I want to refer to the extra money being provided for CIE and also to the difficulties that exist in CIE at present, the inconvenience being caused, the threat of job losses, the threat to the economic life of the city centres of Dublin and Waterford at such a crucial time and the inconvenience and added cost being placed on the general public during a period of such inclement weather as we have had in recent weeks. The bus disputes have certainly caused serious problems for the public.
Vote 43: Transport and Power (Resumed).
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £133,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1976, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Transport and Power, including certain services administered by that Office and for payment of certain subsidies and sundry grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for Transport and Power.)
Will members who do not seem to be interested in the proceedings of the House please leave as quietly as possible?
Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. I think it is unpardonable that you should have to make such a request to people who are elected as allegedly responsible people while I am speaking about something which is seriously affecting the business and everyday life of Dublin city, Waterford city and indeed, Limerick city for a few days this week. One would have thought that the newly-appointed Minister for Transport and Power would have seen the urgency of moving in to solve this situation immediately the problem arose. Instead, he and his colleague, the Minister for Labour, sat back in typical style and allowed the position to worsen. I shall not split hairs with anybody: I do not think it is relevant whether one says the dispute spread to Limerick or not: the important thing is that we did have an added strike in Limerick this week although the CIE management saw fit to correct a statement of mine a few days ago. The point is that there were strikes in three of our major cities, two of them still continuing, and only when the newspapers announced that Fianna Fáil were going to pursue the matter in Dáil Éireann did the Minister for Labour, as usual belatedly, step in to try to solve the problem. On this occasion he happened to be in the country; there was another Dublin bus strike when he was far from our shores while badly needed here.
I want to refer to the disappointing industrial relations history of CIE. A certain amount of blame for this dispute must rest on both sides. I, like all our party spokesmen and our party generally, will always approach these disputes in a very responsible and reasonable attitude unlike the attitude of the Minister for Labour when he was on this side of the House. He never approached such disputes in a rational and sensible way but called for fire brigade action which is not the easiest or best solution to industrial disputes.
Blame for this dispute rests on both sides. Management must accept a share of the blame for the timing of the revised schedules. One thing which is so badly needed and is so often lacking in the best of us is common sense. The timing of revised schedules which could precipitate such a dispute in the heart of winter prior to the Christmas shopping rush was badly planned. I shall not say the other side are blameless; they are not. There is much wrong on both sides in this dispute which I believe differs from some previous disputes in that company.
This Minister has a role to play and when he has the Worker Participation Bill which is slowly dragging through the House accompanied by so many other Bills he will have a role to play in implementing worker participation. I refer to this because I believe—and the Minister in introducing the Bill said—that worker participation will have a very important part to play in industrial relations. I entirely agree that it should and could have a very important part to play—but not in the type of worker participation being introduced by this Minister because it is not adequate or effective or involved at meaningful levels of management where communication is so badly needed. Communications in CIE are certainly not as good as they should be.
The Minister must also investigate whether the works council is working satisfactorily. Is there an honest approach on both sides? Is the conciliation machinery adequate and satisfactory? Is it necessary to have it revised? If we are serious about worker participation the works councils must be effective, must be able to achieve something within their companies. This Minister has a heavy onus placed on his shoulders now. I wish him well in his new Department. I believe he has a load on his shoulders which could have been eased if the Minister for Labour's proposals on worker participation had been more constructive, far-reaching and aimed specifically at management levels where such disputes can be discussed, reconciliation can be achieved and views expressed in a forthright and honest way.
Buses are an essential service. It is the responsibility of a Minister to ensure that essential services are maintained without disruption. Who are the sufferers in this dispute? First, the working people, especially of Dublin city. We have seen a two-fold threat to their jobs. The first is because of loss of trading in some centre city shops; the second comes from the possibility of a worker being consistently late or not able to make his or her place of employment in a reasonable time. The second sufferers are the traders. I believe there has been a 20 per cent drop in sales, despite inflation, on a day last week which was compared with a day the previous year.
The general public and the housewife need these services at Christmas time especially. These people have been waiting in queues for a long time and they do not know if the buses will ever arrive. All this is happening in inclement weather. School children, too, are suffering. Do they deserve that? This Government do not mind sitting back and allowing them to suffer. Recently the key Minister, the Minister for Finance, thinking aloud, said he was considering discontinuing school transport in rural areas. Some of the speakers from these benches said that that was a new term for talking through his hat.
As I said, I believe there was a lot of bad judgment in this case. Intervention should have been made at an early stage to relieve the inconvenience and the cost to the economy in this period immediately preceding Christmas. I tried to raise this issue by way of Private Notice Question yesterday but due to the rule of procedure of the House it was not possible. I am making these points now because I believe the Minister for Labour would not have intervened yet but for the pressure which eventually came from this side.
I am anxious that the Deputy relate his remarks to the Supplementary Estimate for Transport and Power. I am also anxious to dissuade him from straying into an area which is the responsibility of another Minister, the Minister for Labour.
We are discussing the grant in respect of rail passenger services and CIE generally on this Supplementary Estimate. Surely it is relevant to discuss CIE even when it comes into the area of another Minister.
We are discussing the Department of Transport and Power in this Supplementary Estimate.
That is exactly what I am discussing. CIE is a State body under the control of the Minister for Transport and Power. I now want to refer to the concern felt by many CIE employees, especially in the road freight services, about possible redundancies. They fear that it is the aim of CIE, or possibly the Department, to see the road freight section run down. I hope this is not so but the morale of the employees has to be restored and their fears allayed. Otherwise there will be a drop in the morale and job satisfaction that is so essential to any employee's contribution to the work he is engaged in every day.
I am asking this new Minister to give assurances to our spokesman that he will ensure continuation and revitalisation of road freight services in depots throughout the country. CIE are also involved with other countries. They have a 30 per cent share in Irish Ferryways. I want the Minister to assure us that CIE's continued interest in this company is not in danger. I understand this to be a profitable unit in the CIE network and I want to see it continued. There is a fear among those employees that their jobs are in jeopardy.
In the road freight depot in Cork, probably one of the biggest in the country, there is an excellent group of people, both at management and operational level. Many of these men have given long and valued service to the company but they too fear for their future and I hope the Minister will reassure them.
This Supplementary Estimate brings to our attention certain savings on the Estimate itself. Some of them are surprising. In my opinion, no blame can be laid on the shoulders of the present Minister because he has not been long enough in that office to shoulder any responsibility for the Department not playing their role in the employment that is so badly needed at present. I want to know from the Minister how it is that the £500,000 allocated to Cork Harbour has not been spent.
The first indication the Leader of our party had of who was to be the new Minister for Education was when the former Minister for Transport and Power, in typical Coalition fashion, called a Press conference in Cork to announce the approval by the Government of the Cork Harbour plan, two days before the ministerial reshuffle. The harbour announcement had been eagerly awaited and was well received, but one questions the sincerity behind it. How closely was the announcement connected with the event of the following Wednesday or Thursday when the Taoiseach moved the Cork Minister to the Department of Education? One has to ask was he playing local politics, because four years ago, just before the Government took office, the Cork harbour plan had been laid before the Department, and in the meantime pressure had been put on the Minister and the Government, and that Minister and the Deputies behind him voted against a Fianna Fáil motion calling for approval for that plan.
Four years went by, and nothing will convince me that that announcement a couple of days before the Cabinet reshuffle was not pre-empted by the imminent move of the Cork Minister for Transport and Power from that Department. But worse, in answer to questions in the House from Deputy Barrett and to requests from the Cork Harbour Board last spring, the Minister said £500,000 had been allocated in the 1976 Estimates for that work. Now, in December, 1976, we understand this money has not been spent. Why? Would the jobs that would have been created by this expenditure not have been of benefit to Cork in these times of terrible unemployment?
The development of Cork Harbour, and of harbours generally, will become an even more important part of the work of this Department in the future. We have heard of the need for the provision of specialised facilities at our major harbours. That was the case made in relation to the Cork development. All the preparations, including the submission of plans to the Department, were completed in 1972 to tie up with the purchase of 600 acres of land by the IDA in the immediate vicinity of the harbour to coincide with the provision of the necessary infrastructure, such as a water scheme, to serve the industrial development of the harbour area. That land is lying idle and the harbour plan has become a political football.
Tied up with the harbour plan, naturally, was the very important matter of employment. The jobs that would have been created during the construction work would have been of immense benefit in these days of hardship and the aim was that when the harbour had been developed in stages, as industry in the area progressed, more and more jobs would have been provided. One could go on to point out the lack of commitment by the Government——
I am anxious that the Deputy would confine his remarks to the Supplementary Estimate, which is very limited. I am concerned that he is going into detail which should properly be reserved for the main Estimate.
In this Supplementary Estimate there are several subheads. I do not wish to argue with you because you have always treated me fairly, but you will appreciate how we have been prevented from any worth-while debates on Estimates because of the appearance of several of them together. Here I am referring to a saving of £610,000, of which £500,000 was allocated to the Cork Harbour scheme. We need further harbour development and we need more employment and one is entitled, therefore, to ask why this money has been saved.
On the second page of the details accompanying the Supplementary Estimate there is reference to a surplus in regard to Aer Rianta in their operations at Dublin, Shannon and Cork. There is what I take to be a saving of £380,000. It amazes me that a Cork Minister who has just left this Department would in conscience allow that money to be saved at a time when Cork Harbour needs to be developed and when the world knows that Cork Airport, its runways and buildings, are not properly equipped to cater for the traffic such an airport should be able to handle.
I referred a while ago to the necessity for job satisfaction and morale-boosting of employees within CIE and in Cork Airport at management and employee level. There has been a suspicion that the Minister and his Department instead of showing anxiety to up-grade the airport prefer to leave it as a small country airport. Yet on Friday of last week a plane load of people from Brussels could not land at Dublin or Shannon because of fog and they were glad to have Cork then. It did at least give those people an opportunity, despite the inconvenience, of being landed there although they had to be conveyed to Dublin by train in the early hours of the morning.
Someone must ask about that kind of saving of money at a time when people are crying out for jobs and we have in the building industry alone an unemployment figure of something like 23,000. This Government are in no way interested in or committed to the provision of job opportunities. It is in Departments such as Transport and Power and in the State bodies operated under that Department that jobs of a productive nature can be generated. When almost £100 million was paid out in the past year for dole and unemployment benefit, necessary though that be, would it not be far better to save the wages content in the expenditure of that £610,000? It would have been an overall saving for the economy because the money for Transport and Power and for Social Welfare is coming for the most part from the already over-burdened taxpayers, the working people especially. PAYE contributes, VAT contributes, the Excise contributes.
Why did the Minister not see to it that those jobs, so necessary, were provided? We are not talking about just spending money or building harbours or extending airports or runways just for the sake of doing it. These things are necessary and are an investment. During the past year a worth-while number of jobs should have been provided that could well have made some impression on the almost 112,000 people on our unemployment register. Add on the 40,000, 50,000 or perhaps 60,000 that nobody is too sure of, the school leavers, the young people who are not on that unemployment register. We are talking then of a figure between 160,000 and 180,000 on whom we could have made a worth-while impact by reducing those figures to some reasonable extent.
Instead the Minister sits back and allows the savings to be made. We had today the disappointment of a measure specifically designed towards getting people back to work. We are going to see it fall because the Dáil adjourns tomorrow and will not sit again before the date on which that Bill goes out of existence, 8th January. I tried to raise that on the Adjournment and because of the rules of procedure of this House I was not allowed to do so because I would be as an ordinary or private Member of the House creating legislation.
It is hardly relevant now, Deputy, on this Supplementary Estimate.
I could argue that——
The Minister in possession is not responsible for that. It would not be in order.
I do not intend to pursue it too far. I will not make it awkward for you, Sir. However, I believe it is related very closely to the points I am making and the lack of commitment by this Government to providing jobs.
These were a few comments I wanted to make on the Estimate for Transport and Power. I am glad to have the opportunity of expressing some of these ideas. I look for certain assurances from the Minister through our spokesman. Finally, I would also make a request to him. I presume that he has some up-to-date information on the bus disputes. The Minister for Labour and I am sure the Minister himself have been beseiged with requests from people all over the city that in the name of God they would do something quickly to get the services working. I do not want to preempt the satisfactory outcome because I hope that it will be satisfactory, but our need is growing more critical and even if we have to ask the management of CIE to say "We will defer it until a few days after Christmas", that will have to be done. We have eight, nine or ten more shopping days to Christmas. In the interests of the people working in the centre of the city, in the interest of the traders employing people in the centre of the city, in the interest of the public of Dublin especially who are experiencing such problems in going to their employment and going to do their Christmas shopping this must be done. Schools will be closing in a few days although many will be open until 22nd. Those children are suffering during a period of inclement weather.
I accept that this Minister is hard-working and I ask him in the interests of those people of Dublin to ensure that at least some time tomorrow he will get those buses rolling again and rolling properly, even if only on a temporary basis for a few days until after the Christmas period. I appeal to him to do it and to assure us in his reply that he will.
Deputy Fitzgerald has so rightly emphasised the situation existing in the public transport service in Dublin and Waterford and to a lesser extent in Limerick. Perhaps it is fortunate and appropriate that we should be discussing the trouble in CIE between management and unions which, whatever the rights on either side, has certainly penalised the citizens of this city. I walked down O'Connell Street last Saturday afternoon and I saw people standing in the cold waiting for buses which did not come. When they did come they were overcrowded and could relieve little the crowd waiting there and in other places. I often wonder why we inflict such suffering on ourselves.
I am not competent to allocate blame nor is it my function to do so, in relation to the bus dispute. I appeal to both sides in the dispute, knowing it has to be settled sooner or later, to give the people of this city and Waterford a break. We are entering the season of goodwill and it is an appropriate time to make an appeal. The House has under discussion various pieces of legislation for worker participation, the protection of workers and better management generally. Here we find a service on which many people who do not belong to the affluent sector but who live in the new dormitory towns outside the city depend so much. People's lives in those areas are disrupted if buses are not running. There is a great loss to industry because people cannot get to the factories early in the morning or get to their offices or shops in time. There is also great loss to traders in the city.
Perhaps the greatest loss is felt by the young family who have bought a house out in the suburbs. Today Dublin Corporation opened a new housing estate in Killinarden, between Tallaght and Blessington. One can well imagine the state of mind of young husbands in that area who try to get to their jobs when no bus services are available. Those people cannot afford cars so they have to lose one day's pay or even several days' pay. When there is a CIE dispute each side feels that they have got the right on their side. Is it too much to ask, while realising that there are rights and wrongs on each side, that they appreciate this, but that there are thousands of people in the city and suburbs who cannot carry on without a bus service?
In the Book of Estimates under Transport and Power I see that CIE have a subsidy of over £28 million which is quite a hefty sum for this small State although I am sure it is put to good use. We should look at that subsidy and decide if it is sufficient. Some day we will reach the stage when the bus service will be treated as a kind of social service and no bus fares will be charged. Every year we increase the subsidy so I can see the time coming when we may have a free bus service. It may sound a bit absurd at the moment. Even though a free bus service would cost the taxpayer a lot of money it would be better than no bus service which is costing him a lot of money.
We have to examine our transport policy. Before I proceed further I want to congratulate the Minister on his appointment and to wish him well in his Department which is not an easy one by any means. We must see what is wrong with CIE when we have so much industrial unrest there. I do not believe that because a man takes a job as a CIE bus conductor or driver he changes, or that because a man takes a job as manager, departmental or otherwise, he changes. It is essentially a matter of human relations between the two sides. I do not believe that there is such a thing as industrial relations. It is human relations in industry and human relations in our personal lives. If we cannot think of the common good we will run into trouble and have chaos like we have at the moment in our bus service.
The people in the outer suburbs of the city must feel very frustrated when they find there is no bus service for them even though they are heavily taxed to provide such a service. The Minister should look at the public bus service especially in the city. Almost one-third of the population live in the greater Dublin area and in a few years' time the population of this city will probably be one million people. The CIE management have drafted a rapid transit plan. I believe there is some merit in it. The Minister should ask where they stand now. Is the plan being held back by the Department of Transport and Power or have CIE not finished their study of it? The Minister should sit down with the CIE management and unions and tell them that the rapid transit plan has certain merit. I have studied it and I think it is attractive. Our streets are so full of vehicular traffic nowadays that when our buses are running they find it hard to get through the maze of traffic and keep to a schedule.
It is time that we looked at a partially underground and partially on the surface system. People talk about the great cost of such a scheme. Would it be so great when we realise the cost of the present inadequate and unsatisfactory bus service we have? We have some kind of disruption too often in our public transport. It is very easy to stand up here and criticise without offering a solution. The only solution I offer is that each side should recognise the rights and obligations of the other and come together even a few days before Christmas, as Deputy Fitzgerald appealed, in this season of goodwill and decide to give back the bus service for Christmas. The Minister should then call both sides together, sit down with them and work out a solution.
The Minister for Labour told the House that he had intervened in the dispute. This goes on all the time. Buses are disrupted. We have total strikes or partial strikes but a bad bus service. The Minister will intervene, hopefully, with success; it will go on for a while; the House will vote more money to CIE, and then we will have more disruption on the buses.
Dublin is becoming a very sophisticated cosmopolitan place and the good neighbourliness which can be seen in the country areas is dying out in some parts of the city. Very often country people can get lifts from neighbours and so on, but this is dying out in the city. A fresh look must be taken at the transport system as run by CIE. How can other cities of Europe have good transport systems without frequent disruption? No doubt they have transport problems, but they do not have them on the scale we have. The unions have a tough task trying to satisfy each of their members. They are doing everything possible to ensure that the men have proper standards, wages and so on. CIE must put forward some account, a book-keeping record or a profit and loss account at the end of each year. If we are going to continue subsidising CIE, it is time we took a hard look at the structures to find out the basic weaknesses and what causes the frequent disruptions. Both sides appear to be communicating. They should adopt a plan because neither side can win total victory in the interests of the people who are living in the city suburbs who need a proper bus service.
Years ago I wrote on the possibility of using the suburban rail services and after a lot of agitation CIE agreed to open a suburban station in my area. Other suburban rail services could be used in order to create a better transport service. We can have a train service out past Cabra into the Docks area and across to the south side. People might have to walk to the station but at the moment they are walking from the furthest suburbs into town. These services could be used in relation to the transit plan for CIE which I mentioned. I do not know that any member of the public takes these plans seriously because we have been waiting for them for so long. I appeal to the Minister and to his colleagues to take some new initiative tomorrow morning so that we will end this trouble, so that transport services will be back to normal for the last few days before Christmas.
Yesterday I put a question to the Minister for Transport and Power to ask him if the survey which is being carried out on the ports of the country will be published. The Minister said that it will not be published and I think that is a great mistake. Policies in relation to the modernisation and the rationalisation of our ports will have to be implemented so that they can become as competitive as Cross-Channel ports. Cross-Channel ports cannot be compared with Continental ports for efficiency and I would prefer if we studied the ports of Europe rather than the British ports. When this report is finished, it should be published so that the port authorities can study and discuss them with a view to getting the best possible plans for the ports. I refer mainly to the Port of Dublin because I represent the Dublin area. A great extension of Dublin Port has taken place and modernisation is a great advantage. The new roll-on, roll-off service and the container traffic are of great advantage. A port which was modern ten years ago is not modern today without changes in the whole fabric so that cargoes are loaded and unloaded and dispatched to their destination as quickly as possible. When the roll-on, roll-off service started the dockers, understandably, resisted. The full picture was not put before the dockers and they resented this. They thought modernisation would lead to further unemployment and it has. The dockers of Dublin Port have now realised and are appreciative of the great problems and have co-operated very whole-heartedly in the big change in the port. It is not right to ask them to make sacrifices or to accept change without being consulted. Unfortunately, we will see a continual shrinkage of labour in most ports unless we can attract sufficient movement through the ports to provide jobs for all the dockers. The scene has changed in many ways and I am not sorry to see the change.
The Deputy will appreciate that this is a Supplementary Estimate dealing with CIE.
I thought it included the whole Estimate for Transport and Power as well.
No, it is a Supplementary Estimate for CIE.
CIE are involved in the ports.
It has nothing to do with the dockers and roll-on, roll-off.
CIE are involved in this. Apart from the dockers, cargo trains arrive in the ports that are manned by CIE personnel. However, I accept the Chair's ruling.
The heading refers to a grant in respect of rail passenger services and in respect of public service obligations.
There is a considerable amount provided for CIE in the Supplementary Estimate. The part they have to play in the development of our ports is obvious. I will give one instance of the huge Asahi plant in Mayo where the raw material will come to the Port of Dublin and be sent by rail to Mayo. I hope this will bring added revenue to CIE but it is only an indication of what they can do. Our aim should be to press ahead with the industrialisation of the country and ensure that industries are located throughout the regions so that there is not a concentration on the east coast. If there are plants located throughout the country CIE will have a bright future.
The concentration on the east coast of a large percentage of our industries operates against CIE. We have little heavy industry but what there is is situated on the east coast and imports and exports go mainly through the Port of Dublin. At the moment it handles 64 per cent of our total trade. CIE have a large part to play in the expansion of industry.
As I mentioned earlier, we may have to continue subsidising CIE to an even greater extent but it is impossible to set out the limit to which we should subsidise them. Apart from inflation there is much progress in technology. Despite many efforts during the years to modernise CIE they are somewhat out-of-date in many ways. Probably they had not enough money to update their plant and the transport system and perhaps the Minister would consider arranging for some person to study CIE and their operations. In the past many efficiency experts were called in to study the organisation and it may be that were it not for their reports CIE would be in an even worse state than they are at the moment.
I remember when the subsidy for CIE was about one quarter of what it is now. Even allowing for the fall in the value of money it must be obvious that we have been generous in our subsidies to them. I do not think any rail service in the world is paying for itself; all of them are subsidised. This applies even to countries such as the United States and Canada. We are a small island and we have a problem in regard to this matter. It may be small in comparison with that of the countries I mentioned but it is big when we consider our resources.
Occasionally CIE take action that must be commended. Last week they operated a train service from Derry to facilitate people to shop in Dublin. I do not know if the people got good value with regard to their fares or their shopping but I am sure it was good for them to have a break. I hope all the people of Derry and of the North generally will avail of these services.
CIE have taken commendable action with regard to the bus service and in their advertising. I understand that some of their hotels are being sold but I do not know if that is a good policy. I am sure CIE have made the Minister aware of the situation and I expect he will have to sanction any sale that takes place but I think before this happens he should look into the matter. He should consider if it is a sound policy and he should also take into account the future of the workers in the hotels.
All of us hope that the tourist industry will improve and will achieve even greater success in the very near future. Our countryside, especially the west, will continue to attract more people from overcrowded Europe. They enjoy driving on our roads which are not crowded, apart from this city. It is a pleasure to drive in the summer through the more remote parts and I am sure that tourists from abroad value this very much.
We may have to put more money into tourism, bus services and the various activities of CIE so that we will have a proper transport system. I should like to see the Minister going ahead with the rapid transit service which CIE have prepared. It may solve our problems in this city. It would be a faster system if we did not have to depend all the time on the buses in the city when they are running normally.
The Minister has a difficult task to tackle but the challenge is a worth-while one. Any Minister for Transport and Power who improves the system will earn the thanks of the people. A national transport system is essential. The system will cost money and that money will have to be provided out of taxation. At the moment CIE have to be subsidised and it is very frustrating for tax-paying citizens to know they are paying for an unsatisfactory system.
The bus service is the most important service provided by CIE because the buses carry the majority of passengers using CIE. The ratio of cars to people is low compared with other EEC countries. We must, therefore, build a system which will cater for the needs of the people. It has been argued that we should revert to private enterprise transport. Running an 18-hour a day bus service every day of the year is a costly operation. The vehicles must be maintained and the employees must be paid proper wages and salaries. I cannot visualise private enterprise making transport pay. Indeed, if it could pay, I believe the clamour for such a transport system would be much louder. Again, private enterprise would want to concentrate on those areas which provide the best financial return and CIE would be penalised by having to provide transport in the less lucrative areas. CIE will be with us for many years yet. Our task is to get down to improving the system. Every year CIE have to get an allocation of public money and sometimes there is a second allocation in the same year. I sympathise with those running CIE. Their job is an onerous one. I sympathise with the workers in CIE, particularly the bus drivers. Driving buses is no easy job. Acting as conductor is no easy job in cities and towns. There are all sorts of hazards, not the least being constant road repairs involving the build-up of traffic or inconvenient detours. Public demonstrations can be a nuisance too.
I believe the solution to present difficulties lies in an underground traffic system. The Government are strangely silent about a rapid underground transit system. To me it looks very attractive. CIE have produced coloured brochures showing how such a system would operate. The Government should take a look at this. There must be an early decision on it.
At the moment we have a stop/go bus service. I live near a depot and every morning I listen to find out whether or not there will be a bus. If I hear one I say: "Thank God, the bus is running today". We must get down to the cause of the disruption in CIE. Disruption does not happen for no reason at all. Every aspect of CIE must be thoroughly surveyed and examined. It is a false economy to say the total subvention will be £30 million. There is bound to be another subvention later on. No one will object to paying taxation for a proper transport system but subsidising an inefficient system is something people will not tolerate.
The Minister is new to his office and needs time to look around. Because of the weakness of our public transport system he is faced with a tremendous challenge. Perhaps some day we will have a Government and a Minister who will give us a proper transport system. It is absolutely essential to social and economic survival. One can imagine the reaction there would be to any suggestion to drop certain Government services because they were too costly. People want health services and social welfare services, and I submit that in a community like the Greater Dublin area an absolute essential is a proper transport system.
From time to time, in order to help out CIE, the suggestion is made that cars should be kept out of the city. Of course, the motorist, who is paying his taxes has rights, and if that suggestion were adopted the whole structure of the city would change. The commercial element would move out into the suburbs and big shopping centres would develop there. Much of our city is dying and I believe that is caused by the bad transport system. Some people want to live in the city areas but because they cannot get housing there they move out. When a new dormitory town like Blanchardstown is created it is said that customers are created for CIE, but this also adds to the CIE burden because the extension of bus services costs them more money
During the valley period of the day CIE services do not pay but then, say, at mid-day when there is a big demand for buses, because, perhaps, of excavations of the street or a public demonstration, the services are disrupted. All these problems must be considered if we are to provide a proper service. Many people would not use their cars if they were sure of an adequate bus service. That is why I suggested to the Minister earlier on —and if he does not some future Minister will be forced to look at the matter—avoiding free bus services in order to attract people to use buses more and more. However, even if there was a free service, we would have to ensure that the buses run on time and are adequate in number. When one drives out in the morning one notices the number of cars with just a driver in each. It is said that one bus can take the contents of 70 cars. That may be a simplistic way of looking at it but it is substantially true. Therefore, we must take into our confidence the motorist and CIE, including the management and the workers and, for the common good of the city and the country, work out a proper transport system.
In addition to the frustration involved the men who are in partial dispute with CIE at the moment are losing heavily in wages. I do not think these men want to have this system going the way it is. It should be possible to give them a proper return for their labour and provide a proper standard of maintenance for vehicles. CIE can never be a profit-making concern any more than the Department of Defence or the Department of Health can be profit-making. One thinks in terms of cash being profit, but the whole city would profit by a proper service.
I do not think private enterprise can supply the answer to this problem. People may well say that public enterprise is not the full answer either. One of the obstacles, I suppose, is that CIE have never had adequate moneys to carry out any worthwhile reorganisation. Therefore, each time the problem arises they cut back services, especially train services. It may be very easy to economise by closing a branch railway line, but we are probably paying for it in other ways, for instance, by the number of vehicles that must use the roads and the cost of maintaining our roads to take the very heavy traffic on them.
The whole system of transport has changed so much that very often in the suburbs there is a new complaint, that of people parking juggernauts outside their front doors. The driver may be leaving in the morning for Italy or somewhere else on the new ferry service. Dublin, in parts is an 18th century city trying to take 20th century traffic. Therefore, in dealing with CIE and their problems one should also deal with the local authority to see what part they can play in bringing about a proper transport system. Most other cities have the same problem in regard to their preservation. When there are traffic jams and buses cannot get through, the question arises whether the street should be widened and worthwhile buildings knocked down. Again, the preservationists will say you cannot do that. There is general frustration and all the time the bus service is losing money.
I hope the Minister will be able to solve the present difficulties of CIE so that the bus service will be back to normal, and that he will then have a global look at this problem of transport. I am speaking particularly for the city of Dublin. As regards the CIE board, apart from having the people at the top at the moment and representatives of the unions, I suggest that a regional board be established by CIE to look after the greater Dublin area. That board could be composed of the management, representatives of the unions and the local authority. Discussions between those people would mean that it would be possible to find out the problems in the city bus service. It may be a fact that the staff of that company feel frustrated because of the traffic conditions they must contend with daily. If that is the case one can see the reason behind the claims of the men at present that their vehicles should be kept up to a proper standard. It would be wrong if our public transport vehicles were allowed out in service without being properly maintained.
If it is a fact that CIE, with the grant we give them and their receipts, cannot afford to run a modern transport service we should do something about it. Even though some may feel that CIE are being given too much money we must examine the position and see if the company are being given an adequate amount to provide a proper service. If the management of CIE can prove to us that the grant given to them is not adequate it is our duty to take a new look at the position. If one lives in the city or visits it occasionally one is aware of the frustration felt when the bus service is disrupted. There must be something wrong somewhere when trouble breaks out so often in CIE. It is pitiful to see people standing at bus stops for long periods waiting for buses.
The Minister should contact his colleague, the Minister for Labour, and join with him in bringing together the management of CIE and the unions for discussions on the dispute. There is an urgent need for a settlement of this dispute; it must be settled tomorrow. Trade in the city is being disrupted by the dispute and there is a possibility that many stores will have to lay off workers because of the drop in business. Some people are blaming the unions and maintain that they are too strong but I do not think so. There is an onus on all of us to work for a proper system in CIE. There are no short cuts and those who suggest that the concern should be handed over to private enterprise should bear in mind that private enterprise would only take the paying part of the company. CIE would then be left with the unprofitable sections. While I agree with private enterprise I also agree with the principle of subsidisation. If it was suggested that private enterprise should take over our water supply systems people would be horrified at the thought of having to pay for water, although I accept that we must contribute to the cost of our water supplies through our rates. Our public transport system is a vital part of our society and it is wrong that our people should be deprived of it particularly when people are being housed in areas as far away from the city centre as the foothills of the Dublin mountains.
The Deputy's time is up.
I do not wish to challenge the Chair but I had hoped to report progress.
The Deputy's time is up.
I thought I had a few minutes left. I must ask the Chair to call a quorum.
The Chair is telling the Deputy that he has had his hour. The Deputy is not entitled to ask for quorum at this stage. Will the Minister move the adjournment of the debate?
Cavan): I move the adjournment of the debate.
I intend to raise this matter tomorrow morning.
Debate adjourned.