Vol. 567 No. 2
80 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport when he expects the Cabinet to make a decision on the business case proposal for the first phase of a Dublin metro as presented to him six months ago by the Railway Procurement Agency. [13883/03]
Last year, the Government agreed that the development of a Dublin metro should be undertaken on a phased basis as a public private partnership. It also decided that a link from the city centre to Dublin Airport was to be included in phase one. Since then, the Railway Procurement Agency has concentrated its work on developing proposals for this phase. A preliminary public consultation has taken place and a pre-qualification exercise for potential bidders was launched by the Railway Procurement Agency in mid-2002.
In November 2002 my Department received the outline business case for phase one from the Railway Procurement Agency. The Dublin metro is the largest proposed infrastructure project in the history of the State. Careful consideration of the outline business case is being undertaken. The estimated costs are substantial and a number of additional aspects of the proposals are being assessed as part of my evaluation of the outline business case. These additional aspects concern the potential impact of the project on the general Government balance in the context of the EU stability and growth pact and the legal, planning and technical considerations based on practice elsewhere, particularly in Madrid where the authorities have developed a strong international reputation for the speedy completion of the Madrid metro extensions at relatively low cost.
I am also considering proposals for legislative change so as to accelerate and streamline the delivery of critical infrastructure projects, thereby reducing the cost of such infrastructure. Following completion of these evaluations by my Department in the coming weeks, I intend to bring proposals to the Cabinet.
The Minister is very concerned about the slow pace at which infrastructure is being introduced. Last year, the Government fortuitously announced three months prior to the election that it would build a metro. I remind the Minister that it proposed not only to build a section from the city centre to the airport, but a full length system from Sandyford to the airport. His reply was, therefore, incorrect in that respect. The Railway Procurement Agency, a committed and efficient organisation, then went about its work in a highly effective manner and presented a detailed report to the Minister in mid-November.
We are all concerned about the current delays. Why was the report delayed in the Department for seven months before being presented to Cabinet? The Minister has been giving out about the slow process involved in getting infrastructure built. Surely this case is the best example of this process. The Minister has a detailed report, yet it is clear from his answer that it will not be presented to Cabinet for a month or more. In what month does he envisage bringing the proposal to Cabinet?
If the Minister is not able to proceed with the project because the Minister for Finance refuses to allow funding to be allocated to public transport or for other reasons, when will he start making alternative proposals? It is not permissible for us to wait until legislation on fast-tracking infrastructure is passed before we approve the project. We cannot allow the current position to continue.
At the meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport this morning, we had a further example of what has been happening in Dublin for the past ten years, when another person came before the committee claiming to have found the magic solution to Dublin's transport problems and proposing that a certain type of system should be built. We now have utter confusion and the only person who can sort it out is the Minister by making a decision. When will he make a decision on the metro proposal and bring it to Cabinet?
The Cabinet has discussed a metro many times in the past year or two. I should be able to bring a substantive memorandum on the proposed metro to Cabinet in the next three or four weeks. I share the Deputy's concern. I would like to build a metro tomorrow and have it operational the week after. The reality is that the proposal would be the largest infrastructural project in the history of the State. As such, it is a complicated operation.
More than 30 parties responded to the pre-qualification exercise launched by the Railway Procurement Agency in May 2002, including a large number of major companies from around the world. The exciting aspect of the exercise was that the same structure appeared time and again in the various expressions of interest, namely, that an internal or external consortium will design, build, finance and operate the scheme and the State would not start to pay for the project until the first train starts to run. I am considering these proposals.
I bluntly told the Railway Procurement Agency that I did not accept the nine years timeframe it stated it would take before the first metro train would run nor the envisaged cost of €4.8 billion, and asked it to reconsider the matter. I invited the person who oversaw the Madrid metro project to make a presentation to the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure so that we can see exactly what we have to copy. I share the Deputy's concern. A nine years timeframe and a cost of €4.8 billion is not acceptable to me or the Government. The agency charged with overseeing the process is aware of our position and is considering it.
One of the nine years to which the Minister refers will be the year it is taking the Government to decide on what it wants. Will the Minister consider publishing the report so that we on this side of the House who add to a healthier debate have access to its contents? Everyone is operating in the dark which adds to the confusion. Various details and conflicting figures on what the project would cost have been leaked to the newspapers. It is about time the Minister published the report or at least provided copies of it to the Opposition spokespersons on transport so that we can join in the debate.
Will the Minister consider alternative, possibly cheaper, options such as the construction of a single bore tunnel as opposed to a twin bore tunnel, which could significantly reduce costs? In addition, if it transpires that the Government cannot afford a metro system, will he present or recommend to Cabinet alternative schemes such as the proposal to roll out the Luas network in four or five additional lines, as proposed in the Dublin Transportation Office's Platform for Change plan? This option was part of plan B in the document in which it was proposed that we move to other public transport projects in the event that we cannot afford a metro system. Does the Minister have a second option along these lines to propose to the Cabinet?
I am strongly of the view that if we proceed with the metro proposal, we should do it properly. While I am not an engineer, it strikes me that a twin tunnel is better than a single bore tunnel for safety and operational reasons. In terms of alternatives, it would be a bad mistake for the country if we were to take a cheaper or clearly inferior option which left no room to expand because we were unable to afford an option which was obviously right in terms of the next 20, 30 or 40 years. I will not recommend to the Government an inferior product that will not stand the test of time 50, 60 or 100 years hence.
There is no report as such. The Railway Procurement Agency made a presentation to me pointing out that there were, as I stated, 30 expressions of interest, outlining the structure of those expressions and detailing the breakdown of the €4.8 billion proposed cost. I can give Deputies opposite broad details of the information avail able on the €4.8 billion figure. This information has been in the newspapers and includes in broad terms risk, VAT, insurance and various other elements. The information is available if the Deputies wish to have it.
We move on to Question No. 81.
Was that a "yes"?
To what is the Deputy referring?
I refer to Deputy Eamon Ryan's request to receive the report.
There is no report.
We have gone over the allocated time.
Will the Minister allow the Rail Procurement Agency to make a presentation to the Joint Committee on Transport outlining the broad facts?
I will arrange that.
