asked the Minister for Communications the financial assistance, if any, the Government receive from EC sources for the operation or maintenance of rail services in this country; how this finance is spent; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions Oral Answers. - Rail Service Maintenance.
4.
The Government do not receive financial assistance from EC sources for the operation and maintenance of rail services. The EC's involvement in so far as railways are concerned is one of overseeing that common rules apply in member states in relation to payment to the railways of State aid.
Does the Minister not accept that, in view of the fact that the EC accepts the need to maintain rail services and allows, under its regulations, for the subsidisation of these services, it would be reasonable in view of our state of underdevelopment that we should get assistance from the EC to maintain those rail services?
I am not certain that I could accept Deputy De Rossa's proposition. I am not sure that it would be to our national advantage. He will know that the rail networks in some of the mainland European countries are very extensive and very costly. I am not sure that it would be right to expect us to participate in the subsidisation of networks which are perhaps, in their case, grossly in excess of what can be socially justified not to mention economically justified.
I am sure the Minister is aware that there are large tracts of this country which have been denuded of rail services on the basis of economies. Would the Minister not agree that it would be far cheaper to preserve the rail services which we have and, if possible, to extend them and that it would be reasonable to seek assistance from the EC for the purpose?
In relation to the first part of the Deputy's question there have been closures in the past. No closures have taken place for a very long time and I do not anticpate any closures in the foreseeable future. The McKinsey report said there was not any further scope for retrenchment on the railways and that the choice was to keep them open or to close them. The report stated that the relevant cost of both options in the short to medium term at least was broadly of the same order of magnitude. The obvious thing to do, therefore, is to keep the railways. That is the decision which the Government have taken. Moreover, we have tried in our dealings with CIE to arrange a better performance of the railways and the other component parts of CIE. There have been dramatic improvements in that respect in each of the past three years and everybody in CIE should be commended for that.
In relation to the second part of the Deputy's question I will repeat what I have already said. There would be great danger in our proposing that railways should be subsidised by the EC. It is far from clear that we would be net beneficiaries of such an arrangement.
Am I to take it that the Minister is saying there is no subsidisation of rail operations in any country in the EC? Was there piggy back subsidisation, to the Minister's knowledge, for the railways in any of the EC mainland countries?
I do not have that information but if the Deputy tables the question I will be glad to answer it.