the cause of the poor service in that area. The buses are held up for long periods. I would ask the Minister to look into this and try to establish liaison with the Department concerned, or Dublin Corporation, or whoever it is, in an effort to improve this service at the quays. This is where the big hold-up is occurring.

I agree that we need a proper connecting bus service on the perimeter of the city. The sooner it is properly established the better. It is not good enough to establish one on a trial basis or just to have two areas connected by & bus service. CIE are the biggest offenders because they bring their buses right into the city centre as they are afraid they will not make enough money if they bypass the city centre, or that if they include the peripheral bus services they will not make money. For the money they get from Dublin citizens they have an obligation to provide this service. There is no doubt that without the Dublin bus services the whole structure of CIE would collapse.

The provincial bus services make more money.

Does the Minister think that without the Dublin services CIE could continue? That is a fair question.

I am putting the matter in perspective.

Without the Dublin bus services what would happen?

I am just pointing out——

Wait a minute. Could CIE continue at all?

It is part of the operation.

There is the answer. It could not. It has now reached the stage that four people can go home by taxi cheaper than they could by bus. Four people combining and taking a taxi can reach home quicker and more cheaply than if they went by bus. This is a terrible reflection on our service. Many people are resorting to this. The Minister mentioned that fewer people are travelling by bus.

That is a world-wide pattern.

I do not think we live in such an affluent society in this city that we can share with America or some other opulent countries the pattern they created in relation to cars. If the Minister would stroll around Dublin he would see the queues for the buses.

We are well up in the car league.

The Minister is not making it any better for them. This action by CIE, for which the Minister is responsible, is encouraging more and more people to try to get cars. They group together and go into town. They find this easier and cheaper. Something positive will have to be done about restructuring the fares system because it is completely wrong. It is wrong that people should have to pay so much to travel across from Ballymum to Ballyfermot, into town and out again. It amounts to a colossal sum in a week.

It is becoming impossible for people to come by bus from Coolock to Clonskea to work. Does the Minister think that a person who works in Clondalkin and lives in Ballymum could rely on the bus service when he has to be in to work at 7 o'clock or 7.30 a.m.? The service is bad and the cost is exorbitant. This is what is wrong with CIE at the moment. The mis-managers, as we will call them, are not concerned. They are completely indifferent because they know that each year the Minister will come in here and say : "We want a little more and this is due to labour costs."

Imagination is completely lacking at the top level in CIE. I remember getting a pamphlet from them. No doubt Deputy Dowling got one too because he represents the area. In that pamphlet it was stated that machinery in the CIE works was being sunk into the ground and covered over with cement. That was the way to remove it. Did the Minister ever hear that? A works committee disclosed the fact that machinery was being buried to dispose of it. This is dreadful. I cannot understand why we have not got rid of men at the top in CIE who would permit that.

I have the experience every single night of trains parking outside my house which adjoins a railway line. I have gone to CIE about this at six-monthly intervals ever since 1961. I told them that the engines are revved up constantly. It goes on for hours. I wrote to CIE, I went to them, I interviewed different men, and the flimsy excuse given was that there is an incline in the rail, so they have to keep the engines revved up. These trains can be started with a push button but diesel oil is wasted for hours. They did not mention anything about the brakes. Nobody could tolerate this. I have become almost immune to it but people who move into the area find it impossible to tolerate this noise.

It is the same in Ballyfermot. Along Landen Road these engines are shunting up and down all the time. Surely something could be done to avoid this? I am very serious about it. I know people in the area whose children are very disturbed by this noise going on and on all night. This happens at 2 o'clock in the morning. They do not do it during the day because it is a main line to Cork. The usual time for it to wake me is ten minutes to two. I have gone down to Houston Station about it. I went to see the manager of the rail services about it. It is a simple matter of turning off the engines. If they can have the engines running for an hour without moving, they can turn off the engines for that hour.

I was told they are waiting to get into Kingsbridge but, while they are waiting, can they not turn off the engines? I have checked on this and you can turn off the engine and turn it on again with a button. During that hour I am sure a great deal of diesel oil is used. I was told that perhaps they were some of the noisy trains. Would it not be better to turn off the engines and stop wasting fuel? For nearly ten years I have not been able to get satisfaction on this matter. People in this area are being disturbed at night. There are people in Landen Road who cannot tolerate it and who are constantly complaining, but can get no satisfaction. I got one letter from CIE which was not very nice. It amounted to asking me how dare I complain and saying they could do nothing about it. I should like the Minister to bring seriously to the attention of CIE that this disturbance of people at night must stop. I should like him to let me know about this matter because it is not right that it should continue like this. The people's efforts have been in vain. They have signed petitions and brought them to CIE and nothing has been done. There is this constant whine of the engines during the night. It creates a vibration.

I will take it up with them.

Good. We talk about economising; that is one area where we might consider it.

What is happening about the suburban railway services? On 27th March 1969 the former Minister for Transport and Power said :

The feasibility of extending railway commuter services to Clondalkin, Ballyfermot, Cabra, Glasnevin and Drumcondra is being studied by an independent market research company commissioned by CIE and the potential for commuter services on the main railway line for Naas, Newbridge and Kildare is also being examined.

That is from column 1275, volume 239, of the Official Report. What has happened about that? The Minister today, inadvertently no doubt, omitted to refer to these services.

I shall do that in my reply.

I asked here about a year and a half ago whether CIE and the Minister for Transport and Power did not agree that they made a diabolical error in closing Harcourt Street station. Of course I was told it was no such thing, that it was stupid of me to suggest it was a mistake. When they decided to close that station they moved in the bulldozers so fast that I got the impression they were afraid there was a body of people who might protest about its closure. I do not mind people making mistakes but let them come along and admit they made a mistake when they closed Harcourt Street station. We know they made a mistake. We know this station could have eliminated some of the tremendous chaos that has arisen. Is there any possibility of repairing that mistake and reopening Harcourt Street station? We must make use of these stations and inter-city rail lines. We should have stations at Ballyfermot and Inchicore and places like that. This is one way of solving the traffic chaos. I do not think we will see underground rail lines in Dublin in our time. I cannot suggest that the Minister should ask the present management of CIE about this because I cannot see that these people have any imagination. The destructive elements of CIE, I would call them. How can one expect anything constructive from them? Could something be done to open these stations? It should not cost a lot to open a station at Ballyfermot and people could be taken right into Tara Street. There would be extra revenue to CIE from it and an improvement in the chaotic conditions on the roads. At the same time CIE would be providing a very good service for Ballyfermot which has over 45,000 people. We have the line there.

The line is a bit low. That is the problem.

Does Kingsbridge not connect with Tara Street and does the railway line not go up to Ballyfermot?

It goes by Ballyfermot.

Could we not bring it right up to the main road? Is that too much to expect.

I should like that as much as Deputy O'Connell would.

Good. And the Deputy would support it?

Good. And so would Deputy Dowling?

I would support anything good for Ballyfermot.

Ballyfermot is a very densely populated area and we should seriously consider this.

They have an underground in Ballyfermot.

Never say anything about the people in that area.

That is right, John.

The Minister has a peculiar sense of humour; it even shows through his speech.

He said :

The Bill is a temporary measure to meet CIE's immediate financial difficulties and provide an opportunity for a more thorough examination of the position in relation to future years.

The Minister must have known I would attack him on this because he ran.

No, I could not. The Parliamentary Secretary is completely innocuous and I could not.

What would the Parliamentary Secretary know about buses?

Would CIE consider educational rail tours for children arranged with the schools? This would be paid for and it would help to improve the revenue from trains.

They do that.

How many schools participate? In the schools my children attend they have not heard of it.

How many TDs use buses or trains?

I use buses. That is how I know about them.

Quite a number of schools do this.

Do they? Perhaps we might publicise it a little more and we might write to the schools and suggest it, because there is no better way of getting to know the towns of Ireland than to travel by train.

I understand inspectors call round to the schools.

I did not know CIE went to such great lengths. Certainly, the two schools which my children attend have not heard about it. Nothing is done about it, so obviously CIE are not getting the point home. I suggest they promote it a little better. The only way I learned about the towns of Ireland was by travelling by train. I could never memorise them and I thought to do so would be a ridiculous thing to do anyway.

(Interruptions.)

What is wrong with the Ballyfermot crowd that you could not bring them by train? My hearing is good.

I did not say that.

I heard it.

He was talking to Deputy Sherwin.

I know he was, but Deputy Sherwin will not take it from him either.

Deputy O'Connell is damn right.

Get to the last bus now.

We must consider extending the bus services at night because people work later hours now. Even if a skeleton service at increased rates were provided it would be a help. There is an obligation on a national transport service and they should be prepared to provide a service after midnight. It is a long time since the 11.30 last bus was decided on and conditions have changed. People are working longer hours. We should therefore give consideration to a late night bus service.

We must consider the people who are working shift hours. Is the Minister aware that in certain factories in Dublin and on the industrial estate on the Naas Road, if a worker is five minutes late three times in a month he loses his job? If he is more than 15 minutes late he loses a day's pay. We talk about the workers and the demands that they make but in certain cases if they are five minutes late they are in trouble. Many people from Ballymum are employed in the Clondalkin area and they must depend on bus services for transport. If they are late they are in serious trouble. This is a measure of the regard we have for our workers. This is happening at Brittains, the motor car assembly plant——

The Deputy is aware that names must not be mentioned in the House. The Deputy must not mention names of people or firms.

This does not happen in the majority of cases.

It is wrong that such action can be taken. We should be more tolerant in our treatment of workers. They deserve better than this. It is dreadful that they must conform to such rigid rules. This is the practice in many firms.

The Deputy is aware that this point does not arise on the Bill now before us.

With due respect, Sir, it does because the bus services are not a help to the workers. The buses do not meet the time schedules and, as a result, people are continually late. When accommodation is being offered to workers, their place of employment must be taken into account.

A short time ago the Minister for Transport and Power told us there was not a drop in tourism during the year and he was quite adamant when Deputies told him otherwise. However, in his statement today he tells us :

While the board's coach tours continued to expand in 1969-70, the hoped-for development was retarded due to the disturbances in Northern Ireland, which were responsible for the cancellation of many bookings.

This statement puzzles me because it is in direct contradiction to what he said previously. I should like the Minister to explain the statement contained in his speech.

CIE must be regarded as an essential service but they must have a proper policy. They must do all they can to help the workers, many of whom have monotonous jobs. CIE should have a proper policy for the public. There should be a constant effort on their part to improve conditions by the provision of bus shelters and so on. CIE should not hesitate to make demands on the gardaí or Dublin Corporation to ensure that they are allowed to run their services in an efficient manner. It is not enough for a CIE official to write back and ask us what suggestions we can make because we are not involved with CIE or aware of all that is happening. I carried out an investigation and I made certain suggestions but the onus is on CIE to do this themselves. CIE should get in touch with the Department of Local Government and with the Dublin Corporation when certain improvements are necessary.

Unnecessary expenditure in the publication of elaborate reports should be condemned. In many cases a simple report is all that is required and the glossy publications that are produced are a gross extravagance. The Minister should tell CIE to effect economies in matters of this nature.

The Minister should tell us what it costs to keep in operation the large offices in Los Angeles, New York and even in Dublin. If we must have offices abroad surely we can share accommodation with travel agents without any adverse effects on our tourist efforts? It seems ludicrous to open up large offices in other countries for a national transport service that is crumbling.

CIE should make a serious effort to improve train services in suburban areas. There are many people in CIE who only want to change the bus signs and the traffic signals. This nonsense should be stopped. CIE have a demanding task; they should be concerned about this and do something to improve the position.

The Minister's statement is admirable in that he has accepted the stark fact that CIE must be kept in operation by State subvention. The Minister reminds those of us who may be a little longwinded that the Bill must be enacted before the Christmas recess, as otherwise CIE could run short of cash before the end of January.

The Minister has adopted a factual approach in this matter. In many ways, CIE are the national Aunt Sally and it frequently happens that people work off their frustration by having a bash at CIE. I am not suggesting that the organisation does not deserve some criticism. The shadow of Watt and Stephenson hangs over CIE because when these men made their discoveries regarding the steam engine they hoped for improvements which eventually came about. The Minister has said that the measures proposed now are of an ad hoc nature to deal with the company's financial difficulties during the current year. CIE needs more than a mere patching up of its wounds; an injection of cash once or twice yearly.

One of the biggest problems is the question of industrial relations. The Minister gave figures for the amount of money lost by CIE through strikes. It is neither my duty nor my intention to criticise either side involved in these strikes. Indeed, some of the strikes which affected CIE took place in other concerns but CIE had a consequent loss of revenue through loss of passengers or goods carried. Some time ago the Government, realising that CIE's industrial relations were pretty bad, appointed to the board a member of the Oireachtas, a trade union leader and a very fine and very able man. This man accepted the nomination to the board and there was some criticism about his appointment. After a short time he resigned from the board. This was a great loss to CIE and to their workers. The wisdom, energy and dedication of this man could have resulted in the shaping of a new charter in human and industrial relations within CIE. However, now we have to carry on as best we can.

As Deputy Dowling mentioned, perhaps the very apex in this whole disastrous industrial relations system there has been reached through the placing of a contract abroad for £2½ million of rolling stock which contract has been lost because of some disagreement in CIE. I do not know whether we are all going mad or not that in this small country we should think we can afford to have differences on a point like this and sacrifice a contract for £2½ million. Apart from the loss in wages and salaries to CIE employees, apart from the injury to our national pride there is the fact that we could have built this rolling stock here just as well as they can build it in Luton or where-ever they make this stock. The point is that if we could have reduced our trade balance with Britain by £2½ million it would have been regarded as a tremendous achievement but in our blindness we cannot agree in CIE on what we should do and so the contract is placed outside the country.

If some firm here decided that on a matter of costs they would place a contract worth such a sum abroad there would be national protests and street marches but because this happened the way it did we must not touch the sacred cow of non-agreement in labour relations and we must see our workers deprived of a £2½ million contract, some 70 per cent of which, I suppose, would go in wages. Everybody in and associated with CIE has got to tackle this question of industrial relations. The Dublin bus crews, the conductors, drivers and inspectors are one of the finest sections of our workers. You will find among them a dedication to duty despite all the obstacles put in their way and the irritations they encounter. They serve the people very well indeed. Very often CIE are blamed for the lack of good bus services.

If the committee to which the Minister refers succeed in their productivity study it may well mean a much brighter future for CIE personnel in general. I am one of the people who believe that the high level of wages will not matter so much if you can have a really fine production effort. If in this matter we could copy the continentals, who can pay tremendously high salaries because they have this very high productivity rate, we would be doing well. This should be the aim of CIE. We do know, as Deputy Dowling pointed out, that some CIE workers are very badly paid. I feel ashamed when I think about the pensions which are paid to their ex-workers. They are the lowest in the country. I would like to know from the Minister how much of this subsidy will go to increase those pensions. Perhaps none of it will.

None of it.

If it does not, then it is to the collective shame of the Oireachtas. In regard to the Dublin bus services, to blame CIE for bad services is only partly justified. If a traffic-jam occurs buses just cannot get through. That is just one problem they have. It is impossible to operate a 20th century bus service through a city which in some parts dates back to the 18th century. The strange contradiction in the whole problem is that the more affluent we become the greater will be CIE's problem. For many years I did not use a car and instead I travelled by bus every day in the week. I found that I had to sit waiting in buses in traffic jams for a long time or I had to stand waiting for a bus to turn up because of traffic jams and I was forced to buy a car. I know I add to ClE's problems if I drive into the city on my own, as do 90 per cent of car drivers. I realise that a bus must take its place behind all the cars and wait until we all move on. A bus will carry some 70 to 80 people and if buses had clearways we would have a better bus service and more people would get to work in time.

Last year I suggested that all bus routes within a mile of O'Connell Bridge should be made clearways so that buses would have easy access to and from O'Connell Bridge. This would speed up services considerably and reduce complaints and irritations. Until we get a modem road pattern CIE will have this trouble in the city.

I want to criticise CIE on two points. One is in regard to their fare structure in the city. How the lower paid worker can pay his fares and still live is a problem. CIE took the easy way out by upping the Dublin city bus fares because this brought in the most revenue. I do not know how well this proposal was examined but a man living in Ballymum, say, and travelling to the south side is using a big part of his weekly pay packet in fares.

For years we pressed for a worker's ticket in the city. I do not particularly like the description "worker's ticket" but we should have a bus user's ticket which would be at a rate which the worker could afford. This would attract more passengers. At present a vicious circle in regard to fares is starting again. The higher the fares the fewer people use the buses, revenue drops and then we have to provide a bigger subsidy which the people also pay for through taxation. The Dublin city passengers are paying higher bus rates and higher taxation, so they just cannot win. Perhaps some day CIE will make an all-out effort to attract bus and rail passengers. They just have not done this. They always seem to be defending their actions and seldom come forward with new ideas for a better bus service at cheaper rates.

The Minister mentioned that inflation was the cause of many of CIE's problems and of course it is but I do not think you help matters simply by increasing bus fares on the sections which are paying best because people will just not go on paying higher fares all the time for services which are not improved.

An effort must be made to attract more travellers by ensuring that a good bus service is provided at the lowest possible cost. The people of this city are not seeking anything for nothing and they appreciate the difficulties experienced by CIE. However, unless the company change their outlook, there will be a continuance of the decline in the numbers of people using bus services. At some time in the future it may even be necessary to introduce a free bus service for the city. This might not be a bad idea. People would drive their cars to the outskirts of the city centre and take a bus into the city proper.

As Deputy Dowling has said, there appears to be an obsession that every bus must cross O'Connell Bridge. Nelson's Pillar, before it disappeared, was the focal point but now the focal point is the bridge. Ring roads could be utilised to a much greater extent.

One aspect of CIE policy on which I condemn them was their decision to close the Harcourt Street-Bray line. They did this with indecent haste. Perhaps the line was not paying its way and its closing down on a temporary basis might have been justified but CIE have demolished the bridges and have allowed the erection of buildings on parts of the track. If it was proved that it was not possible to continue the rail service, the line could have been examined as a possible new road from Dublin to Bray. Anybody who has travelled on the Bray road will realise that there is a great need for an alternative road. The railway line could have been rebuilt as a roadway, at a modest cost.

I have no wish to fault CIE where they are not guilty but it is obvious that the human relations situation within the company is the kernel of a great deal of the trouble that is being experienced. I am not an upholder of State monopolies but I would remind those who are that most of our industrial unrest is to be found in State companies and in the public services.

Until such time as there is permanent legislation in respect of public transport, those who retire from CIE will receive no more than the pittance that is now being paid to the company's retired workers. If industrial democracy should come about in the future, I would hope that the person representing the workers in CIE would not be forced to resign as was the case some time ago when a Government nominee to the board was forced to resign. I deplore the fact that this excellent trade union leader, this man of great vision and ability, was forced to resign. I do not know who was appointed in his place but with all due respect I would say that no one could surpass the original nominee of the Government.

I ask the Minister to ensure that the examining body get down to work immediately. I am aware of the Minister's interest in the transport problem both of this city and of the country as a whole but we cannot continue much longer to patch up the ailing body of CIE by the granting of twice-yearly subventions. Something more is called for and that is the complete reorganisation of our public transport service. This must be done immediately. I do not wish to hear anybody criticise the Government for increasing taxation. CIE, in their present form, will never pay their way. Unless there is this reorganisation I have mentioned, there will be a need in, perhaps, two years time to increase the subventions very substantially. It is not that I object to our doing that if it would ensure an efficient service but if CIE continue to operate in the shadow of a 19th century railway system, they will not be a viable proposition.

It may be said there is no country in the world that has a paying national transport system. In any country I know of, both the railway system and the bus system are subsidised. Perhaps we could give a lead in this regard and provide a service to suit the needs of our people, a service that, in addition, would be an attraction from the tourist point of view. The Oireachtas, the trade unions and the management of CIE must tackle this whole matter. Otherwise, the future might prove very difficult for CIE.

I shall endeavour to be brief in my contribution but as a Deputy from the west of Ireland, there are a few points I should like to raise. First of all I must say I appreciate that down through the years CIE have modernised in many ways. Travel facilities now provided by the company are much better than they were some years ago. At the same time, as one who has travelled on other lines, I must say that in the west and, particularly in the Mayo region, the best railway carriages are not always provided. It appears that if there are any inferior carriages at headquarters, they are pressed into service when our people come home from England. It is hardly fair to these people. If we have to make do with substandard carriages they should not all be pushed into the west of Ireland service. The coaches to the north and to the south, to Cork and other places, are superior to those used, for instance, on the line from Westland Row to Ballina, Claremorris and Westport. The standard generally has improved down through the years, and for that we are grateful, but when there is pressure on CIE, with extra passengers coming home at Christmas and other seasonal times of the year, they should see to it that these carriages are properly heated and that the passengers are properly treated.

We in the west have experienced the closure of some of our branch lines, the branch lines to Ballinrobe and other centres. There were many protests years ago when the branch line to Achill was closed down, but it was part of the process of tearing up branch lines and it went on to the detriment certainly of the tourist business in Achill. If that rail service were available to Achill today it would mean a great tourist boost to that region.

However, that is past history. I am mainly concerned with the people in my immediate neighbourhood, the people of Ballina and its hinterland, the people who have to travel from Ballinrobe, Ballycastle, Crossmolina, Enniscrone in County Sligo, and other centres and use the rail service from Ballina to Dublin. In recent times an additional train service was put on but that is still inadequate. There should be at least three services up and down per day. There is a bus laid on from Ballina which travels through Foxford, my own home town, Swinford, Kiltimagh, Balla and then on to Claremorris, and a considerable amount of time is wasted.

People should not have to rely on a bus which makes detours, which collects passengers, delivers newspapers and other items along the way, with consequent delay to the passengers. Let me say from first-hand knowledge that that bus, particularly in the mornings and at this time of year, is very poorly heated. It is very unfair that people who are sick or mothers who have to take sick children to hospitals or clinics here in Dublin should have to leave their warm, comfortable homes, go out on the roadside and board a bus which is extremely cold and uncomfortable. It is certainly not conducive to the welfare of the patient travelling. These may seem to be small things but they are not small to the people concerned. It has been brought to my notice that these journeys have caused a deterioration in the condition of some of these people on arrival in Dublin.

The train which passes through Ballina and goes on to Foxford and Ballyvary should make a stop at Foxford. Many of us who travel to Dublin quite often are aware of the obvious congestion to which Deputy Moore referred. Some years ago it was fashionable for people to travel to Dublin by car but from conversations I have had with people I have found that, especially in winter when there is frost and fog and driving conditions generally are bad, people from the western region are reluctant to use their private cars except in an emergency. If a rail service were laid on, with stops at the stations I have mentioned, I am sure many people would avail of such a service. In any case there should be a stop at Foxford, which is an industrial town, for a couple of minutes. It would not be necessary to go to the expense of opening up the railway station and staffing it. The checker on the train could issue tickets to passengers. I would ask the Minister to ensure that trains will stop at Foxford at the earliest possible date.

I wish to refer to the necessity for CIE to seek financial assistance from this House once or twice a year when they are unable to make ends meet. I am of the opinion, like Deputy Moore, that there are so many people employed in CIE and it is such a valuable service to the economy that it must be kept in business, regardless of the cost. Tourism is a very important industry and is of particular interest to people in the western region, especially areas which are noted for their scenic beauty. No other form of transport is acceptable to many people and therefore we must keep the service going and, where possible, even expand and improve it.

On the general principle of subsidising CIE I have always held the view, and I expressed it as far back as 1952, that there is no real incentive for a company to pay its way when it knows that if it is short of money this House will give a blank cheque, so to speak. This principle is wrong; it was always wrong. I remember a former Taoiseach, Mr. Lemass, saying that when our railways were modernised it might be possible to break even. I do not want to misrepresent him but I recall him saying that so many economies would be effected that the problem would become less and less as time went on. I disagreed with him about this.

If CIE examined all their operations I am sure they would find many economies could be made without impairing the service. It should be possible to improve the service and economise at the same time. Day in and day out I see ten and 12 ton CIE trucks travelling around the country delivering and collecting packages and on each of these trucks is a driver and a helper. In fact, I have availed of this service from time to time. It does not surprise me, and this is no reflection on the driver or the helper, that this delivery service should be a drain on the resources of CIE.

CIE should hand over this type of delivery service to private haulage contractors because private contractors could organise themselves in such a way that they could make money where CIE are losing money. I have had an opportunity of examining such a suggestion at first hand because in the west of Ireland a number of small companies own trucks. Some people who started off from very humble beginnings have found their businesses growing and growing; and if the carriage of such goods was handed over to companies such as these it would be a great saving to CIE.

Mayo County Council employ a number of small contractors. They do their work efficiently and they are in good time in the morning. There is no need to have inspectors driving around in motor cars because very often the owner himself is engaged on the job. He will see to it that the work is done efficiently and economically. It is not possible for a company the size of CIE to have the same efficiency and flexibility as these small contractors can have. I have seen a private contractor after he has finished working for the council in the evening go over to the local gravel pit, put on a load of gravel and haul it into Ballina or some other town and collect £5 or £6 for doing so. This almost covers the week's running costs. There is not the slightest danger that any CIE driver would do this because he works a set number of hours and when he finishes he goes home. This is the reason why these people can outdo big companies like CIE.

Many years ago I engaged CIE to haul goods from the west of Ireland to the North Wall. I paid them between £150 and £180 a month for the haulage of these goods which I was exporting. When I took charge of the business I decided to put a truck of my own on the road to haul these goods. Trucks were, of course, cheaper at that time but a truck which cost me £700 was out of debt in 14 weeks. At the same time CIE were going into the red and could not make their business pay. It is true to say that the truck was used for longer hours than CIE trucks, but that is not to say I engaged in slave labour : a driver received fair wages and conditions.

The directors of CIE should look at all the company's operations and see where economies can be effected. If the organisation were made smaller, particularly in rural areas, and work given to private contractors, this would be a step in the right direction, and I say that from my own personal knowledge and experience.

Deputy Moore spoke about industrial relations. I suppose there is no use in crying over spilled milk but I have never known a company to throw away business as recklessly as CIE have done. This arose because of strikes, lockouts, bad labour relations and a variety of other reasons. There are perishable commodities, like fruit and fish, which must be transported as quickly as possible. If there is a strike and these goods are held up for two or three days they quickly become unfit for human consumption and have to be destroyed. Those who engage in producing and selling such commodities cannot afford to take chances. Most of them are small people who cannot risk the losses involved in the event of a strike affecting their goods. The result is that these people provide their own transport as do a great many of the big firms in Dublin, such as Jacobs, Guinness and so on. They will not risk having their goods transported by CIE because of the danger of a strike.

At this time of the year seasonal goods are being delivered all over the country. These goods must be sold at this time of the year. The purveyors of these goods will not transport them by CIE because they cannot run the risk of delivery being held up. A business firm would ensure that it would not lose business. I could not take the risk of using CIE. I was a small customer, £150 a month, but there are thousands like me. Thousands of firms have provided their own private transport because CIE failed to put their house in order. Time has been lost and money has been lost, but it is not too late even now for CIE to employ experts who would advise them on how to run their service efficiently and well. It is no good ordinary people making suggestions; they are only wasting their time. I am afraid that is because CIE know they can come back here year after year for more money and get it.

There was a rumour recently that CIE were contemplating pulling up more railway lines, thereby closing more railway stations. That should not be allowed to happen. We labour under many disadvantages in the west. In the case of Mayo and Sligo we labour under many difficulties from the point of view of transport. Any raw materials we need have to be brought in and the finished article has to be taken out again. It is well nigh impossible for any industrial project in the west to compete successfully on world markets because of this serious overhead. I appeal to the Minister to reduce the freight charges in and out of the west. We have a declining population; we have fewer people and those fewer people are in the older age groups. This decline will continue. Special consideration by way of cheap transport is a must where the west is concerned. If that concession is not granted there is very little chance for the industrialisation there that we all desire.

I have spoken about this before and the Minister for Lands, a colleague of mine, commented favourably on my speech. I advocated industries for the west. Our desire to see more industrial employment can never be met unless we have a satisfactory transport system which will favour the growth of industrial development. I appeal to the Minister to take a look at this whole problem. The Western People has been advocating such a policy for quite a long time. It is a policy with which both the Minister for Lands and I thoroughly agree. It is a policy commended by development and tourist associations in the west. Talk is not enough. We want action. Nothing would benefit the west so much as the provision of cheap transport for the raw materials we need and for the finished article going out. I appeal to the Minister to bring forcibly the few points I have made to the attention of CIE.

I certainly would oppose and deplore any tearing up of more branch lines. Our rates in Mayo are high enough. Without our branch lines, we shall have to put more heavy trucks or heavy lorries on the roads with more and more damage to our roads and a greater and greater bill to be paid by our ratepayers and taxpayers in respect of roads which are completely unsuitable for the heavy vehicle type of traffic which CIE operate. We have a special problem in Mayo and in the west of Ireland. If CIE improve their services for that region it could bring great benefit and hope to the area.

During the past few days we have been very critical of the action of the Chair in dealing with certain matters. On this Bill the Chair has been so lenient that the debate has spread from one end of the country to the other and every possible aspect of public transport has been debated. Possibly this is a good idea. I do not think that I have heard such a wide-ranging debate on a Bill to provide £2.98 million, nearly £3 million. Is this money in addition to the £24 million included in the mini-Budget a few weeks ago or is it part of that Budget? I see somebody shaking his head. I assume, therefore, this is an additional sum which will have to come out of the taxpayer's pocket later on.

A number of people on the Government benches seemed to labour the point that CIE were responsible for the losses. Maybe they are right. On more than one occasion the Labour Party advocated that more account should be taken by the Minister of what the semi-State bodies under his control are doing. I have in mind now the loss of a £2½ million contract which went to a British firm. If the work could not be done by CIE, it should have been given to an Irish firm. It is all right for somebody who does not like trade unions to say "Some trade union official bungled it and they were responsible for what happened". I will not accept that. Somebody must be responsible to ensure that, before a contract of that magnitude is placed abroad, with all the ensuing consequences, every avenue is explored with a view to placing it in Ireland. Not only does it mean finding £2½ million to be paid to a foreign country but there is a consequent loss of employment here and the various other factors which derive therefrom. The Minister must take his full share of responsibility for this. He must have agreed to the placing of the contract in Britain. If he had not advance information of CIE's intention then he is not doing his job.

Dublin is not Ireland and the sooner people realise that fact the better for all concerned. To those who say that the Dublin city bus service is carrying CIE I would retort that the services operating within a radius of 40 miles of the city are the biggest earners for CIE. It was true that Dublin was carrying CIE on its back but it is no longer true.

The Minister said :

The net profit of the Dublin city services was only £61,000 in 1969-70 on a turnover of £7.7 million and, on the basis of present estimates, these services will show a net loss of £280,000 in 1970-71.

I want to put that on the record again because some people think that all of us who come from the country are living off the fare-paying bus passengers in Dublin.

The last increase in fares seems to have been based on an extraordinary arrangement whereby, in the country districts, short-distance passengers were charged exorbitant rates. If some of the Dublin city passengers and workers who have to pay a considerable portion of their pay packet every week on travelling to and from their work had to pay 7s or 8s for a five-mile distance or so—which is quite common in the country districts—they would understand what being fleeced by CIE really means.

Surely the Deputy cannot be right—7s or 8s for five or six miles.

I know what the fare is from where I live to Drogheda. I am a bit surprised at the Parliamentary Secretary, who has quite an amount of experience of the fares paid on buses——

It must be a return fare.

He is surprised, but it is true.

Return fare.

There is no return fare on buses—not on short distance travel.

There are.

There may be special arrangements for the west of Ireland.

It shows how little the Deputy knows. There is, in the midlands.

What is the minimum distance for a return fare?

I know that, all over the country, there are return fares on the buses.

That must have been 40 years ago.

Even last week——

CIE have now raised their fares to the point of diminishing returns. The Dublin city fares have proved that the higher they are raised the lower is the yield. CIE must realise that value must be given for money. Four people can now hire a taxi in Dublin at a cheaper rate than CIE charges for four people on a bus. It is time CIE stopped to think.

Traffic chaos has been mentioned by a number of Deputies. I do not agree with the idea that the way to solve city traffic congestion is to refuse to allow private cars through the centre of Dublin. I drive through Dublin several times a day, as many others do, and I believe the chaos is caused by the buses. Why is it necessary for CIE to drive all their buses through O'Connell Street? It was said when Nelson's Pillar was unceremoniously removed from O'Connell Street that the appearance of the street was improved immensely. I agree. But who thought of making a bus park almost on the site of the pillar? Who decided that was the proper place to park buses for most of the day so that it is now impossible to see O'Connell Street from end to end just as it was when Nelson's Pillar was there? Why is it necessary to park buses in O'Connell Street at all? Why is it necessary for all buses to go through O'Connell Street? It is the main street but surely it should be possible so to route buses that they do not have to drive through the centre of the city?

While I have the greatest sympathy with bus drivers, driving behind one of those vehicles which pull in and out at their own convenience is not pleasant. While motorists in the street may say they are pushed around I suppose if any of us were driving buses and trying to make time as these drivers are, we would do the same thing. It is no joy to drive through a street thick with traffic with a bus before or behind you. It is an unnerving experience. Bus drivers must do their job and timetables are pretty tight although when one sees half-a-dozen buses lined up at one point one wonders if they are really so tight.

The question in regard to the transport system depends on whether we believe it should pay its way. I am amazed at the reference by the Minister, which goes back to the Lemass era, where he says :

CIE have a statutory obligation to break even, taking one year with another, with the aid of the annual grant and the revised grant of £2.65 million which was regarded as a realistic estimate of the minimum subsidy on which CIE could get by, during the five-year period ending 31st March, 1974....

I remember Deputy Childers when he was Minister for Transport and Power talking here about the necessity for CIE to break even. That idea has been handed on from one Minister to another but we all know, as does any Minister with commonsense, that CIE cannot break even. We do not ask that sewage or water schemes should pay their way. They are social services and I believe public transport must be so considered also. Although some Deputies might be inclined to laugh at what was said by some Dublin Deputies who referred to the time when we would have a free public transport system, this might not be so far away. That must be a possibility.

I often wonder if when people talk of the losses incurred by CIE due to strikes, they realise who is responsible for the strikes. Usually, the trade unions and the workers are blamed in that they were unreasonable, but all that is necessary is to check on any wage demand made on CIE through the years, the first offer made by CIE and then the final settlement. It is then very easy to see who was unreasonable.

I do not want to be too critical of people who consider that they are just earning a living like any other workers but CIE have a group of people responsible for labour relations in that company. I have had experience of one of them. As this is mentioned in the Minister's introductory speech I suggest I am in order in referring to it. CIE supply school transport and I had the experience of going to the Labour Court to meet a CIE official who was dealing with those employed to drive school buses. That man, in my opinion, did the same as William Martin Murphy did in 1913: he said he would not make any offer for the drivers collectively but he would deal with each one individually if each case was made to him individually. There are hundreds of drivers. This is the type of attitude that has caused the strikes in CIE. Labour relations in CIE are bad because of this attitude and I believe the Minister should do something about it. It is no use saying CIE are responsible for their own labour relations. In view of the fact that again and again we have had reference in Ministers' speeches here to the fact that so many hundreds of thousands of pounds are lost because of strikes, the Minister should find out who is responsible for the strikes. I am sure he will find out, as I did, that when you begin dealing with an impossible person who thinks he is God and is always right and is not prepared to give an inch, there is no question of negotiating. There is only one thing such a person can understand. If a strike continues week after week until eventually the revenue stops he then begins to change his mind.

In order to prevent that kind of thing continuing the Minister should ensure that those responsible for wage negotiations in CIE are ordinary human beings prepared to see the two sides of a story and prepared to negotiate. It should not be left to one person to decide not alone the destiny of the CIE workers but that of thousands of workers throughout the country who are affected when a strike takes place. They spend almost as much money advertising in the newspapers how right they are as would pay the increases which are sought in the first place. This nonsense must stop. I join with Deputy Moore in his regret that Senator Jimmy Dunne did not remain on the board of CIE because he could have brought a breath of sanity to that board in dealing with labour relations.

Hear, hear.

I am very perturbed about the Minister's reference to railways where he says :

Railway losses of over £5.6 million per annum cannot, however, be accepted with equanimity and I have, therefore, set up a joint committee comprising representatives of my own Department, the Department of Finance and CIE to investigate the deterioration in CIE's financial position and to identify possible corrective measures.

The last time I heard a comment like that by a Minister for Transport and Power it was followed by the closing of branch lines, by the tearing up of branch lines, by the tearing down of bridges, by the sale—to Poland I think —of the lines in case somebody would change his mind and decide to run the trains again. I fear the corrective measures the Minister refers to here are more branch line closures. Before the Minister does anything like that I would ask him to come back to this House and have whatever he or CIE propose to do debated before a final step is taken.

It is quite true, as so many people have said here this evening, that if the Harcourt Street line was opened again it would never be closed. Those of us who travel around the country find every day in the week that the roads are cluttered up with heavy lorries which are employed to bring goods from one place to the other where formerly the railways carried those goods and where, if the railways were still in existence, the goods could be carried instead of on the roads. I should like somebody to estimate the additional cost of making and maintaining roads to carry the weight of traffic which has been forced on them by the economies of Deputy Childers, when he was Minister for Transport and Power, when he closed the railways with such unseemly haste.

I have a document here which is a report on regional development and refers to County Meath. Under the heading of "Infrastructure" there is a subheading "Railways" which states :

Meath is served by a CIE branch line running from Drogheda via Navan to the Gypsum complex near Kingscourt. This is a freight line. A more concerted effort by CIE to attract freight from the industrial complex at Navan might increase traffic and relieve pressure of heavy vehicles on the roads. This proposal is worthy of special study by CIE as inquiries from local industrialists have shown that not alone are they not aware of CIE rates but most of them have forgotten that CIE serve the towns in that area.

We hear of CIE offices in American cities. I do not know what they ar,e doing there or what they hope to sell there. We find that at a time when they have those offices in America they are very anxious to close branch lines, branch offices and even depots in country districts where with the expenditure of a reasonable amount of money they could get quite a lot of traffic. It makes me wonder if this is another section of CIE which could do with a little enlightenment and encouragement from the Department. It is a bit of a cod if the taxpayers of this country are to be put into the position that because of bad management, and it does not appear to be anything else, the public transport system of this country is to be allowed year after year to do all the wrongs and then come back into this House asking Papa for the money when things go the way they did not expect they would go.

There are so many things which have been discussed during the debate before the House that I do not want to detain the House much longer. However, I want to ask the Minister for Transport and Power to take much greater interest in dealing with the board of CIE and the activities of this board than he has done up to this. It is quite obvious from the few points I mentioned here this evening that the Minister apparently has not had very much time to deal with CIE or indeed with any of the other State-sponsored bodies under his control during the last 12 months.

People are very anxious, when referring to the question of increased costs, to point to the wage earners and salary earners employed by CIE and claim they are responsible for the increases which have occurred. It is only fair to repeat what two Deputies in the Minister's party said earlier this evening, that is that there are still a big number of badly paid workers in the employment of CIE. There are people in the employment of CIE whose wages are almost as low if not lower than that of farm workers who are supposed to be the worst paid workers in the country.

When somebody speaks about excessive wages being paid to people employed in the public transport this fact should be brought home to them. Deputy O'Hara felt the same way when he spoke about a private concern being able to undercut CIE with regard to transport from the west to Dublin. We should all remember that the people who are employed by CIE are only looking for a decent rate of wages.

The Minister for Education has an arrangement with regard to school buses which has resulted in a very substantial payment to CIE. They are not alone getting the payment which the State has arranged but a new arrangement has been entered into this year since the summer holidays which bears investigation by the Department of Transport and Power. I refer to the question of the children who, if there is room on the bus for them, are asked to pay. The usual figure is £3 18s, which I understand does not go to the Department of Education but to CIE. The Department of Education are paying for the buses to CIE and therefore the buses should run for the Department of Education. CIE, like any other body, cannot have it both ways. I am aware of a number of children in some areas who are required to pay what I consider to be excessive charges for the purpose of travelling on a school bus because they are only 2.9 miles away from the school and if they were three miles away they would get free transport.

This matter should not be allowed to go on any longer. If the bus is paid for by the Department of Education then all the children who can fit on that bus should travel on it and there should not be any question of having extra payments made. I was amazed, when I made some inquiries about this, to be told that CIE had in fact appointed extra inspectors for the purpose of checking the children going on those buses. Maybe the extra fee being charged to the children is required to pay the wages of the inspectors.

I should like to say a few words on this Bill before the House. It is with some reluctance that I rise to support it. I do so in the knowledge that although I appreciate that this money is necessary in the circumstances, I feel that a far greater effort is required on the part of those who are responsible for the administration of our transport services in the country, but particularly in the city. I am concerned mainly with the city and I have to agree with many speakers from the city constituencies in relation to the inadequate and deteriorating bus services we experience. I am a bus user and I can speak with personal knowledge.

On the Estimate for the Department for Transport and Power I made some points and although I do not like being repetitive I feel I should refer to them again on this Bill. First of all, I would say that this document is depressing in many ways. We have had wide experience with our national transport system and yet we have failed to produce an efficient and economic transport system. Not alone have we failed in the area of passenger transport but we have also failed in the area of freight transport.

The Minister pointed out-and I think we should view this with apprehension—that over 7,000,000 fewer passengers were carried in 1969-70 than in the preceding year and that compared with 1964-65 the number of passengers is down by almost 28,000,000. These are very depressing and significant figures. I see a gleam of hope in the Minister's speech where he refers to the inter-departmental committee he has set up to examine the implications of the problems these figures present.

If I am critical of CIE I am not critical of those who man the day-to-day services. I blame the management. I do so consciously because, if the CIE services in Dublin city have lost 7,000,000 passengers in one year, there are reasons for that. The greater use of motor cars is a contributing factor. It is not unfair for anyone to suggest that there was also a failure by the CIE management to pursue business. They have adhered rigidly to traditional routes established over 30 years ago and, in spite of the growing and expanding suburbs of the city, they have failed to anticipate the passenger capacity and potential.

We had a call today from several Deputies, which I support, for more radial services. My experience of CIE in relation to the running of the services is that when complaints are made, in general traffic conditions are advanced as an excuse for inadequate services and delayed services. I am not in agreement with that. I have pointed this out before. Outside peak hours on some routes I have witnessed three buses travelling in convoy. I have been in O'Connell Street on several occasions between 8 and 9 o'clock at night and I have seen long queues at certain bus stops and then three buses coming along. I do not know who is to blame for that. I just mention these matters to suggest that whatever is wrong is wrong organisationally. With the resources at the disposal of an organisation like CIE a more efficient service could be provided.

The public had to pay substantially increased bus fares in the past few months. They have accepted that graciously. At the same time the majority feel that they are being badly served. Nobody cavils at paying high bus fares or increased bus fares but they do object to and are resentful of the fact that they are not getting an efficient and reliable service. In my opinion, CIE have failed to provide that service in Dublin city at any rate, or on many routes in Dublin city.

Considering the problems he is facing in regard to road transport and rail transport, I hope the Minister will use his influence to bring about a greater improvement in the Dublin bus services. There are several areas in this city in which new routes could be opened up but apparently it is the policy of CIE management to go out and count heads first and see how many passengers they will get before putting on a bus. That seems to be the attitude and the approach. That is wrong. There is no reason, for instance, why CIE should not experiment with more one-man buses and single-decker buses for the various outlying areas to provide feeder services for the main routes. That would relieve much of the congestion at bus stops in the outlying areas.

In areas like Coolock I have seen people waiting for perhaps up to half an hour for a bus to different parts of the city. Unfortunately it is a not uncommon experience for people to have to wait for 20 minutes or 30 minutes, or even up to 40 minutes, before they can get the bus they want. Whatever happens on weekdays applies perhaps more significantly on Sundays and particularly on fine Sundays. Apparently the organisation is not geared to deal with an exodus of people to seaside resorts. If a person wants to get to Howth he has to come into the city. Howth is nine miles from O'Connell Street and if he lives 4½ miles away he has to travel 4½ miles into O'Connell Street before he is assured of getting transport to Howth. These may be small matters but they are important in relation to providing a proper and efficient public transport service. The development of these services in these days of competition with motor owners is very important. If the company made an effort to compete for business against the motor cars they would do much better if the public could be assured of frequent buses to their destinations.

The question of running night services has been raised before. I think I referred to it on the last occasion I spoke on this matter. Since then I have seen that that has been turned down by the management. I would bear with that for the present if I could see some steps being taken to improve the day-to-day services in our city.

I should like to pay tribute to those who operate our bus services at the moment. They are doing a very difficult task and they are coping under very difficult conditions. I should also like to mention the plight of old CIE pensioners. Working in the south-west by-election in the Inchicore area I met many former CIE employees who are existing on miserable pensions, pensions which were determined very many years ago. I know the Minister has since improved their lot and I hope he will see his way to improve their lot still further and provide them with some little extra in the evening of their lives. They are very fine people. They are people with a long tradition of service with the railways. Inchicore was a transport centre in our country and they devoted all their lives to transport and had a special interest in it.

I would ask the Minister to bear those points in mind.

The Minister in his opening statement said that the unhappy financial difficulty in which CIE find themselves is due to inflation. Inflation may well be a contributory cause. However, my recollection of CIE over the years I have been in this House is that their losses have seldom gone below the £ million mark and that it is the exception rather than the rule for them to go below the £ million mark. This is understandable because of the fact that as a semi-State institution they enjoy a privilege which nobody else enjoys. First of all, they have more or less a virtual monopoly in transport in the country. Secondly, for any money they lose they come in here with monotonous regularity and we, the Members of Oireachtas Éireann, must vote them that money. Otherwise, public transport would cease to exist. Thirdly, we are denied the right to raise any matter whatever in regard to CIE by way of parliamentary question. If we ask a question we are told it is a matter of day-to-day administration. CIE are in the happy position that they need not bother about anything until such time as a Bill has to be brought forward to recoup their losses or we have the annual discussion on the Estimate for the Department of Transport and Power.

I suggest to the Minister that there is no regulation which prohibits his answering questions in relation to CIE. It would be to the advantage of the national exchequer for him to do so because it might encourage them to try to lose less money than they are losing. It is only about ten years ago since the then Minister for Industry and Commerce, Mr. Seán Lemass, brought a Bill in here with a scheme under which CIE were to be made solvent in five years and we were told they would not have to come back to the State for any more money. Since then they would have been continuously broke but for the generosity of Members of this House voting them money to exist.

I do not think CIE run their affairs very well, particularly in the city of Dublin. Nobody can congratulate them on their bus service. The Minister has said they have lost quite a number of passengers this year and attributes this to transport difficulties. I do not very often travel by bus but I take a certain interest in the management of CIE in Dublin. I have stood alongside bus queues and seen four or five buses of the same number all together going in the same direction. Sometimes one has to wait a considerable time for a bus to a particular area and while one is waiting the same buses are sweeping by all the time. That shows grave mismanagement.

Has the Minister ever considered the system of urban transport which is used in practically every European city? There is a standardised fee in practically all European cities for buses and trolley buses. A person can get into a bus and travel for any distance he likes for a prescribed sum. It may seem that that would not be an advantage. The Minister told us today that the failure of CIE to keep the Dublin buses fully used in order to make the money they made previously and to carry the same number of passengers is due to traffic conditions. Does it not occur to the Minister that, if he instituted this scheme, many people who come in from outlying districts by car might cease to use their cars because it would be more economical to travel by bus? I know from talking to porters and assistants and people in the different Departments that a tremendous number use their own transport because they say they cannot afford to use public transport. If we had the standardised fee here many more people would use public transport, fewer cars would come into the city and there would not be the cluttering up of traffic that exists at present. I would ask the Minister to consider this. There is nothing novel about it. It is done everywhere else.

CIE are ordering new railway coaches. I suggest that if they looked after the old ones and kept them in any sort of workable order it would be to the advantage of the company. The windows are not cleaned. The seats are dirty. In wintertime they are not properly heated. It is quite usual for engines to break down. Perhaps we are singularly unlucky on what was the old Dublin South Eastern Railway but I hardly ever get into a train on which there is not a breakdown. That, I am told, is due to lack of servicing. There is no use spending huge sums of money on new coaches unless the old ones are kept in proper working order. If we do spend this huge sum, and it is exported money because we are buying them outside for reasons which I cannot understand—I fail to see why we cannot manufacture at least some of them here—it will be useless if they are allowed to go to rack and ruin as all the others have been allowed to.

The closing of the Harcourt Street line was one of the biggest mistakes ever made, whoever was responsible. It was not the present Minister. He was probably sitting on the back benches, if he was in Dáil Éireann at all. It was a most foolish and shortsighted act. Ever since then there has been a gradual build-up of traffic coming in from the south side. At a peak hour it is almost impossible to get in at all. Much of that traffic was carried by the Harcourt Street line. Now it is all road traffic. The line is still there and belongs to CIE. Some of the bridges have been taken away but it would not be a very big job to put them back. It would be well worth considering reopening that line. It would certainly ease the situation considerably.

CIE have a monopoly of school transport. They are the agents on behalf of the Department of Education. I cannot congratulate them on making a success of it. One has to wait weeks on end to get any satisfaction from them. Parents have appealed to me on many occasions for transport for their children and the Department of Education have agreed and written to CIE and told them to make the necessary arrangements. It is the old story. Nothing happens. People come back, one goes to the Department again and they ring up CIE. There is a local agent who is trying to do the job. We have a local agent in my constituency who lives in the town of Wexford. He is trying to do the job but he cannot do it without going back to the central authority. Children are being exposed to traffic hazards on the road just because somebody sitting in a well-heated office in Dublin is foostering over the proposal and will not look after the job properly. The Minister should look into this. This is something about which a Deputy should be able to ask questions. If I asked the Minister a parliamentary question about that I would be told it was a matter of day-to-day administration.

The Deputy would get a full and detailed reply. That has been my practice as Minister.

I am so surprised to hear this that I feel like collapsing on the spot. In regard to every question I have raised relating to CIE I have always received a courteous note from the Ceann Comhairle in which he regrets that the Minister has no function in the matter as it is a day-to-day matter of administration.

If the Deputy puts down the question the answer will be given in detail.

I am delighted to hear that. I wish to raise a point in regard to Ostlanna Éireann Teoranta, which body, I understand, are under the jurisdiction of CIE. They have been selling houses in recent times and I have tried to have this practice stopped. In the southern part of my constituency railway employees find it impossible to get houses. Recently this body sold houses to Roadstone and the tenants were apprehensive that they might have to vacate the houses. I tried to put down a parliamentary question on the matter and it was ruled out of order. If I put the question down again will the Minister give me an answer? It is easy enough for the Minister to say he will answer any question but I must get by the Chair before the Minister can give an answer.

Questions in relation to the ESB, to Bord na Móna and Aer Lingus are answered. Why does the same position not obtain in regard to CIE—possibly the most dull semi-State institution in the country. They have lost more money than anybody else, they have been responsible for allowing machinery and rolling stock to rot away, and yet they are guarded and protected in every possible way by the State. I hope that when a question of national or local importance in regard to this organisation is put down the Minister will answer it—assuming, of course, that he gets the question.

I certainly will.

Having read the Minister's statement and the report of the board of CIE, I am asking the Minister is it not true that CIE are dying?

They are employing more than 20,000 people.

Is the process a rather slow and costly one? If CIE were to cease operating their road services tonight, I have no doubt that a private transport company could take over and within a fortnight they could provide a service equal to that offered by CIE.

We can discuss that with the trade union concerned with the road freight of CIE.

I am making my statement and the Minister will have an opportunity to refer to it later. The photograph in the report I have here shows Ireland as represented by CIE rail services. Much chopping of the services has taken place. In the days when the chopping was carried out we had a few specialists who were able to tell us how to ensure that CIE would break even. However, those days are gone.

So far as my area of the country is concerned, the rail system was abandoned completely and this also happened in many other places throughout the country. According to the Tánaiste, then Minister for Transport and Power, the reason for the exercise was that a country with a small population could not continue subsidising CIE to the extent that was necessary. We were told that something drastic would have to be done : in fact, it was stated, an operation must be performed.

Not only did the Minister and the board of CIE perform that operation quite well but they would not accept any advice from county councils or public representatives. They told us : "We are able to deal with this patient, we know what part to remove. We are satisfied that when the operation is completed the patient will be independent and will not want any injections or subventions from any source." That operation was performed in the late fifties or early sixties but since then the patient has required many injections from the pockets of the taxpayers.

The operation was not successful and all the remedies prescribed had no effect. This matter would be funny but for the fact that the people of the country must again dig into their pockets and find £2.98 million to keep CIE in operation, in addition to the £2.65 million they have already provided—a total of more than £5.6 million.

I had many arguments with the former Minister for Transport and Power when he stated that, as a result of this chopping exercise in the early sixties, CIE would be viable. I could quote from the Official Report many statements made by Deputy Childers who, it could be assumed, knew what he was talking about. His foresight was nil and his knowledge was at the lowest possible point. It was evident then and it is more evident now that he could not see into the future when he claimed that once all this chopping and changing was finished we would hear no more about having to pay subventions to CIE.

Can we go on paying subventions to CIE? Can a country with 2.8 million people go on paying a subsidy of just about £2 per man, woman and child to keep this body going? I do not agree with Deputy Tully that this is a social service because a social service would be applicable to the nation as a whole. CIE do not operate in south west Cork; their railway system has been abolished completely and buses are running practically empty because their fares are excessive. If the services were withdrawn tomorrow I doubt if there would be any complaints. I will illustrate my point. I live in Schull, 70 miles from Cork, and the return bus fare, except for one excursion day weekly, is £4. If I went to travel by bus from Schull and on arriving at the bus stop found there another person who was also bound for Cork, the two of us would join together and we would have no trouble getting a hackney car for the amount we would pay CIE. I heard Deputy Tully staling that four passengers could hire a car for the cost of a CIE fare but I am bringing the number down to two. CIE cannot do business because their charges are too high. Although I have a great deal of sympathy with them, people are not going to pay more than 6d a mile to travel by the CIE road service.

I realise that this is a very difficult problem to solve. The main advantage of CIE's services at present is that they are regular, that you are sure the buses will travel, but I have not got the slightest doubt that if CIE were abolished in the morning you would have—as we had in west Cork in areas not serviced by CIE—a plentiful supply of applicants wishing to provide a service at regular times, that could be equal to if not better than that provided by CIE. Because of the bus fares charged CIE have to be satisfied to travel over a number of west Cork routes carrying only small numbers of passengers, apart from some school children. Again, take my own area as an illustration. You can be driven to Cork privately for half the CIE fare. People are only too anxious to drive passengers direct to Cork, with no stops, and to take them to particular parts of the city which they may wish to visit, such as hospitals or other public places, and bring them back again.

These private owners are able to provide a better service than CIE and I have sympathy with CIE trying to compete with them. What happens in south west Cork, as far as road services are concerned, is no doubt somewhat similar to what is happening all over the country. Is there any re-thinking or, to use the phrase most used nowadays, restructuring of ClE's road transport operations? We are told that they are all right so far as road transport is concerned, that they work out more or less evenly and there is no great profit or loss.

There was a substantial profit on the road passenger service.

There is no great profit or loss shown. However, private companies who could provide a service at half the cost are deprived of doing so because of ClE's monopoly. I know that if such companies were given the same latitude, or if you had—should I use the term—possibly it is dangerous —a free-for-all, they could provide a service at prices which in my estimation would be 50 per cent less than ClE's. We have to take cognisance of the fact that when a person travels on the road transport system, which is much dearer than the railway system, he is subsidising this CIE monopoly because apart altogether from what he pays by way of taxation by virtue of having to use their transport system he is possibly paying twice the normal fare.

I do not know if I have made myself clear on that point. You have two types of subsidies, two types of subvention. First, you have the direct one which you have to pay through taxation to make up this £5.6 million, and secondly, there is the subvention you have to pay by reason of the CIE monopoly. When you travel on their road passenger services you have to pay fares which are far in excess of what you would have to pay if CIE were not in existence. Of course, as I mentioned already, if you are fortunate enough to find when you arrive at the bus stop that a number of people are travelling in the same direction, you can then go along to the private man and get him to take you to your destination. I want to impress on the Minister—and I think I made this statement on a previous occasion—that CIE are losing a great deal of money because their fares are so high. They say that they must meet rising costs of wages and other incidentals, that they must increase their fares, but in many instances they are pricing themselves out of the transport market. Naturally, individuals with cars for hire are watching this process. Who would blame them for cashing in on it? Who would blame them for trying to ascertain who will be travelling here or there tomorrow and trying to coax them to travel with them, which they can do because of CIE's charges?

The Minister seemed amused when I mentioned that CIE are dying. I was astonished to learn that the number of persons availing of CIE buses in Dublin city has decreased to such an extent. According to the Minister's statement, more than 7,000,000 fewer passengers were carried in 1969-70 than in the preceding year and that, compared with the year 1964-65, the number carried in 1969-70 was down by almost 28,000,000. Seven million is a substantial number when one considers that the population of the city is less than three quarters of a million persons. Therefore, it is evident that the people of Dublin are not using the services to the same extent as they used them in other days. Does not this trend justify one in saying that CIE are dying?

This is a world-wide pattern in relation to public transport.

Then, it is a question of whether public transport is on the way out.

There has been a substantial increase in the use of private cars.

For how long more can this caper continue? Who is doing the calculating? The present Minister for Health, who is regarded as being a man of intelligence and ability well above the average, said that CUE cannot continue to receive the injections that they have been receiving. Most of the railway lines were discontinued. Fares were increased and, possibly, other services were curtailed. The same pattern is being followed still. I did not develop my statement about CIE being a social service as was stated by Deputy Tully. I mentioned merely that social service should be one applied nationally. Let us consider the position in relation to west Cork, where there are no railways. In the Berehaven peninsula, which might be regarded as being the poorest part of west Cork, there is no free service for pensioners or for others who are entitled to such a service. CIE do not provide transport beyond Glengarriff which is a distance of 32 miles from the end of the Berehaven peninsula. The result is that pensioners and others must pay fares to the private company which operates in the area. It will be seen therefore that, while the residents of this area pay their contribution towards the subsidies to CIE—this year the subsidy is £5.6 million—they get nothing in return. The same applies to other sparsely populated areas of west Cork and I am sure the same story can be told of several other parts of the country.

I raised the question here of allowing the private bus company which operates in the Berehaven peninsula to accept those passengers who are entitled to free transport services on the same basis as they are accepted by CIE but negotiations in that regard have not concluded although the free scheme has been in operation now for the past three or four years. The same applies to the Sheepshead peninsula. It applies also to the entire parish of Durrus and to parts of the Mizen Head peninsula as well as to other parts of south west Cork. It is about time we discontinued coddling CIE and gave some concessions to the private companies that are operating in those areas I have mentioned.

I have asked who is doing the forecasting. Who is the prophet in CIE? It is not the gentleman about whom we used hear so much long ago, Theophilus Moore.

Old Moore's Almanac.

Down through the years the amount of money that would be required by CIE in any one year has been miscalculated. This year, the prediction was very far off the mark.

A sum of £2.65 million was included in the Estimate whereas the additional amount required to keep the company in operation was more than 100 per cent of that estimate or £2.98 million. I am as much entitled to make a prediction now as are the fellows who have been predicting CIE finances during the years. It is my prediction that the amount required for 1971-72 will be £8 million and that by 1975-76 it will be at least £10 million. Since they have now passed the £5½ million mark it is reasonable to assume that the amount I have mentioned will be required by them by the year 1975-76.

I realise that transport services must be nationalised but, as I have stated here before, I am a firm believer in examining alternative methods. I believe that private enterprise should carry out any operation that could be carried out more economically by them than by State sponsored bodies.

How does the Deputy equate that with the views of his colleagues?

I am not casting any reflection on either the board or the executive of CIE, some of whom I know to be very capable men but, at the same time, it must be very nice for a man or a woman to be an executive in a body such as CIE rather than to be an executive in a private company. A person holding that position on the staff of an organisation such as CIE would be free from financial worries. If things do not go according to plan they know that Kathleen Ní Houlihan must pay. They know that the Minister for Transport and Power will come to the Dáil and ask for a subvention. How much more pleasant that is than the position of the private business operator who is worried about his balance sheets, who is worried about a falling-off in his customers, who is worried about difficulties that may arise in one field or another of his activities, and that as a result he, his family and his employees will suffer.

There is no such worry among the members or the executives of the CIE board. It must be the grandest job in the world to be attached to a company in which you are sure of your money irrespective of how you manage it, irrespective of how you work, irrespective of how you attract custom. A private businessman, if he is to live and provide for his family, must be nice to his customers, he must devise ways and means of expanding his business and attracting customers. That does not apply so far as publicly owned bodies are concerned, although I am not saying that within publicly owned bodies there are not a number of very conscientious men who try to expand business and improve as much as possible the services they provide.

The complaint made by me here on a number of occasions relating to State-sponsored bodies and referred to by the previous speaker. Deputy Esmonde, is that we are not getting sufficient information on State-sponsored bodies. I have agitated again and again for a committee of this House to be set up to probe into the workings of State-sponsored bodies. Personally I am satisfied that that claim is justifiable, and if I were asked to produce a single supporting argument it would be the fact that we must provide regular subvention for a number of State-sponsored bodies. Surely representatives of the Irish people who are elected to this House should be entitled to form a committee and get some information as to how business is managed, as to how the companies are progressing? In the course of this statement there is reference to the employment of consultants.

They have been employed since yesterday.

That is a good one. CIE are now acknowledging failure. They are acknowledging they are unable to devise new tablets for the patient, to prescribe any new medicine. They have to call in a firm of consultants to whom they will possibly have to pay £100,000.

The people will read that this additional money is required to keep CIE in motion and will recollect the statement of CIE during the past few weeks that they have placed orders for coaches to the value of £2½ million with an outside company. Are a group or a body that are losing money as rapidly as CIE are losing it entitled to use public funds to buy coaches to the value of £2½ million? Is that essential?

I must say there are very few complaints about the condition of the coaches and other vehicles in the public service. I do not agree with the remarks of the previous speaker. I do not know where he got his information or whether he was speaking from knowledge of a few isolated incidents. Generally speaking, any time I have travelled up here on the train—and I see the buses also—the service has been up to the standard. How does it come about therefore that a company losing £5.6 million is ordering goods from outside the country to the value of £2½ million?

This is a question which should be probed by a committee of this House, because I believe Ireland will not be able to meet the demands made on it. It is an additional £3 million for CIE today. There was an additional £2½ million for the Cork Health Authority last week. How many more demands will be made all over Ireland? Is it any wonder the Book of Estimates is showing a sharp increase of around 18 per cent from year to year? Will that continue or is that supposed to be what is known as the inflationary trend?

Even in places where CIE services are essential one hears complaints about the cost of travelling by CIE. Is the declining patronage of Dublin bus services due to increases in fares? Has a consultant been employed to ascertain whether the consequent loss of custom after fare increases results in a reduction in revenue? I am satisfied that this applies to rural services and possibly urban services as well.

Sub-committees should be set up to inquire into the functioning of State-sponsored bodies. I do not see why a board should be given a free hand. When the Minister is asked questions about that board he replies to them in a general way and public representatives are unable to obtain any more information about that body. There may be Members of this House who could make useful and valuable suggestions if such a committee were established.

The whole question of establishing committees of this House to inquire into the activities of State-sponsored bodies should be reconsidered.

It is fortunate for CIE that the school bus services were introduced but it should be remembered that if CIE were not there, private firms could operate these services. At present CIE have a monopoly of school bus services but they employ private companies to supplement their own transport system.

I always like to illustrate a point with personal experience. Dunbeacon is a townland in the parish of Schull. CIE operate a school bus service from that townland carrying eight or nine children to the secondary school in Bantry. Dunbeacon is ten miles from Bantry, but the children travel 42 miles on their way to Bantry. They have to attend for collection at 7.25 each morning and they are taken from the cross four miles to Durrus village; they are then taken to Sheepshead, which is 16 miles from Durrus village, brought back to Durrus village and finally taken on to Bantry. This is completely unfair to the children. A private company collects children at Durrus village and takes them directly to school in Bantry. But despite repeated representations to have a minibus call at Dunbeacon, which is four miles away, this has not been done and the children must travel more than 50 miles each day to and from the school in Bantry. The Department of Education say that the conveyance of secondary school children is a matter for CIE and I should like to know what the Minister thinks of that kind of service. Does this sort of thing happen in any other part of the country? If CIE do not feel they can take the children there are plenty of local people willing to do so. I admit the case I have given may be an extreme one but I want to illustrate how difficult it is to get defects remedied by a big body. I realise that top executives of CIE are probably not the type to listen to representations from passengers—they are too big for that—but it is the passengers who will contribute to the big injection CIE require this year and will require next year and the year afterwards.

The Minister can disclaim responsibilty here for the school transport service and place it on the Department of Education. I am sure that you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, as an ex-teacher are conversant with the transport scheme for children living more than 2½ miles from a primary school and you may also be conversant with the regulation which some person in the Department of Education—maybe it was a combined effort on the part of CIE and the Department—devised quite recently; you are entitled to be carried to school if you are more than a certain distance from it and if you are less than ten years of age but, once you pass ten years of age, you must walk. I think the distance is 2½ miles.

Two miles.

Three miles.

Deputy Tully says it is three miles. How ridiculous can we be? The driver of the bus will tell John Murphy that he is now over ten years and he must walk to school but he will continue to take his sister because she is only nine; the vehicle may be only half-full. This is the kind of crackpot regulation we have. Maybe there is some justification for this kind of regulation in populous districts where transport is taxed to the limit. I ask the Minister for Transport and Power to get in touch with the Department of Education and discuss this silly regulation with that Department. The Minister is supposed to be in charge of transport.

We are the executants.

Surely the Minister has some say? If a job is farmed out to me and I am paid for doing that job the natural thing is for me to make some comments on how the work should be done.

The Chair would point out to the Deputy that it is the Department of Education which decide whether a pupil will travel. After that it is a matter for the transport company. Secondly, a matter like this is a matter of administrative detail and is more applicable, therefore, to an Estimate.

I understand the Department pays a lump sum to CIE for doing this work.

CIE have to comply with the regulations.

The Department draw up the regulations. The people who avail of this service can truthfully say that they are not getting value for the money they are paying for this service by way of taxation. This measure proposes to levy an extra £2.98 million additional taxation to keep CIE moving and, therefore, no matter how remote the operation is, it can be discussed.

Again, the Chair would point out that it is the Department of Education which decide whether a pupil will be carried. After that it is a matter for the transport company to carry the pupil.

I have indicated the silliness of the regulation. One would think that your time and the time of the House should not be wasted on a matter of detail. There would be no need for me to mention such a matter here this evening if it could be dealt with through personal representations. Mark you, I have referred to this on other occasions.

We have here a sum of £707,000 which CIE seem to have lost through strikes. It is no harm to let the general public know that. It is only through discussion here that the general public can be made aware of what is happening. I heard Deputy Tully opportioning responsibility for the strikes. He is more conversant with that side of the picture than I am but, whoever is responsible, it is a damn shame, to put it mildly, that such a position should obtain and that we should have in a country with a population of less than 3,000,000 people so many strikes and so much disruption year after year.

Hear, hear.

We must address ourselves to this problem. I cannot dispute the figures submitted, but the grand' total is £707,000. It is also pointed out that other strikes resulted in a loss of business to CIE-the cement strike and the strike in the fertiliser industry. We must take cognisance of strikes. We cannot continue to ignore them. I say that as a Labour representative. When a strike occurs everyone seems to be a loser. The workers suffer. Our prestige abroad suffers. Our chances of getting people to establish industries here suffer. Our chances of attracting outside investment suffer. Something must be done. There must be a change of heart. There must be more give and take, I realise that well-organised groups will stretch out their hands for possibly more than their fair share of the loaf, asking for a bigger slice than that to which they are entitled. My standard of intelligence, which is not as high as that of some other Members of this House naturally, leads me to believe that if one group get a slice of the national loaf in excess of that to which they are entitled it follows that other sections must do with a smaller slice than that to which they should be entitled. The Government's job and the Government's duty is to ensure, so far as possible, that all sections of our people are given their fair slice of the loaf. Any fellow who, having got his fair slice, stretches out his hand and asks for more—to the detriment of some other fellow—should be told: "Hold on. You are not getting it."

Hear, hear.

That happens in an ordinary country home where, say, a sweet cake is divided among six or seven children. It is not unusual for one or more of them to ask for another slice but it is not given because the mother knows that, if it is given, some of the other children would have to get a smaller slice.

If some of the wealthy neighbours came in and bought the whole cake, I think there would be a bit of a row, too.

If she had a taxpayer to bake another one——

There is neither right nor left here.

I agree with Deputy Murphy completely in what he has said just now.

It is about time all sections of our community commenced to examine their conscience. We must try to bring about a position in this country whereby strikes will be unheard of. If we continue along the road we are travelling, I am afraid we shall get into very deep water.

Hear, hear. That is what the Prices and Incomes Bill is ail about.

That is what uncontrolled inflation leads to.

I am sure the Minister will put about ten different interpretations on the Prices and Incomes Bill.

It is good sound sense.

Why do you not put good sound sense into operation? The young fellow in second class in school can see through losses just as well as the most intelligent professor in this House.

Hear, hear. The Deputy is dead right.

This brings me back to the establishment of sub-committees at which this and similar matters could be discussed and possibly some solution found. Questions such as the avoidance of strikes and the losses sustained by CIE could be probed with a view to seeing how these problems could be solved. We are all too conscious of the ballot box : that is a failure of democracy. It is the type of thing which necessitates this Bill.

Do not worry. The Deputy will talk it out, all right.

We have an abundance of speakers here. I resent the insinuation by the Parliamentary Secretary. I have never wasted one minute of the time of this House. I am not in connivance with any group to talk here. I am making my own statement, as I always do. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to withdraw his remark. It is completely unfair to suggest that any Member would come in here and wantonly waste the time of the House.

The Deputy's name has been on the television monitor for a long time.

I do not know what part of the building the Parliamentary Secretary was in before he arrived here.

Make a guess.

Let us leave it at that. CIE's health is not too good. The former Minister for Transport and Power, Deputy Childers, argued that transport companies are not paying in any other place and why should they pay here. He did not tell us that in years gone by. There may be justification for continuing a transport service on a national basis but with the financial provisions for that undertaking so upset, as is evident from the introduction of this Bill which seeks approval for still more money, and in view of other Bills which we had recently for additional sums, there is equal justification for closer examination. Will the representatives of the people be given an opportunity to get that closer examination. I am not picking on CIE. If it were the ESB or some other State-sponsored body, I should be making the same statement.

The Chair is aware of the length of time it has taken the Minister for Transport and Power to acknowledge that public representatives are entitled to know how funds are allocated to hotels and guesthouses. That claim was resisted for years. If one keeps urging the justice of one's claim, eventually the justice of it becomes so evident that it has to be acknowledged. Similarly, we must keep repeating, on Estimate after Estimate, the desirability of a body of people, elected by the general group of citizens, examining the activities of this board and of other public bodies.

I want to make a few points about County Mayo and the west of Ireland in general so far as transport is concerned. Over the years, we have suffered from the closure of portions of our railways in Mayo. We have lost our rail link from Ballinrobe to Claremorris. We have lost our rail link from Achill to Westport. We have lost our passenger service from Sligo to Claremorris. We have also practically lost our passenger service from Claremorris to Ballina.

I want to make a few points regarding matters affecting County Mayo in particular. I cannot see why a train travels from Ballina, bypassing Foxford and Balla, and stands at Claremorris. Why could it not stand for two or three minutes to collect passengers? A station master would not be necessary in either sector. The people who would avail of this service could get on the train and purchase their tickets on the train. Various protests have been made in the past to save the passenger service in those areas but as a result of CIE and Government decisions they failed. Once again I appeal to the Minister to reconsider the possibility of collecting passengers at Foxford and Balla. People from the Balla area must pay for a hackney car to take them the eight miles to the train at Claremorris whereas a two minute stop by the passenger train from Wesport or Ballina would accommodate them.

The Ballinrobe section of the line has been completely cut out for the past ten or 15 years. This is one of the greatest farming centres in the county. A new cattle mart has been built there and there is a successful sale every week. All the stock from there must be transported through Claremorris for whatever part of Ireland it is going to. CIE at that time gave a grant of £12,000 to construct a road from Ballinrobe to Claremorris but the available grant constructed only half of that road. The condition of the road from Claremorris to Ballinrobe is deplorable. Seeing that the rail link from Ballinrobe to Claremorris was removed, at least that road should have been constructed all the way. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider this matter and see if an extra grant could be given to construct the remaining part of the road. This is a farming area that can compare with anything in Ireland.

Under the increased fares it costs £7 14s for a return ticket from Westport to Dublin. This means that if four people from Westport wanted to come to Dublin they could pay over £30 for a private car and get home at the same cost as CIE would charge them. I believe that as a result of increased passenger fares CIE will lose heavily in the west of Ireland because the people will not avail of the services. I appeal to the Minister to do something to reduce fares. I feel certain that if fares from Ball in a or any part of the west, were kept at the same level, CIE would benefit.

Complaints have been made to me about the prices charged on the trains. I suppose this applies to every passenger service in the country. You can leave Dublin on the 7 o'clock train for Westport but you will find no dining carriage, only a snack bar, on the train. People doing shopping in Dublin cannot have a meal before they leave because they are rushing all the time to catch this train. Yet they cannot be supplied with the meal because there is no dining coach on the train. I should like the Minister to take full note of this. Prices charged for meals on those trains are excessive. You pay 2s 6d for a boiled egg. That is the listed price. These charges should be challenged. Surely no sensible man would pay 2s 6d for a boiled egg?

Various committees of agriculture, county councils and various other bodies of which lama member have raised the matter of freight charges for the west of Ireland in relation to the survival of the west of Ireland. It costs £6 more to get one ton of stuff in the west than it does in Cork. In the case of pigmeal this would mean at least 30s difference in the cost of a pig produced in the west of Ireland and a pig produced in any of the southern or eastern counties. I ask the Minister seriously to consider these freight charges to the west of Ireland. Regardless of political views, all public bodies in the west are concerned about this. If some subsidy were provided for freight charges for foodstuffs for the west it would be an enormous help and if the Minister could do something in that way it would be a great benefit. I would not oppose his Estimate because I know—and we must all be realistic about the situation—that costs and wages have gone up and as a result we know that no Department can run its business for the same figure. Therefore the excess must be obtained for extra wages and costs. As some speakers have said, it may be that things are not all right. I should like to see a complete investigation of the whole matter to discover why all these costs arise. I know extra costings are needed to provide the increased wages which have gone on down the years. I appeal to the Minister to consider this seriously. The Parliamentary Secretary who was here a few minutes ago representing the Minister accused Deputy Murphy of trying to talk out the debate. I am not here to talk out the debate and I do not think Deputy Murphy was here to do so either. I only stood up here to make a few points which concern the people of the west.

I appreciate that.

I resent, for that reason, the statement the Parliamentary Secretary made to Deputy Murphy at that time.

Never mind. Deputy Murphy dealt with it.

The Deputy is making a very constructive speech.

I should like the Minister to consider the few points I made.

This question of CIE, their continuing losses and their various problems will, like the poor, always be with us. For a long time now the problems of CIE have been debated here in this House, in newspapers and in various other places. As we have heard from the various speakers, it is a subject with many aspects such as the operation of the law of diminishing returns to the cost of the boiled egg on the train to Claremorris. Indeed, I sympathise with a person getting on the train at Westland Row, travelling to Westport and having to depend on a boiled egg at a cost of half a crown to sustain him over that arduous trip.

The various problems that affect CIE gives us some indication of the complexity of the whole situation. One must have sympathy with the Minister in coming into the House to ask for nearly £3 million so that this institution can be kept, as Deputy Murphy said, literally in motion. It would appear from the Minister's statement and from the annual reports of CIE, that the villain of the piece is the railway system. This is where the big loss occurs. The Minister said frankly in his statement that inflation would have its greatest effect on the railway end of CIE operations.

The Minister in his statement also said that salaries and wages of railway employees represent 81 per cent of the total railway expenditure as against 54 per cent in the case of provincial buses. We must regret that inflation has been allowed to develop to the stage where it has had this effect. If the warnings about the results of inflation had been heeded when they were first given years ago and remedial action taken, it is possible we might be spared this debate and the Minister would be spared the necessity and CIE the embarrassment of having to come to the taxpayer for yet another substantial subvention. It is depressing when one considers that this subvention is only one of a long line of similar payments. The Minister's statement holds out no hope that it is likely to be the last such subvention.

If CIE's problems vis-á-vis the railway service are to be approached purely on a money basis, the answer must be to shelve the railways. But I would be against such a step. I know varying views have been expressed on this side of the House as to whether or not the railways should be retained. Some people think the purely economic viewpoint should be adopted and the railways scrapped, while others believe the railways represent a social service and should be retained. I confess I am a supporter of the latter view : that the railways are in effect, a social service and we must pay for it. It does not follow that, because we describe it as a social service, it should be allowed to lose exorbitant sums.

The problems of the railway have been with CIE for many years now. It is not strange that those problems cannot be solved because railway losses is a world-wide problem and is not confined to this country. It seems odd, however, that they cannot be contained within reasonable limits, that the losses on the railways should continue to increase each year and that the abilities to be found within CIE could not have been directed towards that end.

I am disappointed to learn that the committee which has been set up in CIE have been authorised by the Minister to enlist the aid of consultants because I consider this new science of industrial consultancy to be one of the new modern bluff sciences. I do not know if anyone has ever yet been able to say in any firm to which those people have given their lofty minds that that firm has improved by £1 as a direct result of a survey and consequential recommendations.

I agree with the Deputy. You must really know what you want. There is no point in employing them blindly and giving them a free hand.

My experience of those consultants is that they are brought in to solve a problem, to advise on how a problem must be solved.

You must know first what the problem is before it can be solved.

If you know what the problem is, then it can be solved.

I agree fully with the Deputy. If you bring them in to solve your problems there is no point in that.

They have to identify the problem.

You must know what it is yourself.

If you know what the problem is you do not need them, because surely it is not beyond the ability of anybody, especially a body of the complexity of CIE, to solve their own problem if they know what it is. Possibly in a body of this size with all its ramifications it may be difficult for the people in it to see the wood from the rees and a consultant may perform that function. I have a bias against those people because I feel it is a modem bluff science. They have their own particular gobbledygook which hides their real inadequacies. I am disappointed that this is all CIE can suggest towards containing the losses on the railways. I know in CIE there are very many people of ability and they have all the aids which modern science can give them in identifying and solving their problems. Despite this they go to one of those outside firms. I do not know which firm it is.

It is McKinseys.

I do not know what it will cost. I would say £80,000 would possibly be a conservative figure.

It costs £200,000 to tell how the health boards should be run.

They did a very good job with the ESB.

I would say that £80,000 is a conservative estimate.

Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 11th December, 1970.
Top
Share