P. J. Sheehan
Question:87 Deputy P. J. Sheehan asked the Minister for Transport if he is satisfied that all State-funded transport operators are acting within the terms of their service agreements with his Department. [39978/08]
Other Questions.
Public Transport.
CIE and its subsidiary companies have a broad statutory mandate under the Transport Acts of 1958 and 1986 to provide a range of loss making but socially and economically necessary public service obligation, PSO, services. The compensation paid by the Exchequer to CIE in respect of these PSO services, €308.6 million in 2008, is administered through annual memoranda of understanding on service levels and targets between my Department and each of the CIE companies. The memoranda require the submission of quarterly reports to confirm compliance with the terms of the memoranda. These reports are subject to an independent review process. In addition, the annual report and accounts of CIE certify that the Exchequer grants paid to CIE are deployed in accordance with EU regulations governing state aid to transport undertakings.
If Dublin Bus or Bus Éireann wishes to initiate or alter a bus service the companies must give advance notice to my Department. Where proposed services by either company are deemed to be in competition with services that are the subject of a licence held by a private bus operator issued under the Road Transport Act 1932, Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann are required to obtain my consent under section 25 of the Transport Act 1958 before the services can be introduced.
I am satisfied that the CIE companies comply generally with the terms of the MOU and with the bus licensing requirements. Nevertheless, issues have arisen regarding competition with private sector operators in a number of areas. In this regard, the Competition Authority, the European Commission and my Department are investigating complaints against Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann. It would be premature at this stage to make determinations as to the outcome of these matters.
Funding is also provided for regional air services and rural transport services. I am satisfied that the recipients of this aid are acting within the terms of their service agreements.
The key point is that the Minister says he is satisfied generally. However, he is not completely satisfied. Private bus companies who were providing commuter services, such as Circle Line, have gone out of business because of what they claim to be unfair competition from Dublin Bus. There are serious issues in this area. One of the problems is that there is no transparency about the routes that are PSO and those that are not. The allegation is made, and I appreciate it is being investigated by the European Commission and the Competition Authority, that State funding is being used to keep a private bus operator from operating competitive services. That is unfair and unacceptable.
I agree with the Deputy, and I have made it clear since I took office, that any anti-competitive behaviour by Dublin Bus or Bus Éireann will be investigated and followed up by me. We have lived by that rule. I do not wish to comment specifically on any case because most of them are ongoing at present. However, I can assure the Deputy that where there is a PSO an audit is carried out on it.
We do not have the information. That is my point. We do not know what are the PSO routes. Would the Minister be happy to give us that information?
I do not think there is a difficulty with that; I will check for the Deputy and try to get that information to him.
Can the Minister report on the outcome of the case taken by Swords Express — I believe Digital Messenger Limited is the company name — against the Department, given that public money is involved? Second, why are we still waiting for legislation on this matter? There have been serious complaints from Swords Express, Circle Line, the Dublin tour bus operators and so forth to Deputies. My colleague Deputy O'Dowd asked about PSOs. We know, for example, that the nine o'clock bus to Finglas or the nine o'clock bus to Dundrum is the type of service that will in all probability have to be supported. Given this fact, why does the Minister not simply publish legislation, pass it through the Houses and move on to a playing pitch that everybody understands in terms of good standards of public transport?
I look forward to the Deputy's support for the legislation. I am not sure if he is advocating that the legislation should open up the Dublin bus market and other bus markets to everybody. That has not been——
I am not. I am asking the Minister to publish the rules for licensing.
——the case up to now; there has not been open competition. The Dublin Transport Authority Act allows for competition on any new PSO routes in the future. From 1 December next year, new PSO routes will be open to competition from the private sector as well as from Bus Éireann and Bus Átha Cliath. The legislation the Deputy asked about is the reform of the 1932 Act. The heads of the Bill are in circulation and will go to the Government shortly. I will bring that legislation forward as a matter of urgency.
Is it the case that a senior official in the Department of Transport when examining complaints on the matter formed the view that Dublin Bus was abusing its "dominant position", but the Minister has no real powers to deal with infringements by Dublin Bus, other State operators, or other organisations and cannot discipline such organisations?
The Minister did not answer my question about Swords Express. Is the Minister prepared to publish the report? I am a strong supporter of public transport, but why is the sector operating under an Act from 1932, at which time most of the country used bicycles and horses to get around? The situation is laughable and it is another indictment of the Minister and the Government.
I do not wish to repeat myself every time I answer questions in the House but, as the Deputy is aware, I am keen to table the necessary legislation. We introduced part of the required legislation, namely, the Dublin Transport Authority Bill 2008, with the co-operation of Opposition Members including Deputy Broughan. We are now concentrating on amending the Road Transport Act 1932 as quickly as possible. I expect to discuss this in the House early next year.
The case involving Swords Express was settled in the High Court on 28 October 2008. The principal element of the settlement provided for an inquiry created under section 25(2) of the Transport Act 1958 to deal with a decision to authorise rerouting of the 41X bus service in Swords. The inquiry will produce a report which will be submitted to me for final determination and this will be pursued within a defined timeframe. In addition, the High Court settlement allows the Department to give early consideration to outstanding applications for express bus services from Swords. We await a submission from Digital Messenger consultants, the receipt of which will trigger the inquiry.
Regarding Deputy O'Dowd's point about penalties, if a bus operator is in breach of the terms of its private bus operator's licence under the 1932 Act it is a matter for the Garda which is supposed to pursue the matter.
My question referred to Dublin Bus. The point is that the Minister has no powers to deal with the company.
The Minister has powers, which I used as recently as today, to direct Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann or any public company to desist from acting in a manner I regard as outside the terms of the licence.
What if the company does not desist?
I can impose a sanction by way of a reduction in the company's subvention and I intend to do that.
Dublin Transport Authority.
Sean Sherlock
Question:88 Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Transport the stage of the process of recruiting a chief executive officer for the Dublin Transport Authority; when the DTA will be fully operational; the way the Dublin Transportation Office will be absorbed by the new DTA Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39861/08]
I intend to establish the Dublin Transport Authority as early as possible in 2009 once I am satisfied it has the financial and staffing resources necessary to enable it effectively discharge the functions assigned to it by the Oireachtas under the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008.
Discussions are taking place between my Department and the Department of Finance on the financing and staffing of the authority against the background of the difficult position faced by the Exchequer outlined in the recent budget. The process of appointing a chief executive designate of the new authority will commence once those discussions have been finalised.
Part 6 of the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 provides for the dissolution of the Dublin Transportation Office and the transfer of its employees to the Dublin Transport Authority in accordance with the detailed arrangements set out in that Part of the Act.
Will the search for the new chief executive officer of the DTA involve an international competition? Will the search for a very experienced transport person be as wide as possible? The Minister referred to the budget. Is there a decision about the parameters, such as the salary package, available to the chief executive and other senior positions in the new authority? How many staff will work for the organisation? Is there a decision on where the headquarters will be placed? When will the new authority be operational?
The Department of Transport will not conduct the search for the chief executive, it will be a matter for the Public Appointments Service. I have instructed officials in my Department to seek the best person for the job and to spread the net as wide as possible to recruit the very best person. The salary range for the post is governed by the scales set by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration and the Hay group. The number of staff is subject to discussion and negotiation with the Department of Finance. Several staff will move from the Dublin Transportation Office, some will move from the integrated ticketing project and some will move from the Railway Procurement Agency.
Will there be 150 people involved?
I do not wish to be held to a figure, but I estimate some 100 staff will be involved.
I refer to the remit of the DTA. Is it intended that the new authority will become a national regulator since the budget was announced? Will it become the regulator for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's constituency and the entire country, not just the Dublin region? I am aware it is intended that the new authority will absorb the Taxi Regulator. Will this happen early next year?
An editorial in the Irish Independent today called on the Minister for Transport to buy more buses following the report of the Dublin Transportation Office on quality bus corridors. The report suggested there is a deficit of between 300 to 500 buses in the greater Dublin region. Given the situation arising from the budget, what does the Minister intend to do to address this need and to address ongoing gridlock?
I forgot to mention absorption of the Taxi Regulator into the new authority. During the debate on the DTA Bill, Deputy O'Dowd suggested the remit of the new authority should be extended. I have considered the matter and although initially I intended to proceed in three stages, namely, to introduce the DTA Bill, to amend the 1932 Act and then provide for a national regulator, I now intend to compact the final two stages into one and create a national transport regulator.
Will it be called the Irish Transport Authority?
It will be the national transport authority. Regarding the newspaper report, I do not know what qualifications the newspaper editorial writer can call on to tell me to buy more buses——
He is probably the only remaining member of the Progressive Democrats.
He may be a socialist.
I have always maintained that we must ensure we use the existing fleet efficiently. In the coming weeks I hope to find out whether this is the case.
Not alone should we use the existing State bus fleet efficiently, we should bring in the private operators also to meet the demand which clearly exists. I refer to the DTA and fare structures. It emerged during the debate on the DTA Bill that the new authority can identify transport trains originating outside of the Dublin area which are deemed to be fare-controlled by the authority. A number of what is termed "promotional fare" increases are due from Iarnród Éireann. Will the DTA be able to deal with these increases? There are many inequalities and injustices in the fare system. Locations equidistant from Dublin pay widely differing fares and there is no uniformity. Commuters, especially those north of Dublin in counties Meath and Louth suffer greatly. A commuter pays a Dublin fare as far as Balbriggan, however when one goes beyond Balbriggan to Louth or Meath one pays through the nose, which is unfair. Iarnród Éireann has refused to deal with this matter.
The question is whether the DTA will have powers to examine this matter and the answer is "Yes".
Harbour Authorities.
Phil Hogan
Question:89 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for Transport if he has received a communication from the executive committee of the Association of County and City Councils regarding a provision in the Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 which will remove the right of county and city councils to appoint members to the boards of harbour companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39953/08]
I confirm that I have recently received representations from the Association of County and City Councils regarding proposals contained within the Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 on the reform of port company board structures. The Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 recently commenced its passage through the Oireachtas and is currently in the Seanad. The primary purpose of the Bill is to give effect to certain aspects of the ports' policy statement, which was launched in January 2005 and is available to view on my Department's website. One of the key recommendations of the statement was the need to enhance port company performance through reform of the board structure. These recommendations are the basis for the provisions on board structure, which are contained in the Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008. There will be ample opportunity to debate these proposals and other related matters during the passage of the Bill through the Oireachtas. We are currently on Committee Stage of the Bill in the Seanad.
The Minister of State did not point out that those proposals include the removal from the harbour authorities of a number of public representatives from councils around the country. I appreciate that he acknowledged the letter he received from the Association of County and City Councils, but he had to do it. In their letter, they state they do not want public representatives to be removed from the harbour authorities. They believe they have a very important role to play in representing the local authorities near the port authorities. It is very important to maintain that link, so will the Minister of State reverse the decision to exclude a certain number of local authority members, if not all of them, from the Bill?
We are talking about ports, not harbour commissioners. There are ten ports.
One of them is in Drogheda.
There are currently three local authorities on the board of that port company, which has been the position since the mid 1990s. The remit and culture of ports has changed since corporatisation came in. They are now commercial State bodies. Other commercial State bodies such as airport authorities do not have local authority members on their boards. We are currently removing the statutory provision in which each port company would have three local authority members. The Minister has agreed that the smaller boards will have eight members rather than the current 12, but that one of the ministerial appointees will be a local authority member. Therefore, there will be one local authority member out of eight board members rather than three out of 12.
That is another issue. The local authority representative should be appointed by the local authority, not by the Minister. That would be local democracy in action.
That is not the way it is going.
I know that is not the way it is going. We will have more henchmen.
There were questions about all this and I said in the Seanad that I would look at certain aspects of it. However, we are removing the statutory provision and we want to have one member from local authorities.
I hope it will not be the case that an appointee will have to be a member or a chairperson of a Fianna Fáil cumann before he or she can be considered for one of these jobs. Is this not a ferocious attack on local democracy? The three councillors are being thrown off the boards of directors. It is also wrong headed. Who knows better than local councillors about the economic and social issues of the port areas? When this Bill comes before the Dáil, I will ask the Minister of State to reconsider this aspect.
A related matter is the cutting of the number of employee directors. We have had a great tradition in Dublin and elsewhere in which the employees also had representation on the board, often to very good effect. The Minister of State is preparing to cut the number down to just one employee director. Will he and the senior Minister reconsider this on Committee Stage of the Bill when it comes before this House? Deputy Ahern and I both served on Dublin City Council. We worked closely together on many issues affecting the city——
The Bill is currently before the Seanad, and there is a convention that we do not normally debate potential amendments in this House that may be under discussion in the other House.
I do not think the Minister of State and the Minister realise the enormity of this. There is a meeting this afternoon of the Association of County and City Councils across the street, and they are very upset about this. It is another removal of local democratic powers and it is wrong. The Minister of State was a hard-working councillor, and so was I. We know what we tried to do to represent our people. Is this not a backward step? He must get rid of it.
The whole scene has changed, and we must have consistency. It was the position until the mid 1990s that harbour authorities represented a broad church of people. In some cases, there were 11 councillors on those boards, among others. Various reports since then have stated that there should not be any councillors or port users. The ports are now commercial State organisations like the Dublin Airport Authority. We in the Department are trying to be consistent. It is a different ball game now and we are trying to bring things into line.
As a compromise, it has been agreed that one ministerial appointment would come from the councils, which is a half-way house between the old——
It is no house at all. Whoever is in power puts in their own people.
There have been a few expert reports, which have stated that——
Bureaucrats hate elected people, as the Minister of State knows. This is where all of this is coming from. Councillors have mandates, so let us give them some authority.
I have total respect for councillors. Like the Deputy, I spent 17 years on the council. It is a case of giving them their full status in the appropriate places.
The board representation is being reduced from 12 members to eight. It is intended that there be one worker director rather than two. Most of the ports are very small. Some of them have nearly more on the board than they have as employees.
Taxi Regulations.
David Stanton
Question:90 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Transport further to Parliamentary Question No. 61 of 1 October 2008, if, following budget 2009, a final decision has been made on the provision of a subsidy scheme for taxi and hackney operators to purchase wheelchair accessible vehicles that comply with new standards; the further discussions he has had with the taxi regulator on the issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40018/08]
As mentioned in the reply to the parliamentary question to which the Deputy refers, my Department has been in discussion with the Commission for Taxi Regulation about a subsidy scheme to assist with the purchase of accessible vehicles over a five-year period that will meet the new accessible vehicle specification developed by the commission. A number of options for the delivery of additional accessible vehicles are being explored by my Department, in order to improve accessibility to public transport for people with disabilities.
The Department's public transport accessibility committee recently discussed the provision of wheelchair accessible taxis when considering a review of "Transport Access for All", which is the Department's sectoral plan under the Disability Act 2005. The committee questioned whether, in the current economic environment and on practical grounds, it was necessary to provide for the entire fleet of taxis in urban areas to be wheelchair accessible. My Department will engage further with the Commission for Taxi Regulation to identify whether a more cost effective approach to the provision of adequate numbers of wheelchair accessible taxis can be developed.
I thank the Minister for his response. When does he envisage these discussions to finish? When does he envisage being able to assist taxi and hackney operators to purchase wheelchair accessible taxis? Does he intend to publish any policy document on this? He has just indicated that there now seems to be a policy change in the area.
We will shortly be undertaking a review of our sectoral plan. There has been discussion on the progress made and on where we need to go over the next few years. We will be producing that document towards the end of this month. The issue will be discussed then.
I cannot give a timescale for the discussions with the taxi regulator, but I do not think there will be any undue delay. It is a matter that we should try to resolve as quickly as possible, so that we can introduce the scheme quickly.
Is it true that the percentage of wheelchair accessible taxis has dropped below what it was when deregulation occurred? What percentage of taxis are now wheelchair accessible? How much funding does the Minister of State intend to make available for this scheme?
The number of licensed wheelchair accessible taxis increased from 840 in 2000 to 1,504 in December 2007. A further 216 applications for wheelchair accessible taxis were received by the commission up to the end of September this year. Under Transport 21, the Department has a provision of €14 million in 2008 for funding accessibility improvements. Some of the money for the scheme would come from that. I cannot recall what the total figure for this was, but it is larger than that amount. I do not have the figure here, so I will have to revert to the Deputy.
A few months ago, the taxi regulator, Ms Kathleen Doyle, told us that the new standards protocol for the taxi industry would operate from January 2009. Is funding being provided for that and will it happen? Given that we now have well over 26,000 taxis, which is substantially more than the greater London area with a population three or four times that of the Republic, does the Minister consider this matter a priority? Is the Minister still opposed to any moratorium or cap on issuing licences, despite recent discussions at the Joint Committee on Transport?
The issue initially raised in the Deputy's supplementary question is a matter for the taxi regulator. I am not privy to the details of what progress has been made in that regard. I am sure, however, that if she said she would have the standards protocol in place in January, she will do so.
As regards the moratorium, I have followed with interest the discussions at the Joint Committee on Transport concerning taxi regulation. It was made clear at the committee that, given the High Court decision, the law as it stands makes it impossible for any kind of moratorium to be introduced just on the basis of controlling numbers. The report the committee compiled will be examined, however. I am aware of the various legal viewpoints that were put forward in that report, which will be considered in the Department.
There was agreement in the programme for Government in 2002, and in the Department's sectoral plan, to introduce a pilot subsidy scheme for this area. Will the Minister report to the House on what has happened in that regard?
The taxi regulator is undertaking an economic review of the impact made on competition and choice by opening up the market. A key issue in considering all aspects must be the economic impact. Ultimately, there must be choice for consumers.
I agree with the Deputy about that. For a long number of years in this House, Deputies on all sides were complaining that it was impossible to get a taxi in Dublin——
That is right.
——and, indeed, in rural areas. The High Court decision reversed that trend. The belief now, particularly among taxi drivers, is that there are too many licences, but the law is as it currently stands. With the introduction of improved standards by the taxi regulator, many of the concerns currently being expressed can be met.
Deputy Stanton referred to the introduction of a pilot scheme. The discussions I mentioned at the outset relate to that matter. There was extensive discussion by the Commission on Taxi Regulation. In the course of the committee's hearings on public transport accessibility, which reviewed the disability plan, a view was expressed that the commitment in the programme for Government to making wheelchair accessible taxis widely available was not deemed to be an absolute necessity. It is on that basis, therefore, that we will talk to the taxi regulator again to see if we can produce some sort of scheme that is not as widespread as originally envisaged.
Roadway access is also important.
Human Rights Issues.
Charles Flanagan
Question:91 Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport the expected role his Department will have in ensuring that gardaí and airport authorities have adequate legal powers for search and inspection of aircraft at Shannon and other airports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39940/08]
Terence Flanagan
Question:145 Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport if he will strengthen provisions of the Air Navigation and Transport Acts in dealing with increased powers for search and inspection of aircraft; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39942/08]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 91 and 145 together.
As the Deputy will be aware, the Government recently established a Cabinet committee on aspects of international human rights. At the first meeting of the Cabinet committee, it was agreed that the statutory powers available to the civil authorities and to An Garda Síochána regarding the search and inspection of aircraft, including those under the Air Navigation and Transport Acts, would be reviewed in the context of the obligations on the State under the Chicago Convention, which governs international civil air transport. The purpose of this examination is to determine how the current statutory provisions could be strengthened or amended in the context of our agreed international commitments under the Chicago Convention. The review is being undertaken by the Attorney General's office in conjunction with the relevant officials and the outcome will be considered by the Cabinet committee in due course.
The issues that brought this matter to our attention were the problems at Guantanamo Bay, the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the question of extraordinary rendition. Does the Minister agree that the quicker that review is done, the better? We have been told that Shannon Airport has been used by certain aeroplanes which may have been involved in extraordinary rendition in other countries. If the people who own those planes are aware that we may search them if they land, it will make it much more likely that extraordinary rendition will not take place, if it ever did, through our country. It would also defend our human rights in that regard by standing up to ensure, in as much as we possibly can, that it does not happen here.
I agree with the Deputy that these matters should be dealt with as quickly as possible. I note he accepts that the Government is, and always has been, completely opposed to the practice of extraordinary rendition.
Absolutely.
We need to say that all sides of the House are so opposed. There should be no undue delay in reviewing all the relevant legislation. However, gardaí must always be mindful that they have to form reasonable opinions that something illegal is going on. The fact that a plane might at some stage have been involved in extraordinary rendition in some other country is, of itself, not enough in current circumstances for gardaí to board and inspect an aircraft. It is important, therefore, to review all of that, including how the law can be strengthened. Together with my colleagues, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, I am anxious to clarify this matter and strengthen the legislation as quickly as possible.
My colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, is to publish an air transport navigation Bill, which would give the authorities the necessary legislation to which the Minister has referred. Would the Minister be interested in supporting the Labour Party's Bill on the inspection of aircraft coming through Shannon and other airports?
I wish to raise a related matter, which is the massive seizure of cocaine off our coast last week. Has there been any review of security and customs arrangements at private airports? The Maynooth community residents' association wrote to the Minister recently asking him if regular inspections of flights were being carried out at Weston airport. When a tragedy happened a few weeks ago, we became aware for the first time of a little airstrip outside Athy at Kilrush. Are private aircraft at airfields, such as Kilrush and Weston, currently being inspected? Does the Minister intend to undertake any review of this area? My colleague, Deputy Joan Burton, and I were promised something like this about a year and a half ago, but we still have not got it.
I am sure the Deputy would not expect me to suggest I would support a Labour Party Bill without having sight of the Bill. That would not be good practice.
I will send the Minister a copy.
I respectfully suggest that when Deputy Michael D. Higgins is drafting that Bill that he remind himself we must operate under the Chicago Convention which means any legislation in this area——
It is all covered; he is a good legislator.
——would have to comply with it. There is not much point in producing legislation that ignores international treaties. I am not for one minute saying that the Deputy would do that.
The review of security and customs and excise at airports is a matter in the first instance for either the Minister for Finance or the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I understand there is a constant review of the adequacy of security at airports. The IAA also has a function. I believe airstrips are subject to IAA inspection rather than Customs and Excise inspection.
I refer to flights which may have been used for extraordinary rendition and whether the Garda Síochána can inspect such flights. The Department of Transport has the power to refuse permission for a plane to land. Will the Minister consider the reasons for refusing permission to land in light of this issue? Of the thousands of flights which have sought permission to land only five have been refused permission in the past number of years and one reason for a refusal is when it is believed that certain munitions are being carried. Will the Minister include extraordinary rendition as a reason for a refusal to land considering only a small number of planes may be involved and this may be another way of dealing with the issue?
This will certainly be considered as part of the review.
It is hardly worth starting on another question in the two minutes remaining.
I disagree. I wish to hear the Minister's reply.
Very well. I call the Minister to reply to Question No. 92 and perhaps he might offer a précis of his answer.
Light Rail Projects.
Michael D. Higgins
Question:92 Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Transport the status of proposals for Luas or light rail systems in Cork, Galway and Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39839/08]
Seymour Crawford
Question:129 Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Transport the progress to date on feasibility studies into Luas style light rail transit systems in Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford, as promised in the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39913/08]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 92 and 129 together.
We made a commitment to have an investigation of Luas light rail systems for Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford, within two years. I asked the city authorities to carry out those studies. The Cork study is being carried out under CASP, the Cork area strategic plan, and is now substantially complete. In the case of Limerick, a tendering process is being conducted for consultants to carry out the examination and feasibility of an LRT-BRT in the context of the mid-west region. Galway City Council is also in the process of tendering for consultants to carry out a study of LRT-BRT for the city. Waterford City Council is finalising the appointment of a consultant to carry out a feasibility study. Apart from Cork, consultants are being appointed and expect to produce these reports within the two years' framework.
When will the feasibility studies be published? Many people have worked very hard on those projects. I note the Green Party gave an absolute commitment to the people of those four cities to provide light rail systems and so far we have seen nothing only hot air.
A commitment to the children of the country.
The quicker they are built the better.
The Minister for a brief final reply.
Agreed.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.