Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 Nov 1979

Vol. 316 No. 10

Supplementary Estimates, 1979. - Vote No. 44: Tourism and Transport (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £12,342,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1979, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Tourism and Transport, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.

—(Minister for Tourism and Transport.)

Mr. Leyden

Last night I was speaking about the Estimate for CIE. I would like to take this opportunity again to refute the statement by Deputy Bruton in relation to the contribution being made by the taxpayers to the running of CIE. Last night Deputy Bruton stated that the first £100 paid by the average family now goes to maintain CIE. I request Deputy Bruton to substantiate that statement or withdraw this unfair attack on the management and staff of CIE, a company who are giving good employment to their 16,600 employees—that was the number in December 1977 according to their annual report. Deputy Bruton does not seem to take into account the contribution of £26 million in payment to the State by the employees of CIE and also the £28.3 million spent on the purchase of goods of Irish origin. Those figures are stated in the annual report of 1977 and surely Deputy Bruton must take those into account when making his allegations in relation to income tax contribution. He has cast an unfair slur on the workers of CIE who have given loyal and faithful service to the country. They are all employees of CIE through the Department and they should be commended for their efforts over the years. They are working in a very difficult area and their contribution should be recognised. They are in an area which is providing a service which the public require and I would be very upset at any curtailment of the services being provided. The public are getting a good return for their investment, and I appeal to the Minister to ensure that a level of contribution and support for CIE will be maintained which will ensure that they will provide not only stable employment for their employees but also the improvement and continuation of their service to the public.

It should be noted also that the staff of CIE were reduced by 3,400 between May 1975 and December 1977. Part of that time was during our period in office but the greater part of it was during the term of the Coalition Government. That reduction in the staff probably was necessary, but it is regrettable because we should be in the area of job creation and CIE can play their part in the creation and provision of employment.

In relation to the purchase of goods of Irish origin by CIE, the management of the company should be always on the alert to ensure that they will continue this policy of buying Irish. Recently in one of their dining cars on the route to Roscommon I found that some of the items supplied were not purchased in Ireland. This matter should be investigated by the Department. I will give the Minister further details and he should request the purchasing officers of CIE to ensure that only Irish products are provided on the national railway and on the national transport service generally.

I have been seeking to obtain the up-to-date annual report of CIE and I understand that the latest annual report available is that for 1977. As this is 1979 the 1978 report should have been issued by now, and I wonder what is the reason that this report is so late in coming out. Any company should have their annual report issued early and on time. I have failed to obtain a copy of the annual report for 1979. I understand from the Oireachtas Library that it has not been issued and is not available. If I had that report I would be able to make a more accurate contribution to this debate from figures which would then be available to me.

To come back to another point I made last night in relation to the transportation of goods for industry, it is vitally important that industries be made aware of the excellent services available in CIE for the transport of freight to different locations throughout Ireland. The IDA should play a part in encouraging the carriage of goods on the rail services, thus helping to eliminate some of the very heavy traffic which is now using the inadequate roads of Ireland to transport goods from the ports in Dublin and other parts to industry throughout Ireland, particularly in the west. A very serious look should be taken at the situation regarding transport of certain products to the Asahi plant in Killala, Mayo. We have an opportunity now to review our safety precautions and we want to ensure that the near tragedy which occurred in Canada would not and could not occur here in Ireland. One product transport is extremely dangerous and CIE management should take every precaution in relation to the transportation of this chemical to the Asahi plant.

With regard to the hotel section of CIE, the Coalition Government took a retrograde step by closing so many of their fine hotels. The CIE hotels at Sligo, Mulranny, Bundoran and Kenmare were closed but there was an opportunity to develop them. CIE are a State company involving tourism and they should not have been allowed to sell them. The Coalition Government were supposed to have many so-called Socialists in their ranks and I fail to understand how Socialist Ministers in the Coalition Government could have allowed CIE to sell four of their hotels. The returns from the sales were so little that it should be obvious that a very bad decision was taken. I feel that under a Fianna Fáil Government such a decision would not have been taken. It deprived many people of good employment.

The situation in relation to the Russell Court Hotel in Belfast is still creating difficulties for CIE. It is costing approximately £360,000 to pay the interest on the original loan. I understand they have difficulty in converting it to an office block because of the grants they were paid by the Northern Ireland authorities. I also understand CIE are awaiting a decision from the Government about the future of this particular building in Belfast, which I hope at some stage can be used again as an hotel. It is closed at the moment. It was damaged by bombing in 1974 and after it was re-opened it was bombed a second time. This hotel was built at a time when there was an improvement in the situation in the North and it would have made a contribution to the financial affairs of CIE if everything had worked out well.

With regard to the increased subvention required by CIE it is worth pointing out that the increase in oil costs alone was over £5 million and the increase in labour costs not provided for in the original Estimate amounted to over £9 million. This would take into account the National Understanding which CIE are obliged to honour. The Government must provide a subvention to ensure that the employees of CIE are given the full benefit of the National Understanding. The shortfall in the anticipated revenue amounts to nearly £4 million, which has also created difficulties for CIE and resulted in them having to come before the Oireachtas for a further subvention.

What would be the actual saving to the State if much of the transportation on the public roads was eliminated? If we had not the services of CIE the total fuel bill for the State would be much larger. This should be taken into consideration when the public are assessing the quality of the services provided by CIE. They are playing a major contribution in the reduction of our oil imports and they should be commended for this. I believe that in the future CIE rail services will be availed of by more of the public. A retrograde step was taken some years ago in closing down many of our rail services, particularly in parts of my constituency in County Leitrim, where the rail service was completely removed. The people who made that decision had little foresight. That railway could provide an excellent service to County Leitrim and would assist in the provision of industry in that part of my constituency, which requires every assistance the State can give.

With regard to Bord Fáilte I would like to congratulate the management and directors of that organisation for their contribution in earning £400 million this year as against £376 million in 1978. This is a tremendous success for Bord Fáilte, when one takes into account the effects of the postal strike and the oil and petrol shortage this year. It is also a success for the Minister who spearheaded the drive for further tourists in England, Germany and the Netherlands. Tourism is a major earner, and Bord Fáilte are an efficient organisation. I understand that Bord Fáilte have commissioned a special film on the Pope's historic visit here. They will be using this for further promotion, which is a very realistic approach to the visit of the Pope. Bord Fáilte will now be promoting places like County Mayo, Clonmacnoise and other historic locations visited by the Pope. This will play a major contribution in the tourist drive in the eighties. I feel that during that time we will see a further marked improvement in the revenue earned by Bord Fáilte.

The new proposals announced by Bord Fáilte in relation to the hotel industry are very welcome. I look forward to their contribution to my constituency to ensure that the hoteliers in Roscommon and Leitrim obtain support for the expansion of their present facilities, which they are anxious to go ahead with. It is appropriate to compliment the work done by the regional tourism organisations, particuarly the Midland Regional Tourism Organisation, which covers part of my constituency, and the North Eastern Tourist Organisation, which covers the Leitrim part of my constituency. Those organisations are playing a very positive role in the promotion and development of tourism in County Roscommon and County Leitrim.

The grants for the development of the tourism information offices and for local authority amenity improvements schemes are very welcome. Hopefully, there will be a continuance of the necessary financial support for local authorities to help them improve tourism facilities. I take this opportunity of appealing to the Midland Regional Tourism Organisation to ensure that areas such as Portrun in Roscommon and other such areas receive further assistance in order to ensure the expansion of the existing facilities both for the Irish tourist and for the tourist from abroad, because tourism is not merely a matter of provision of facilities for people from abroad. We must cater, too, for our own tourists. The contribution that Bord Fáilte have been making in this regard is to be highly commended. I am confident that everyone here will support the extra grant to the board so that they may be able to continue the good work they are doing. We are fortunate that there is such a good working relationship between the board and the Department of Tourism and Transport. The Minister has played a very important role in regard to the number of tourists who visited Ireland this year. His quick action in relation to the issuing of fuel vouchers earlier in the year was a big factor in the success of the tourism industry. The voucher system worked very well. During the fuel crisis the Minister was never out of touch with the situation. He went on BBC television and other media to explain the situation here and to reassure the many tourists who intended spending their holidays here.

I regard as totally unfair the attacks on CIE by members of Fine Gael whose attitude on this occasion cannot be very encouraging to the management and staff of that company in carrying out their work. It is too easy for politicians to knock an organisation such as CIE but recognition should be given to the important part that the company are playing in the wellbeing and development of this State. On an occasion such as this we should not miss the opportunity of paying tribute to the management and staff of CIE both at local and central level. I have the highest regard for CIE staff in my constituency, from station masters to the people who drive the buses and also those people involved in the school transport system. These are a dedicated bunch of people who are working in very difficult circumstances but who never fail to assist in any way possible those people who avail of the transport services.

The standard of maintenance at railway stations is very high. This situation is appreciated by the public who, of course, are entitled to the best possible services and standards. I would appeal to the Minister, though, to do something about the improvement of the rolling stock on the western route because we in the west should have a service equal to the service being provided in any other part of the country. From my contacts both with the Minister and with CIE I am aware that usage of the rail services in that area has increased by 30 per cent. That is a situation that should be recognised. It warrants the provision of additional funds for the rail services in that area. I have been informed by CIE that they are awaiting a decision from the Department in relation to the rolling stock situation on the western route. In the circumstances I would appeal to the Minister to give the matter his immediate attention.

There is a need, too, for a further service from Westport, leaving, say, at about 10 a.m. and reaching Roscommon at about 12 noon, with another train leaving Heuston Station at about 8 o'clock each evening. The service on the western route was curtailed during the time of the Coalition Government but I am confident that the situation will be rectified by this administration.

I congratulate the Minister on the excellent work he is doing in the Department. Now that his responsibility in relation to Posts and Telegraphs is to be assumed largely by another body, he will have all the more time for concentrating on his Tourism and Transport portfolio and, consequently, for expanding this very important industry.

Deputy Bruton was critical of the Minister in regard to his commissioning a report into the affairs of CIE but it is only right and proper that the Minister would seek the advice of the best possible consultants in regard to the development of the company's services. However, Deputy Bruton failed to point out that during the Coalition's term in office, CIE commissioned the consultants Martin and Voorhees Associates and Henderson, Hughes and Busby to undertake jointly a study of the southwest rail corridor. According to the company's annual report for 1976, the objective of this study was to assess the best long-term investment policy for the Dublin-Cork and Limerick-Limerick Junction railway lines taking account of policy for national and regional development. On page 9 of the report we read that:

It was designed to examine such issues as electrification, train frequency, speed, phasing of improvement, the future role of the railway and the impact of rail investment on other transport modes. It will have particular regard to the influence of changes in population, fuel costs and fare levels.

Perhaps the Minister will be able to let us know the outcome of the investigation, an investigation which must have some bearing on the development of those aspects of CIE services.

It is not for me as a Deputy from the west to concern myself too much with the transport situation in Dublin except to point out that traffic hold-ups in Dublin affect travellers to the west in so far as they may spend an hour travelling from the city centre to Heuston Station. Something must be done about the situation in Dublin. I understand that there is to be an experiment in the Parliament Street area in respect of bus clearways. Perhaps this is the sort of development that will help solve the congestion in the city. If the experiment proves successful I expect that it will be extended to other parts of Dublin and an increased number of people will avail of the bus service. At the moment the service is inadequate and it is frustrating for both the travellers and the management of CIE. I feel sure that when the Minister sees the result of the first experiment he will consider, in consultation with the Department of the Environment, a further expansion of this proposal. It is a worthwhile proposal and it could ensure the viability of the service in Dublin.

In conclusion I congratulate CIE on their activities. Unfortunately they are not making money but if the rail lines could be taken into account on a different accounting system and maintained directly out of State funds without CIE having to come before the Oireachtas for extra subventions then the real picture of CIE could be clearly shown. CIE should be given encouragement. I know the Minister is giving encouragement and leadership to CIE. I hope that this will continue so that in the years ahead we will see a true picture of CIE and will have a service which will be second to none. We have a national transport service which we should be proud of and we should do everything in our power to encourage it.

Mr. Kenny

I would like to remind Deputy Leyden, and indeed some other Fianna Fáil Deputies I have heard speaking in this House, of the proper pronunciation of the name of this party. If we were to change the emphasis on the various pronounciations we might get the word "fiáin" which implies that we are all wild. We are not. The name is Fine Gael. At least, that is what I was taught.

I am glad to hear from the Minister that there has been an increase in the amount of passengers and in the tonnage of freight carried on the railway lines. The day of the rail line is not ended. If the matter is taken in hand in the proper manner there is a very bright future indeed for our railway lines.

First, I want to take up a point made by Deputy Leyden in relation to the western line. I understand CIE are awaiting the approval of the Minister for extra finance to purchase new coaches to bring the standard of the western line into line with that of the southern and eastern lines. I would not mind if we were speaking of the Moscow to Vladivostok line but it is not that length; it is only about 150 or 160 miles. CIE have introduced changes in the running times of the trains on this line and have also increased the speed of the train from Westport to Dublin. They purchased some new engines some years ago but due to the condition of the western line and due to the inability of some of the arches to keep up the weight of some of these new engines they were not put into use except on a very limited scale on that line. In fact many of the trains now coming from Westport to Dublin have two engines pulling them giving them a horsepower of about 1,800 as against 2,500 for the newer engines which were purchased some years ago.

There can be no question but that the west has often suffered at the hands of successive Governments in the provision of equal facilities with other parts of the country. The Minister should take in hand immediately the provision of equal facilities on the western line. The state of the trains on this line after football matches or large sporting events leaves a lot to be desired. This results from vandalism on the trains but it is also because of the lack of the necessary number of coaches which leaves no time for the workers to have the coaches which were used on the day of the sporting event properly cleaned before being used again. I remember being in communication with Mr. St. John Devlin of CIE. He was very courteous and efficient in his reply. He stressed that he thought we were looking for air-conditioned coaches. The coaches are air conditioned as they stand but it is not the type of air conditioning that is designed in many of the modern coaches. I do not know if the Minister has ever travelled on the western line but if he heads into a gale force wind somewhere west of Roscommon air conditioning is very real at that stage.

Due to the amount of emigration we have had down through the years our railway lines and railway stations, particularly in the west, have played an historic part in relation to our people. Many a harrowing scene has been witnessed at railway stations. Many a person has left the railway station with visions of glory in his eyes as he headed for Holyhead and the darker areas of London. It is sad to see the closure of many of these railway stations. Successive Governments have been responsible for this. If things are handled properly there is a very bright future for the railway lines here. The visit of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, to Knock in County Mayo, has opened up new possibilities for the introduction of a railway line into the Knock area. Never before in the history of this country has such a crowd descended on such a small village. I do not believe that such a crowd will ever descend on it again but the number of pilgrims who are now visiting the shrine since the visit of His Holiness has increased on a vast scale in that short period and it is something that should be considered seriously. If the development at Knock continues on the same scale, in ten or 15 years' time there will be complete chaos on successive Sundays in that part of the country unless there is a greater improvement in the roads into the area. The Minister should consider this within his portfolio. He should provide the finance to allow CIE to purchase the necessary coaches to enable the western line to provide equal facilities with those of their neighbours on the eastern and southern lines.

In relation to Bord Fáilte, with all the difficulties we have had this year the situation was not as bad as was originally forecast. This was not due to the weather we had in 1979—somebody said we had summer on a Tuesday this year. The Minister has two jobs as Minister. He must impress on the people of the Continent, of the United States of America and elsewhere that the troubles here do not extend over the whole of the 32 counties. Many of the people of the Continent have the impression that they cannot walk any street in any town here without being shot at or harrassed in some way by subversive organisations of one sort or another. The Minister's tours and promotional campaigns abroad can have a very important bearing on this. Many continentals do not recognise the existence of Ireland at all and those who do seem to think that the whole country has been engaged in an all out state of war for the past 50 years. The Minister should promote the truth on this matter.

One of the biggest drawbacks and one of the worst impressions tourists come away with is not of the weather or of the people but of the amount of refuse and the general lack of hygiene in many of our towns. Our beauty spots and historical sites are being destroyed by refuse and rubbish down through the years. The anti-litter campaign conducted during the past few years does not seem to have been very successful in this area. It leaves a very bad impression if tourists come here and find that the standards of hygiene in restaurants, cafés and in toilets are not up to the standards obtaining in their own countries. Bord Fáilte is headed by a man from my own county and he deserves credit for the magnificent work he has done, often under tremendous pressure. I am glad to see that the Minister is giving the board an increase in funds. Naturally, we wish it could be more but I suppose the Minister also is bound by financial constraints.

The future is bright for tourism in Ireland. The persistent quality that has shone through every difficulty is the genuine Irishness and warmth of our people in receiving tourists. This is something that money cannot buy. It is something that has always been there and it is much appreciated by people from abroad. We have an inherent quality of receiving others from distant shores, just as they received our people during the years, and of making them feel at home here. If the relatively minor difficulties that arise are attended to by the Minister I can see our tourist industry improving tremendously in the next 20 years to the benefit of the country as a whole.

Mr. F. O'Brien

The Estimate does not give any great hope for the future of CIE other than that McKinsey and Company are going to report on where the losses are occurring. That may be a useful exercise but it will not solve any of the problems in CIE. That organisation are charged with transporting people from A to B and also with delivering cargo and goods throughout the country.

The passenger services, particularly in city areas, are both expensive and of poor quality. In his statement the Minister referred to losses incurred in this city and a figure of £11.7 million was quoted. There was mention also of a drop in the number of passengers. One would not expect anything else in view of the exorbitant increases in bus fares and the deteriorating service. People have to make their own travel arrangements and this is causing further traffic chaos. People no longer can depend on public transport for one reason or another.

I do not see anything in the Minister's speech indicating proper development of the city services. For many years CIE have tried to get a commitment from the Government to develop a rapid rail system from the centre of the city to the satellite towns around Dublin but nothing has happened. The Minister mentioned that there is an increase in the use of the services operating on the suburban lines and this indicates that there is a clear desire for further development in this area. The rapid rail system will cost approximately £200 million, possibly more having regard to inflation. We are talking in terms of £50 million per year over a four-or five-year period. At the moment CIE are incurring a loss of more than £1 million per week and this cannot be sustained. If we are to cut that loss we must think positively. The only way we can give people a proper service is to develop the rapid rail system as soon as possible.

We should improve the system that exists at the moment from Howth to the city and also that operating to Greystones. Areas such as Tallaght, Blanchardstown, Clondalkin and Ballymun have large populations. We are building these towns outside the city but we are not providing facilities for commuters. The roads are totally inadequate to deal with the traffic and obviously the only way to provide an efficient service is by the rapid rail system. I do not know why there is no great desire to have this scheme in operation. I know that some kind of consultative transport commission has been set up to look into the question but it is just putting the matter on the long finger. The facts and figures for the rapid rail system show that it is necessary and could be viable. If the rapid rail system were in operation there would be beneficial effects for the centre city. People from Tallaght would be able to commute in 19 minutes. The traders in the centre city would also gain financially and it would give new life to the inner city. However, it does not seem to have the blessing of the Government. We tabled a Private Members' Motion on this matter some time ago but nothing has happened. I ask the Minister to examine the matter. If the Government inject the necessary finances the losses we are talking about now would be reduced substantially.

It is time we did something about bus lanes. I am a member of the local authority and I can tell the House that we are introducing a bus lane in Parliament Street. Admittedly it is only one short street but at least it is a start. The Government will have to examine this matter and see what constraints can be put on private motorists from coming into the city. However, it is not possible to put an embargo on private cars if an alternative is not provided. People will use public transport if it is efficient and reasonably priced. They are not using it at the moment because it is not efficient or reasonably priced. If the Government are serious about fuel conservation they should encourage more people to travel by public transport. This would cut down the number of cars on the road. If we have bus lanes in operation the service will be quick and efficient. There would be no need for any more rolling stock because the available buses could travel much more quickly. In that way one would operate at an efficient rate in bringing people to and fro, and they know they could get to work and home again in a reasonable time. Obviously this will have to be done in conjunction with the Department of the Environment.

A Government committee should be set up to examine the whole question of transport and to eliminate the chaos in our cities. I spent a few weeks in Cork during the by-election campaigns. I thought Dublin was bad, but in Cork there is complete chaos. There is a great need for a commitment in that city to a positive transport policy. As in Dublin city, there does not appear to be the will to have this commitment.

One of the greatest blunders in our transport system was the closing of the Harcourt Street line. That was vandalism at its worst or its best, whichever way you like to describe it. The bridges were taken down and the lines were taken up. Part of the line was sold off which makes it nearly impossible to reopen it. Perhaps we could have some type of bus lane in that area where there is a large population. I believe it would be a money spinner. It is a pity that decision was taken many years ago. Given the fact that Dublin had to expand one cannot imagine why such a decision was taken. Something should be done about the Harcourt Street line. A two-way bus lane would be a useful service.

If we are to take our transport difficulties seriously, rather than setting up committees here and there and bringing in groups to see how we can cut corners, we should have a positive transport policy. The Government do not appear to be prepared to have this policy. CIE have put forward policies which have not received the support they should have received. When losses of this magnitude crop up, the Government tend to point the finger at CIE. Bringing in consultants is welcome so far as it goes, but it does not solve our transport problems.

The Government must make decisions quickly on a positive transport policy. Not too many years ago the Dublin transport service was profitmaking. Now it is making a loss of nearly £12 million. There is something radically wrong, and it is not easy to know what it is. There is chaos on the roads. There is no forward planning by the Government. All CIE can do is make plans and, if they do not get the wherewithal to put them into effect, they can do no more. Apparently all the Government are prepared to do is to top up the losses every year. We have now reached crisis point at the figure of £56 million which is £21 million more than the figure last year.

It is chaotic to think we are losing £1 million a week on our transport service. Definitely something is wrong and it calls for accountability. The Government should look at positive ways of improving our transport system. Our population is increasing. Our cities are expanding. We are building towns around them. To me that suggests a climate for a profit in the transport services. Instead we are having loss after loss because there is no proper planning and no commitment.

I call on the Government to commit themselves to the rapid rail plan for Dublin city. I have no doubt that it would reverse the loss-making situation. It would not eliminate it, but it would reverse the serious trend which is setting in. Unless we do that we will come in here every year and talk about ways and means of cutting CIE losses without any positive policy. Unless the Minister is prepared to make a commitment to the rapid rail system, the days of our public transport system are numbered.

I do not know whether we should examine the feasibility of allowing private companies into the sphere of transport. It might be possible for people to get licences and to be given designated areas in which they could operate. If that were allowed, we would not have to subsidise transport at the rate at which we are subsidising it at the moment. We will have to eliminate these losses having regard to our financial resources and what we require in other areas such as housing and education. We cannot continue to make this type of subvention on a yearly basis. The money is not in the kitty.

At the end of the day the position in regard to tourism will be satisfactory despite the setbacks early in the year. I am pleased about that naturally, because it will bring in much-needed revenue. Since we are well-established in Europe now, I should like to see a hard-sell policy in the European market. I realise that many Europeans come here but we are still only scratching the surface. Many people will not tend to come here. The sun worshippers tend to go where the sun is. We have much to offer with our open countryside, our fishing facilities and other activities. We can attract the upper bracket of the continental market if we provide a first-class quality service. We have many amenities which they have not got in Europe consequently we should be looking at the upper market in the tourist industry, because a great deal of money is spent by continental tourists.

Obviously the American and other markets are being looked after but there is still a great deal of work to be done on the continental market. This is not a criticism of Bord Fáilte who are and have been doing a very good job. It is up to the Government to finance them and ensure they have the necessary tools to do the job and it is up to the public representatives to ensure the continental market, particularly those in the upper bracket, are encouraged to visit Ireland. We should send our best sales force to the continent to sell Irish tourism.

I ask the Minister to get a transport policy moving quickly and to adapt a rapid rail policy as a matter of urgency. If he does that he will stem the tide—£56 million now and next year it will be even more—because the money needed will soon be out of all proportion and, as a result, our public transport system will grind to a halt. Nobody wants that. A country must have a positive transport system. Again I appeal to the Government to get a transport policy moving and to provide the finance necessary to improve rolling stock and to provide a rapid rail service, bus lanes and so on. I had various complaints about the sub-standard, cold and uncomfortable transport system. I was told that last winter snow was coming through a carriage roof. This will not encourage people to use our buses or trains. We must provide a comfortable, efficient service.

Minister for Tourism and Transport (Mr. Faulkner)

This Supplementary Estimate relates to the principal spending areas for which moneys are provided by the Oireachtas, that is, inland transport and tourism. It is not surprising that the discussion covered a very wide field since tourism and transport are interdependent in many ways, nor that the debate ranged beyond the topics specifically dealt with in the Estimate. I would like to take this opportunity of replying to some of the points made by Deputies. In particular I want to refer to the large subvention to CIE to cover the additional costs, which are mainly attributable to labour and oil costs.

I have already expressed my concern at the trend in CIE's subvention and have outlined the latest measures I am taking to have the position reviewed. Both the work being undertaken by McKinsey and Company and the Transport Consultative Commission will provide valuable contributions towards the formulation of a future transport policy.

On the tourism front the indications are that despite the difficulties encountered early in the year this will be a successful year for the industry generally and will be equal to, if not better than, last year.

Deputy Deasy referred to the continuing losses made by CIE and wanted to know what their future was. It must be understood that public transport services, particularly rail services, cannot be provided on a scale necessary to meet the economic and social needs of the community on a commercially profitable basis. We are not unique in this respect. In fact, many highly developed countries like Germany, Japan, Britain and the United States, with much larger population centres and much longer travel journeys, are not able to provide viable public transport services.

The reasons are various. Public transport is highly labour-intensive and, therefore, very severely affected by increases in wages and salaries. The recent increases in fuel costs are obviously a serious problem. In addition, the great growth in private car ownership and the consequent aggravation of urban congestion have affected the quality of city transport services and the level of passenger carryings.

I do not accept the suggestion that CIE have been deprived of financial support by the State. The great improvement in the quality of mainline rail services has been possible only because of the substantial Government support both in terms of capital investment and current subvention. This Supplementary Estimate provides full confirmation of this, as does the recent decision of the Government to electrify the Howth-Bray rail service.

The maintenance of an efficient public transport service is essential for trade, economic development, tourism and social purposes. The question is whether we are getting the best service for the level of financial support we provide and whether we are getting good value for the subvention we provide. It is mainly to deal with these questions that I engaged McKinsey and Company to undertake an independent and objective assessment of the position and to see what measures can be taken and what options are open. In this connection, I have to say that the board, management and staff of CIE have received a lot of criticism and abuse, much of it undeserved. There has been very significant progress in the improvement of productivity, in raising the level of efficiency and in attracting additional traffic, especially in the rail passenger services. Nevertheless, the particular escalation of costs which arose this year—due mainly to cost increases for fuel and labour—are a matter of great concern. Therefore, I look forward to the review and the recommendations of the consultants. In this process I attach a lot of importance to the co-operation and assistance of the staff of CIE and the unions in the consultants' studies. In the final analysis it will be a matter for me as Minister and the Government to weigh the results of the consultants' work, to examine their recommendations in consultation with CIE and to determine what modifications may be necessary in future transport policies.

There was some criticism by a number of Deputies of the engagement of McKinsey but I think I should make the point that the previous McKinsey report contained a very good analysis of the problems of CIE and their recommendations met with broad acceptance.

Deputy Bruton referred to the speed of the implementation of reports of this kind. When the Post Office Review Group reported to me and the Government, that report was acted on very quickly. The interim boards recommended in that report have already been set up and have commenced work.

Deputy Bruton seemed to believe that if we abolished CIE we would save the money used to subvent public transport and that the money thus released would be available to assist housing development, to promote industrial development and so on. This is a very unreal approach to the matter. The abolition of CIE or the withdrawal of the subvention would in no way eliminate the need for public transport services or the need for financial support for public transport. Deputy Bruton is also on weak ground in assuming that housing construction or industrial development can be seen as alternatives to public transport subventions. In fact, these activities are interdependent. Housing development and industrial development create a demand for public transport, and transport services are a necessary precondition for all other social and economic development. The fact is that capital resources are limited and we must allocate these resources to the best overall public interest, with due regard to the need for public transport as for other public services, whether they be housing, education, health and so on.

Deputy Leyden referred to the new coaches for the mainline railway. CIE have been carrying out a rail modernisation programme involving the upgrading of the mainline services, including greater comfort, improved frequencies and reduced travelling time. In order to extend the benefits of this programme further through the mainline network, CIE have drawn up proposals for the acquisition of an additional 100 mainline carriages. The cost of the additional carriages is likely to be of the order of £20 million.

There has been an increase in the number of rail passenger journeys in recent years and I am sure that CIE could attract further passenger traffic to the railways with the introduction of additional modern rolling stock. The CIE proposals are being examined in this light and in the context of the various other considerations which arise, notably the cost of the additional carriages and the overall capital demands arising in the public sector.

Deputy Leyden referred to the transport by rail of chemicals for the Asahi factory in Killala and quite rightly said that transport by rail was preferable to transport by road. CIE observe very stringent precautions in relation to the carriage of these chemicals and they have assured me that the equipment used is designed and built to the highest standards and that the transport arrangements are in accordance with the best international practice. Moreover, following consultation between CIE and the State agencies concerned, a scheme has been drawn up to ensure that in the event of any mishap there will be a quick, coordinated response from the emergency services concerned.

Deputy Deasy seemed to suggest that we ought to compel traffic to move from road to rail. I am afraid that the Deputy is unrealistic in his comments on the question of transferring traffic from road to rail. It is recognised all over the world that the margin for transfers from road to rail is extremely limited. The rail is virtually fixed to certain bulk traffic for which that mode is especially suitable. In fact, less than 5 per cent of freight is estimated to move by rail.

Efforts to restrict the road haulage industry in the belief that freight would transfer to rail proved unsuccessful in the past. The results of that policy were an inefficient road transport industry and a great increase in "own account" haulage. It is unrealistic of the Deputy to suggest that we should now again revert to a policy of restriction and compulsion. A more positive approach is needed and I shall be tackling the matter in a positive spirit when I have the results of the study of the road haulage sector which the Transport Consultative Commission will be undertaking in due course. The idea of compelling freight to go by rail is a legacy of 30 or 40 years ago. This approach was revived with little or no success in other countries, for example, in Britain and Germany during the sixties.

Deputy O'Connell suggested that CIE were damaging the rail freight service by promoting their road freight services. It is true that CIE promote and advertise those services. It would be very uncommercial if they failed to do so. The fact is that CIE road freight services have been contracted in recent years and not expanded. Overall, CIE road freight services carry not more than 5 per cent of the total volume of road freight, the bulk of the freight being carried by private hauliers and by "own account" transport.

Deputy O'Connell also suggested that industrial relations in CIE are very bad. We should get this matter into perspective. CIE are a complex and far-flung organisation with over 16,000 people engaged in a wide range of activities in all parts of the country. The majority of these people have rarely if ever been involved in a strike. For example, as Deputy Leyden pointed out, the railway, which account for the greatest number of employees, have not had a significant stoppage for many years. There have been a number of interruptions in the Dublin city services and some of these stoppages were unofficial. The problems, social and industrial, which affect the operations of the city bus services are notoriously complex. I am sure that both management and unions are anxious to avoid these stoppages and the machinery to help them to achieve this is available.

Deputies Deasy and Bruton referred to the question of private enterprise in the transport sector. There are frequent calls for a greater role for private operators in the provision of passenger transport services. It is true that CIE operate most of the scheduled bus services in urban areas and throughout the country. However, private operators dominate in the field of private hire. In recent years private hire operators have made big inroads in the provision of weekend services between Dublin and the provinces. It has been suggested on various occasions that an element of competition should be introduced into the operation of scheduled passenger services and that private operators should be allowed to compete with CIE for the right to provide services on specific routes on an equal basis.

Deputy Bruton's suggestion regarding the selling of blocks of bus routes to private operators would involve setting up elaborate administrative and control arrangements to specify routes and frequencies, to operate a tendering system and to monitor operations. There is no reason to think that this would eliminate the necessity for subsidisation of the services or lead to an improvement of the services, as private operators operating on the scale required for urban areas will encounter exactly the same problems as CIE. There are few, if any, private operators organised or equipped to take over urban services on the scale required. Considering the various aspects I am not satisfied on the arguments presented here that such a system would offer a satisfactory substitute for existing arrangements either in terms of service or cost to the public.

I am not saying that there is no possibility for a modification of existing policy. One of my objectives in establishing the Transport Consultative Commission was to have an examination made of the appropriate role of public transport. This matter will be considered as part of the general review of transport policy which will be undertaken in the light of the reports of the Transport Consultative Commission, the study of CIE which is being carried out by the consultants, McKinsey and Company and of the recently issued report on CIE by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies. The report of the Oireachtas committee is a well balanced and useful report. It has been examined in my Department and will involve consultations with other Government Departments concerned. The report will make a valuable input to other studies in relation to public transport at present in progress including the McKinsey study of the financial position of CIE and the study of the Transport Consultative Commission of urban passenger services in the Dublin area. It is not possible to say yet what decisions will be taken on the recommendations contained in the report of the Oireachtas committee.

Deputy Bruton tended to believe that the increase in the number of cars has been as a result of the removal of car tax. In my view he is on very poor ground. The burden of car tax represents only a small proportion of the total cost of car ownership. When one considers the capital cost of the car, the interest charges on HP or other borrowings, the cost of petrol, insurance and all the other running expenses it will be clear that there is no justification for isolating car tax. The main factor in the growth of car ownership has been the tremendous increase in living standards and the fact that many more people are in a position to buy and run motor cars. The problem is how to reconcile that fact with the need to maintain an efficient and flexible public transport system. This is one of the major tasks of the Transport Consultative Commission from which we will have a report very soon.

There were many comments in respect of the fact that the Dublin city services paid their way some time ago. That was true but it was because at that time relatively few people owned cars. When I set up the Transport Consultative Commission in 1978 I recognised that one of the most pressing problems in the transport field was the growing traffic congestion in urban areas and particularly in the Dublin area. I requested the commission to accord priority to the question of the provision of urban passenger transport services particularly in the Dublin area. I understand that the commission have been concentrating on the Dublin problem and expect to be able to submit a report to me early in the new year.

The question of special routing concessions for Dublin buses, that is bus lanes, was raised by a number of Deputies. That is largely a matter for Dublin Corporation subject to the general regulations to be made by the Minister for the Environment concerning road signs and markings and any necessary amendments by the Garda Commissioner to the Dublin traffic and parking by-laws. I understand Dublin Corporation have given their approval for the introduction of a contra flow bus lane in Parliament Street in Dublin. It is hoped that this bus lane will relieve congestion on the north quays and Winetavern Street. I understand that the necessary statutory regulations to implement the bus lane are at present being drafted and it will be the new year before the scheme will be introduced.

There was a bus lane in operation in Fairview some time ago but the experiment was considered to be a failure because it appeared to add to traffic congestion in that cars were compressed into a more limited area. My own feeling is that the experiment ought to have been persisted with longer. It did not give a real opportunity to people to decide to leave their cars at home and travel by public transport. It might have been successful. However, this is another matter which is being examined at present.

Reference was made by Deputy Deasy to Rosslare Harbour. The position is that Rosslare Harbour is not covered in the subvention paid to CIE and is operated at a profit. The present development scheme at Rosslare Harbour is being financed from profits, from borrowings and from a harbour grant of the same category as those available to other harbour authorities. In other words, Rosslare Harbour is in receipt of no special preference in the context of harbour policy. An important consideration in the case of Rosslare is the fact that the development scheme now under way and the limited grant support being given to the project is necessary to eliminate acute congestion arising in that port and to facilitate the continuing growth of tourism, particularly motoring tourism, into Ireland. If we failed to deal with the bottleneck there we would limit the volume of tourist traffic, particularly that into the southern areas. It is for that reason that I allowed a grant for Rosslare Harbour.

Deputy O'Brien spoke about the need for expanding the suburban rail service and in particular the rapid rail plan. The Deputy will already be aware that I have approved the electrification of the Howth-Bray line. The question of the rapid rail transit system arises in the overall context of Dublin city transport problems which, as I have said, are under study by the Transport Consultative Commission. The cost, which is approximately £200 million, is formidable and must be considered in the light of whatever recommendations are made by the consultative commission and in the context of other very heavy demands which are made on available capital resources.

Reference was made by Deputy O'Brien and others to a positive transport policy. There is considerable confusion about the idea of an overall national transport policy and a great deal of loose thinking and facile thought. People who refer to the need for a national plan or policy never seem very anxious to say what exactly they have in mind. Indeed, I suspect they have given the matter very little thought.

Deputy O'Brien mentioned on a number of occasions in the course of his speech, a positive transport policy, but he did not make any attempt to elucidate what exactly he meant. It must be remembered that, while the transport industry is subject to a reasonable degree of regulation, the country's transport services are not all in State ownership nor are they under direct State control. Is it suggested that there should be greater central and public intervention in the transport industry? Is it envisaged that the State should determine which transport mode should be used for different journeys or traffics? Those who apparently advocate an extension of State direction of transport and travel should face up to these questions and refrain from simple, glib suggestions that the publication of some new form of plan would eliminate the losses on railways, or improve the quality of transport services, or in some way serve as a panacea for all transport problems, problems which, I might stress, continue to defy solution in almost every other country.

I must make it clear that I reject the suggestion that there is a lack of policy and planning in the transport sector here. Policy in the various areas has been clearly enunciated in a number of ways, in legislation, in economic development plans and in Government and ministerial statements. In the case of CIE overall policy is set down in legislation and a more detailed delineation of policy is effected through the level of financial support which the Government determine each year. There have been clear statements of policy in regard to the railways, the road freight services and so on. Policy statements are not confined to CIE operations. In the sphere of road haulage generally, where CIE have a minor part of the market only, my policy in regard to the future of the industry and movement towards liberalisation, subject to quality control, was clearly stated in the debate on the Road Transport Act, 1978.

Of course, transport is a service for the community rather than an end in itself. Therefore, it must be responsive to changing needs and must adapt to developing circumstances. This requires some degree of flexibility and a willingness to review policy on a regular basis. The setting up of the Transport Consultative Commission was motivated by the Government's desire to have the benefit of informed, independent and mature advice on the complex issues which affect the shaping of future transport policy. There is room for public discussion and debate on these issues and I welcome realistic and constructive debate by all interested parties.

On the tourism front I should simply like to repeat what I said in my opening statement: that while it was perhaps too soon to predict the final outcome for this year, I am confident that, while some areas and sectors will have done better than others, overall at least we will have held our own with 1978, which was the best year ever. I pointed out also that the preliminary figures at my disposal would suggest that we will slightly exceed last year's overseas tourist numbers and that the total revenue will exceed the £400 million mark for the first time. Here was an industry which was faced this year with what appeared to be insurmountable problems. But let me say—to the credit of everybody concerned in the industry—that they all showed perseverance, grit and courage, backed by the application of practical proposals. They showed an imaginative approach to the problems and perhaps most of all a determination that they were not going to allow whatever difficulties faced them to damage one of our most important industries. The effort made by all concerned is an example to people in many other areas of our economy and shows what can be done when effort and determination applied. The Government reacted very quickly to the problems facing the industry at an early stage, first of all, by ensuring that oil was available for cooking and heating and then by the implementation of the voucher scheme for the provision of petrol for tourists—a much criticised scheme in the sense that whatever was done seemed not to have been enough. We were told on numerous occasions that many people were unable to get petrol and that the voucher scheme was not working. I had to repeat many times in this House that it was working, was working well and the results of the year's operation show now that what I said then was factual. I might refer also to the great efforts of Bord Fáilte, to the promotional tours undertaken by myself, and to point out the tremendous effort by all concerned has yielded a worthwhile result.

I find it difficult to understand why the Opposition persist in saying that this was not a good year for tourism despite the figures I have given. Of course, the fact of the matter is that it was an exceptionally good year; from all appearances it will have been better than last year—not very much better, but somewhat better—which was a spectacular one for the tourist industry. Deputy Deasy suggested that if we had not the problems we would have done better. There is that possibility, but it is not as positive as it might appear because there was a downturn in the economies of a variety of countries from which tourists come and this naturally would have affected tourist traffic in any case. There were some references made to the European market. The European market, with the number of tourists coming from Europe this year, was about 11 per cent up on last year.

It is very wrong that we should have constant repetition of references to a disastrous and calamitous year and so on. Even Deputy Hegarty, who is a very reasonable man, referred to this as being one bad year. This is not one bad year; this is a good year. Unfortunately, experience shows that if one keeps repeating that something is disastrous or calamitous it becomes part of the mythology. I have no doubt that in years to come, depending on what speeches or what newspaper articles are read, we will still find 1979 referred to as a disastrous year. It reminds me very much of the time of the technician's strike in the Post Office when one individual said we were losing £3 million a day. Sometime later, when put under pressure as to how he could account for this, he was unable to give an answer of any description. He had nothing with which to back up that figure. Yet even today we find people talking about the £3 million a day loss. It is unfortunate, particularly in relation to an industry so very important to this country. We should underline the fact that we are doing well, that we have done well, very much of it due to the efforts of those involved and equally to the major attribute we have in relation to tourism, that is, the friendliness of our people.

Let me say, of course, that I will accept that there were some areas which did not do as well as others. Just in case the argument might be made that Dublin or the east coast were the only recipients of visitors last year, I should like to point out that friends of mine who tried to book in West Cork were unable to get a booking. I mention west Cork because Deputy Hegarty referred to that area last night. I should also like to refer to an interview given on 7 November on Radio Éireann by a hotelier in Gweedore. The interviewer asked the hotelier if the season had been as bad as some people made it out to be. The hotelier replied: "Not at all; I do not accept that because we had a brilliant year and if next year is as good we will be quite happy".

Mr. O'Toole

Another friend of the Minister's?

Mr. Faulkner

In the tourist industry, like other industries, there are two different types of operator, those who look for the business themselves and those who expect business to come to them. Naturally, those who look for the business fill their hotels more quickly. As far as the Department and Bord Fáilte are concerned, we did everything possible to ensure that 1979-was a good year and we will continue to develop this, our major industry. It has been recognised as such by the Government who have added tourism to the title of my Department. The Government have also recognised that by making large sums of money available to tourism.

Deputy Hegarty suggested that the aid to the hotel industry should be extended to aspects other than bedrooms and bathrooms. When I introduced the Tourist Traffic Bill earlier this year I explained in detail my approach to the problems of the hotel industry. The main problem in the last two seasons was that at certain entry points such as Dublin, Cork, Shannon and other major tourist areas like Galway and Killarney where there was great difficulty in getting bookings, especially during the peak season. The main objective of the grant scheme which was recently announced was to come to grips, as soon as possible, with that problem, to devise a scheme which would be flexible and easily administered so as to get new bedrooms on stream as quickly as possible, and not to make excessive demands on capital resources. It is my belief that we have met those criteria in the new scheme. I understand that Bord Fáilte have a big number of applications for grants under the new scheme and expect by closing date, 23 November, that sufficient development will be in prospect to meet the needs of the next few years.

Deputy Hegarty also referred to facilities and amenities for tourism. The Deputy appears to have overlooked the fact that the Tourist Traffic Act, 1979, was enacted last July and that it provided additional funds for the development of facilities. Many of the amenities he advocated are being assisted by Bord Fáilte. I should like to assure the Deputy that there is full liaison with the Minister for the Environment and the planning authorities to ensure the best possible standard of amenity and to ensure that we retain our appeal as an attractive and relatively pollution-free country.

Mr. Hegarty

I should like to ask the Minister if those who are ready to go ahead with work now can get clearance from Bord Fáilte to proceed?

Mr. Faulkner

We have asked Bord Fáilte to process all the applications as quickly as possible. We are as anxious as anybody else to get on with the work.

Mr. Hegarty

Is the Minister saying that such people will not have to wait until the new year or another budget? Those people are anxious to get on with the work now so that they will be ready for next season.

Mr. Faulkner

We will try to process those applications as quickly as possible. I should like to make one important point in relation to this matter, which is that applicants will have to get approval for their work first. We had cases recently of people going ahead with the work before seeking approval. We do not want that to happen again.

Mr. Hegarty

I am confining my remarks to people who got approval.

Mr. Faulkner

We will deal with those matters as quickly as possible.

Vote put and agreed to.