Vol. 491 No. 6
21 Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Public Enterprise the impact the proposed tunnel port at St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2, will have on the proposed timeframe for completion of the Sandyford line to the city; and the interim public transport initiatives proposed to relieve the traffic congestion in the area served by this line. [13065/98]
The location of a tunnel portal for the underground section is one of the issues which the CIE light rail project team will examine before it submits its application for a light railway order in respect of the Sandyford to St. Stephen's Green line. At this stage, it expects, subject to the necessary technical confirmation, to be in a position to submit its application before the end of this year.
Regarding traffic congestion, the Dublin Transportation Office has nearly completed an action plan designed to address the growing transportation deficit arising from the unprecedented level of traffic growth in recent years. I understand that the plan will propose short-term measures, including public transport measures, which can be taken over the next two years to deal with the problems of traffic congestion not only in the area served by the Sandyford line but throughout the city. I also understand measures will be taken by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government regarding traffic. The DTO proposals will be available soon.
The Minister referred to the impact of the tunnel on the design timeframe. However, my question related to the construction and completion timeframe of the Harcourt Street portion of the line. There is a clear conflict between the location of a light rail terminus on St. Stephen's Green and the location of a portal tunnel in exactly the same place under phase one.
A question please, Deputy.
The entire matter is a black hole.
If the drilling results indicate that St. Stephen's Green is an unsuitable location to commence a tunnel or, as appears more likely, the public inquiry and the EIS show that the environmental impact of digging up Stephen's Green is unsustainable, clearly the completion of the Harcourt Street portion of the line is in disarray and we are back to square one. The Minister said in her reply that nothing can be done until we have an evaluation of the underground section, which is due in the year 2000. If we wait until then to make a decision, we may well find ourselves back at the drawing board. If the Minister appreciates the bind we are in as a result of this change of plan, does she appreciate that she must make the decision to bring the Harcourt Street line to Stephen's Green, no matter what the outcome of the tunnel investigation? Otherwise we will find ourselves unable to complete the Harcourt Street line, which may be sacrificed for a tunnel that might not be built.
I see the Deputy's point because I made the same point to Mr. Donal Mangan and his team when they came to see me.
That was a good one. The Minister will have Dublin looking like Beirut.
The Minister without interruption.
A colleague of Deputy Yates asked the question and she is entitled to an answer. Deputy Yates is not helping by cutting across me to rant the same phrase.
I put it to Mr. Mangan that a "separation" should be considered. As of now that is not the situation but it continues to be under review. I think the Deputy's dates were incorrect. Preliminary studies on underground sections of Stephen's Green-Broadstone are scheduled for autumn-winter 1998, then borehole drilling on underground sections for Stephen's Green-Broadstone in spring-autumn 1999. The Deputy's point was one we discussed informally in the corridor. It seems a simple answer that might work, but apparently in light rail order terms, which are legal, it would not be feasible.
There will be nothing done.
We will return to this issue, as I have a horrible feeling we will miss deadline after deadline. Regarding the alternative measures, we are already two years later than the best scenario provided for.
I am not yet a year in office.
The Minister has cost us two years.
The Deputy should ask a brief question that allows the Minister to reply.
The Minister rightly says that the DTO is coming up with interim recommendations. Can I take it that some of those recommendations will be put in place in the areas this line will serve? A number of the recommendations refer to quality bus corridors, which are not planned for this line because it was expected that Luas would be there in 2001, which it definitely will not be.
I am not yet a year in office.
The Minister has caused years of damage in eight months.
The Minister without interruption.
Perhaps I have had double the effect in my time. I do not know what the DTO proposes but Deputy Mitchell is right in saying the quality bus corridors do not figure in those plans. I understand that the DTO has putative arrangements in mind which I hope everybody takes on board.
That concludes Priority Questions.
Can we talk for as long as we like?
I would not recommend that.
The Minister's usual verbosity.
That is nothing on Deputy Yates.
