Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 6 Apr 1993

Vol. 429 No. 3

Roads Bill, 1991: Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage.

I move amendment No. 109:

In page 50, between lines 42 and 43, to insert the following:

"(3) The responsibilities, including the responsibilities to maintain roads and to take out adequate policies of insurance in relation thereto, which would normally attach to the relevant local authority, shall, for the duration of any works under this section, attach to the contractor (if any) involved.".

The purpose of this amendment is to make clear the responsibilities for the insurance for the duration of any works. In this regard I am not sure whether the Minister is able to impart to the House any more wisdom than was given on Committee Stage, but it should be made clear that while any works are being carried out the responsibility that would normally rest on the local authority once the works had been completed would lie with the contractor.

(Wexford) This section relates exclusively to works on motorways, busways and protected roads. It is the practice and the intention that public utilities do not interfere with these high capacity roads at all if it can be avoided. Any services provided by them will usually be laid down away from the roads in question or at the side of these roads, where they can be accessed without interfering with traffic. The provisions in this section relate only to cases where it is absolutely necessary to interfere with a motorway, protected road or busway to carry out works on pipes, cables and so on.

On the specific point of responsibility and liability during road works, it has always been the case that if damage or injury is caused through negligence during such works, the body carrying out the works is liable. Telecom Éireann, Bord Gáis and the ESB, for instance, are all responsible for the work carried out by them on public roads. The position on reinstatement can vary from local authority to local authority. Some road authorities may themselves carry out the reinstatement on behalf of the public utility on payment of a fee. Alternatively, the statutory undertaker may carry out the work itself and arrangements are made for the transfer of responsibility to the local authority once it is satisfied that the reinstatement has been satisfactorily carried out.

I thank the Minister for his explanation. I note, with a little regret, that the latter part of the Minister's comment demonstrated how desirable it would have been for him to accept amendment No. 76, which dealt with the carrying out of various works of interference with the roads and with the reinstatement of the roads. In time to come the Minister may very well, in the quiteness of his own soul on some dark night, wish that he had accepted amendment No. 76. Having made that point, I find the rest of the Minister's explanation satisfactory and I am prepared to withdraw amendment No. 109.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

We now come to amendment No. 110, in the name of Deputy Gilmore. I note that amendments Nos. 115 to 120, inclusive, are related amendments. The proposal is to take amendment No. 110 and amendments Nos. 115 to 120, inclusive, together.

I move amendment No. 110:

In page 52, to delete lines 11 and 12, and substitute "in the case of National Regional and local roads the elected members of the local authority in whose administrating area, the road is located;".

This amendment is probably one of the most critical amendments. Amendment No. 110 and the group of amendments related to it, all of which are being discussed, relate to the provisions for the tolling of roads. Until now the power to make a decision to toll a road of any kind was vested in the elected members of a local authority. Toll schemes have been made in several instances. The East Link Bridge is a classic example, as is the West Link Bridge, that being a toll scheme that I myself, as a member of Dublin County Council, supported. I am not opposed in principle to the concept of tolling. I am opposed to the provision in this Bill that will for national roads remove from local authorities the power to make a tolling scheme and will give that power to the National Roads Authority.

I have an immediate reason for expressing concern about this matter. Before the Bill was introduced, a backdoor, surreptitious attempt to toll the "C" ring around Dublin was made by one of the Minister's predecessors. About two years ago an arrangement was made with an American company to make a toll scheme on the Western Parkway, part of the "C" ring around Dublin. The absurd position obtained wherein, with the authority of the Minister's predecessor, toll plinths were erected on the section of the motorway then being built at Clondalkin and those toll plinths subsequently had to be removed at the direction of Dublin County Council. The total cost, between putting up the plinths and then taking them down, amounted to about £50,000. That was an utter waste of public money in an attempt made by the Minister's predecessor to toll a road that was being built with public money. Having failed to introduce that measure through the backdoor, it would appear that the Government is now attempting to achieve the tolling of that road by way of making a provision in this Bill that will shift the power for the making of a toll scheme from the local authority to the National Roads Authority. The "C" ring around Dublin is presently under construction. As I said earlier, the Northern Cross, the Southern Cross and the South-Eastern motorway are completed.

I want a specific statement from the Minister on whether it is still his intention and that of his Department to toll that road. Of course, the effect of tolling that road would defeat its whole purpose, which was to take heavy concentrations of traffic out of residential areas. If it is tolled the Minister would end up with the kind of problem at present obtaining in areas such as Ringsend where traffic trying to avoid the toll on the East Link Bridge winds its way through residential areas. The Minister might well end up with the same position if he were to toll the motorway now being constructed around Dublin.

This amendment has been tabled against the background of an unsuccessful attempt by the Minister's predecessor to place toll booths and require motorists using the motorway now being built around Dublin to pay a toll — toll plinths were erected and subsequently demolished. The local authority concerned has already made it clear that it does not intend to impose a toll scheme for that motorway for a whole variety or reasons. But the views of the local authority will be neither here nor there if this section is passed unamended. It will take from elected members of local authorities the power to impose a toll and place it in the hands of the people appointed by the Minister to be members of the National Roads Authority.

I very much agree with the sentiments just expressed by Deputy Gilmore. I am sure he will not be annoyed with me when I say I find his amendment technically somewhat deficient. Since it is obviously based on the circumstances of someone dealing with a potential toll project within the area of one local authority only. I contend there are cases where we should go somewhat further than his amendment, because a project in question may well affect several local authorities or road authorities. I do not believe that the National Roads Authority should be put in a position where it can take a decision to impose a toll without any reference to the local authorities through whose areas of competence and responsibility the proposed motorway is being built.

If we learned anything from the limited experience we have of tolling and from examination of what happens in other countries, we should be very careful about approaching the idea of tolling roads here at all. It should be remembered that the only two projects nationwide that because of their nature are properly subject to tolling are already subject to tolling — the East Link and West Link bridges. In almost every other case where there are substantial works on stretches of new road or new bypasses, it is virtually impossible, because of the layout of this country and the density of other roads, to devise a practical and feasible proposition for tolling. There are so many alternative options available within a high density of road networks that it is very difficult to toll most of our major roads.

I might illustrate that more explicitly by saying that I would find it very difficult to envisage that one could successfully toll projects undertaken so far such as the Naas bypass, the Athlone bypass or any of the other bypasses about to be built because we build them all in discrete sections. On the other hand, had we ever reached the point, to give one example only, that we had built a motorway standard road from, say, Newlands Cross to Portlaoise, it would certainly have been worthwhile to have considered tolling that, because by building such a road one could reduce the numbers of access and exit points to a level that would render it a worthwhile proposition for tolling. If one examines successful tolling projects in all of the places where they have been implemented one discovers they have been long distance roads where there are very substantial gaps between the access and exist points. But the nature of this country being what it is, I do not think such circumstances prevail here.

The reason I am worried about the provisions of this Bill and support the sense of Deputy Gilmore's amendment is that I believe the National Roads Authority may be tempted to examine the imposition of tolls for reasons that do not include a proper examination of these factors, that do not include a proper examination of either the spatial or traffic-flow factors that should be properly considered, but rather would be tempted to do this simply in order to raise revenue either for the construction of new sections of road or for the maintenance of sections of road already built.

Reverting to the gentlemanly discussion we had a few moments ago about local authorities, I contend there is nothing in this Bill that makes a substantial case for removing a power from our local authorities and granting such power to this new supra local authority body in the way proposed there. I contend that would constitute a totally inadequate and partial way of dealing with the matter.

I am not too sure I agreed in total with Deputy Gilmore's amendment. Since we have spoken so much about local democracy, fear has been expressed in relation to retrospective tolling of roads, something that should not be allowed in any circumstance. On the question of tolls, if there is a private input into the building of roads, bridges or whatever, like the East Link Bridge, obviously a case will be advanced for the tolling of such routes. That is a reasonable way to fund such schemes. But, as Deputy Dukes pointed out, the scope for such endeavours here is rather limited. We must take that into account. The views of local authorities on tolling must be taken into account, particularly in regard to minor or shorter roads which do not lend themselves to tolling. It comes back again to the whole issue of local democracy. I wonder whether we have thought through sufficiently the whole aspect of tolling. Perhaps we will have an M 99 running from Belfast to Cork which could be tolled. Certainly, I would be delighted if I could reach Cork in one-and-a-half hours flat or whatever. There is a case to be made for a tolling system where there are alternative routes such as obtains in France; but we need to re-examine our circumstances.

I would make a brief comment in relation to toll roads. The East Link was the first toll road around Dublin and cost the taxpayer nothing. It will be handed over to Dublin Corporation after, I think, 20 years when they will reap the benefit of the toll receipts. The toll roads themselves provide extra access to new roads. It is not as though they were substituting existing roads. These are new roads created with private money which are to be welcomed.

The West Link Bridge is a huge boon to people travelling north west from Tallaght, right from Firhouse through almost to Blanchardstown, and it will eventually continue to the Airport. If one crosses the bridge en route to the aiport, which I do frequently, it costs 70p. But if I want to travel to the airport through the city centre I can do so at any time without paying a charge. Apparently when toll booths were erected at Clondalkin to cater for traffic travelling southwards and subsequently demolished, this was done without the consent of the relevant local authority. I am also aware, as a member of a local authority, that when it is proposed to build a major road objections raised by people living in a small area — indeed, local councillors can be intimidated — can delay the process and hold it to ransom.

Provision is being made in the Bill for appeals by a local authority to the Minister if it feels that charges are unfair or too high or should not be charged at all. Having said this, I would welcome private investment in road building in order to relieve congestion on our roads and remove the burden on the taxpayer. While, ultimately, it is the motorist who will pay the toll I have yet to meet any driver who begrudges paying 70p to gain access to a road. Certainly, the East Link Bridge, the Roche Bridge, has proved to be a boon for many people; it saves them much time and has led to a reduction in pollution levels on the little streets that surround it. Deputy Gilmore mentioned that people try to avoid the East Link Road and that this has led to "rat running" in other areas. This was a far greater problem before the East Link Bridge was built. That is my experience of driving in the city and, as someone who drives 400 miles a week, I know what I am talking about.

(Wexford): I should point out to Deputy Briscoe that, in the main, it is country people like myself who pay tolls on the East Link Bridge.

At least something is coming to Dublin.

An export service.

(Wexford): As I stated on Committee Stage, it is my intention to ensure that the National Roads Authority will be given the power to toll national roads, subject to ministerial approval. I am introducing an amendment which will provide for a formal statutory consultation process with elected members of the relevant local authority, that is, the county council or the county borough corporation, before the National Roads Authority make a toll scheme in respect of a national road. A draft of the toll scheme will be sent to the local authority, together with a formal notice giving it an opportunity to make written representations to the National Roads Authority. The National Roads Authority will be obliged to consider any submissions made to it by the local authority.

If the National Roads Authority decides to proceed with the toll scheme and submit it to the Minister for his approval and the local authority is still dissatisfied it can then submit its objections to the Minister under section 58 and have them considered at the ensuing public inquiry. The Minister will be obliged to consider them before making the decision on the toll scheme.

In relation to the Dublin Ring Road it will be up to the National Roads Authority to consider whether it should be tolled. If it does decide to proceed it will be obliged under my amendment to consult with the local authority and the proposal will be subject to a public inquiry and ministerial approval. The National Roads Authority will also be guided by any recommendations which the final report of the Dublin Transport Initiative may make in this area.

The point made by Deputy Dukes is also relevant, that the scope to toll roads is limited and any revenue obtained by the National Roads Authority will be ploughed back into this area. Other factors, other than revenue, will have to be considered in deciding whether a road should be tolled. The National Roads Authority will have to take into account whether it is likely that traffic will be diverted and consider the impact on local areas of traffic diversions and possible additional costs of improvements in these areas. The use of tolls to manage traffic will also have to be considered in the future.

The Minister of State's reply is not satisfactory. He has said that local authorities will be consulted and will be able to write a letter to the National Roads Authority. If not satisfied with the reply, it will be able to write another letter to the Minister for the Environment to see if he will change his mind. This is no substitute for the power, which local authorities have at present, to make the decision in the first place. The Minister of State knows this very well.

It is also quite clear from the Minister of State's reply that it is still his intention to toll the Dublin Ring Road. This would be disastrous. One already has to pay a toll at the West Link Bridge and it would be a disastrous decision if the remainder of the road, which is relatively short, were tolled. This would lead to traffic pouring back into residential areas. The road was designed to take traffic out of these areas.

If we were not so close to the final moments of this debate I would push this amendment to a division. When we have a division at 6.45 p.m. it will be worth remembering that Members will be dividing on a Bill which contains within it a provision which will allow the National Roads Authority to toll any national road, specifically the Dublin Ring Road. If in a few years' time we find that the Minister or the National Roads Authority intend to go ahead and toll the ring road we will refer back to the record of this House to see which parties and which Members went through each lobby. We are now making the effective decision as to whether the Dublin Ring Road will be tolled eventually and whether the motorists of Dublin, in addition to paying a toll on the West Link, will have to pay a toll on the remainder of the road.

Question: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand", put and declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.

We now proceed to amendment No 111. Amendment No. 112 is related. It is proposed to take amendments Nos. 111 and 112 together.

I move amendment No. 111:

In page 52, line 14, after "public road" where it secondly occurs, to insert "the construction of which was either partly or wholly funded by private investment and".

This amendment, which deals with the same problem we have just been talking about, would restrict the roads to which the National Roads Authority could apply a toll. This would mean in effect that the East Link and the West Link would be the only roads to which tolls could be applied. It is my expectation that they would remain for a long time the only roads to which a toll could be applied. I should point out for the record — I know that Deputy Briscoe will check this——

I always do.

——that is disingenuous to suggest that the East Link Bridge was constructed at no cost to the taxpayer. The private promoter of that bridge did not provide the full capital cost. Dublin Corporation and the taxpayer — the great Irish borrower — provided the greater part of the funds required to construct that necessary road.

It will revert back to us — I am sure the Deputy would not dispute this — after a period of 20 years.

It will eventually, after the initial private sector investment which was a proportion of the total cost has been remunerated over a period of 20 years. Therein lies the difficulty.

I do not intend to deal with this amendment at great length as I do not expect the Minister of State to accept it. I expect that the number of projects, the construction of which is wholly or partly funded by private investment, will for a long time remain limited. I speak with some knowledge as I have come across projects which were put forward ostensibly to build long sections of roads with private investment but as yet the formula has not gelled. I do not expect to see any case for a long time where we have a seriously operational project which is funded by private investment but since the effect of this amendment is simply to restrict the scope of what the Minister has succeeded in maintaining in the Bill, I will not discuss it interminably and I will therefore withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 112 and 113 not moved.

I move amendment No. 114:

In page 53, to delete lines 12 and 13 and substitute the following:

"(6) A toll scheme shall not be made in relation to a regional road or a local road.".

This amendment is the braces we hoped to put on the Minister in addition to the belt that Deputy Gilmore tried to put on earlier. We seek to make it quite clear that even though the National Roads Authority may impose tolls on national roads without democratic consultation or proper involvement, the intention of this amendment is to make sure that this could not happen in relation to regional or local roads. It may be argued that this is not needed, that the National Roads Authority has no competence in this area. If that is what the Minister says to me, I am inclined to believe it, but I take leave to doubt whether he can honestly and convincingly say to me that the National Roads Authority will never ever think of doing it. To avoid doubt I would like to hear what he has to say about the potential scope of this amendment.

(Wexford): While it is envisaged that most potential toll schemes would apply to national roads this might not always be the case. For example, a local road in an urban area may well carry heavier traffic than a national primary road running through a rural area. If a restriction of this kind had been contained in the Local Government (Toll Roads) Act, 1979, it would have precluded the construction of the successful East Link bridge, which is not on a national road. Local authorities or private investors from time to time may identify gaps in the network or other suitable opportunities which would not be fully funded, if at all, from the public purse. In my view the local authorities should have the discretion to pursue the possibility of funding those developments through tolls either on their own or in partnership with private investors or operators.

The Minister has confirmed my worst fears. What he is telling me is that the Castlebar inner relief road — the P. Flynn parkway — could now be tolled and the Athy inner relief road could be tolled, if he ever gets around to building it and, indeed, local roads all around the country could be tolled. It is as I suspected. The Minister has got the particular flag of the National Roads Authority and in the best tradition of Fianna Fáil Governments, in this case aided and abetted and supported by a Labour Party that knows not what it does, it is now bringing in this Trojan horse and the Government will be trying to toll roads left, right and centre. I have to press this amendment.

A great way of slowing down the construction.

(Wexford): It will be a matter for the local authorities and not the National Roads Authority.

Question put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 115 not moved.

(Wexford):) I move amendment No. 116:

In page 53, to delete lines 14 to 16 and substitute the following:

"(7) (a) Before making a toll scheme in relation to a national road, the Authority shall send a copy of the draft scheme to the appropriate road authority under section 13 and serve a notice on the authority stating—

(i) that a draft toll scheme has been prepared and that it is proposed to submit it to the Minister for his approval, and

(ii) that representations may be made in writing to the Authority in relation to the draft scheme before a specified date (which shall be not less than six weeks from the date of the notice).

(b) The Authority shall consider any representations made to it under this subsection and not withdrawn.

(c) The making of representations by a road authority under this subsection shall be a reserved function and shall be without prejudice to the right of that authority to make objections to the Minister under section 58.".

Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 117 to 120, inclusive, not moved.

As it is now 6.45 p.m. I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That the amendments set down by the Minister for the Environment and not disposed of are hereby made to the Bill; Report Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed."

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 73; Níl, 37.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Andrews, David.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Bhreathnach, Niamh.
  • Bree, Declan.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Collins, Gerard.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Fitzgerald, Liam.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Hughes, Séamus.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Killeen, Tony.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • McCreevy, Charlie.
  • McDaid, James.
  • Moffat, Tom.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Moynihan, Donal.
  • Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
  • Mulvihill, John.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Hanlon, Rory.
  • O'Keeffe, Batt.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Shea, Brian.
  • O'Sullivan, Gerry.
  • O'Sullivan, Toddy.
  • Pattison, Séamus.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Ryan, Eoin.
  • Ryan, John.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Spring, Dick.
  • Stagg, Emmet.

Níl

  • Ahearn, Theresa.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, John.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Bruke, Liam.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Cox, Pat.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Cullen, Martin.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Dukes, Alan M.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foxe, Tom.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Sheehan, P.J.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris; Níl, Deputies E. Kenny and Browne(Carlow-Kilkenny).
Question declared carried.

Upton, Pat.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Eamon.

Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.

Top
Share