Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 2 Apr 2009

Vol. 679 No. 3

Priority Questions.

Job Protection.

Fergus O'Dowd

Question:

1 Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Transport the contact he had with the Dublin Airport Authority regarding the future of a company (details supplied) at Dublin Airport; if there was information in his Department that the company was selling back leases on hangers at Dublin Airport; his views on whether an aircraft maintenance facility at Dublin Airport is critical for the future of the aviation industry here; the action he has taken to protect jobs at the company’s facility at Dublin Airport; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14019/09]

In November 2007, which was more than 16 months ago, I became aware that Aer Lingus maintenance contracts at SR Technics were being put out to tender. It was immediately clear that, were SR Technics not to win back these important contracts from Aer Lingus, it would have major implications for employment at the Dublin plant.

Officials in my Department immediately alerted the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to the potential implications of SR Technics not being successful in the tender competition. My Department has maintained contact with that Department since then.

With regard to the Deputy's specific question on SR Technics, in mid-January 2009 my Department was informed by the Dublin Airport Authority that SR Technics had agreed to return the leases on certain hangars to the authority and had signed a letter of intent to that effect. It was then clear to the authority that SR Technics' planned re-structuring would involve closing the Dublin operation, subject to the resolution of arrangements for the transfer of line maintenance for Aer Lingus. I was informed of these developments at the time and officials in my Department immediately provided their counterparts in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment with this information.

In mid-November 2008, the Department had been made aware by the Dublin Airport Authority of confidential contacts between SR Technics and the authority about possible restructuring of SR Technics and, as a consequence, the possible return of hangar leases. The authority advised that, as it had signed a strict confidentiality agreement with SR Technics, it was therefore precluded from providing the Department with details of the discussions at that stage. However, it indicated that the employment implications of any restructuring were not clear at that time.

Subsequently, in late December, the Department was advised by the Dublin Airport Authority that these discussions were progressing but were still subject to a strict confidentiality agreement and that any restructuring of SR Technics could have a significant impact on employment in the Dublin operation.

I understand that, in January, the IDA and SR Technics were in direct talks regarding the provision of funding for a training and up-skilling programme in SR Technics. The IDA was involved in putting together a package for a submission to the company's headquarters in Zurich. This is only the latest contact that the IDA has had with the company. It provided training grants in 2006 for the up-skilling of workers and has had ongoing contact with the company since then.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

While the decision to close the Dublin facility was conveyed to the IDA by SR Technics at a meeting with the Tánaiste on 11 February, the IDA was aware for some months before that date, both from information that my Department passed to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and from its own sources, that the company was engaged in a major review of group operations that would have consequences for the Dublin facility and could result in its closure. The IDA had intensified its engagement with the company with a view to assisting the Irish subsidiary to achieve the optimal outcome in the circumstances.

As already indicated to the House, both the Department and the Dublin Airport Authority have at all times been sensitive to the employment implications of SR Technics' closure, which was announced by the company on 12 February.

I can confirm that the IDA and Enterprise Ireland are continuing to work intensively to ensure any viable proposals for aviation-related projects to retain as many jobs as possible in aircraft maintenance are given serious consideration. The Dublin Airport Authority will also give serious consideration to any commercial proposal put to it as regards access to hangars for aircraft maintenance operations.

I thank the Minister for his reply. It seems from what he is saying that, in 2007, it was known something was happening although its extent was not clear. Given that the industry is so important and employs more than 1,130 people, could more not have been done? Clearly, the Minister informed the Department at the time in question. However, is it a sufficient defence for the Dublin Airport Authority to state the discussions were secret and that it could not have told the Minister about them, even though it did? More could have been done by the Government, particularly by the employment creating Ministries, to save these jobs. What proposals, if any, has the Government to save them? Six hundred jobs are to go to the wall tomorrow.

No more could have been done. The IDA was in direct contact with the company. As late as January of this year, local management was talking directly to SR Technics about an additional up-skilling programme for workers to try to ensure the company would have a viable future. Local management did not seem to be aware at that stage of the overall plans for the parent company. The IDA, for which I am not here to answer, entered those discussions in good faith. In light of my having made my first contact in 2007, I just warned that if the Aer Lingus contract were lost, jobs could be at risk. There was engagement between the IDA and SR Technics subsequent to that. The IDA was hearing from local management that it wanted to restructure, up-skill the workforce and put the company on a viable footing. The IDA was operating on that basis until January, at which time the news was announced.

The key point concerns the reporting to the Department by the Dublin Airport Authority. This is where the communication did not take place. The authority is under the aegis of the Department. It is somewhat like the case in Shannon, in respect of which the Minister was not told the details directly. In this case, the fact is that there will be a very serious impact on the future of jobs in the aerospace industry. The jobs are extremely important and the staff are very highly qualified. No man or woman who will walk the line tomorrow and lose his or her job would ever have believed such an incredible amount of knowledge would be leaving this country. If it goes, it may never be replaced.

Does the Minister believe it satisfactory that he was not told what was taking place by the Dublin Airport Authority? Is this credible given the critical loss of the plant, as now appears to be the outcome? Is it acceptable that this fact was not reported to the Minister, notwithstanding all the other issues he raised? There is no point in being in Government if one does not know the full facts.

The parent company of SR Technics insisted on confidentiality. It probably could be said the Dublin Airport Authority breached confidentiality even by indicating talks were taking place. The decision to close the Dublin facility was conveyed to the IDA by SR Technics at a meeting with the Tánaiste on 11 February. I received an e-mail directly from the IDA that states it was aware for some months before that date, both from information that my Department passed to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and its own sources, that the company was engaged in a major review of group operations that would have consequences for the Dublin facility. It was in this context that local management asked the IDA for help in putting in place a package that could be given to the parent company. The loss of jobs will be considerable.

The Deputy asked me what the Government was doing. It continues in its efforts. The Tánaiste, through her agencies, has been meeting anybody who has expressed a reasonable interest in saving any or all of the jobs. There are ongoing talks in this regard. The relevant State agencies should be allowed to get on with this. The less heat generated in respect of this matter over the next few days, the better all round.

On a point of order, will the Minister withdraw a comment he made yesterday? It is on the record of the House.

That is not strictly a point of order.

The Deputy will be aware that I made my explanation yesterday and that the Ceann Comhairle accepted it.

The Ceann Comhairle did not accept it.

If the Deputy is prepared to say he misunderstood the matter or was misinformed and that he was not lying, I will accept that and withdraw the remark.

I do not want, and certainly I cannot facilitate, a debate on the matter now. As I stated this morning, if the Deputy feels strongly about this issue it is open to him to table a motion for the House to consider in proper debate.

We have to do business here on a range of matters affecting the transport portfolio and I have to ask questions. I want to be able to do my business. I received information which I reported in good faith. The Minister used an abusive term with regard to parliamentary democracy. I ask him to withdraw it.

The Deputy has made that point and the Chair can do no more. If the Deputy wishes to take the avenue I suggested——

Will the Minister show a bit of decency and graciousness?

Certainly it is not up to me to review decisions made yesterday. I am anxious to move on with business.

The Minister wants to talk.

I do not want to be in dispute with Deputy Broughan. Yesterday morning, Deputy Gilmore made the point that——

No more than——

I ask the Leas-Cheann Comhairle to let the Minister finish.

I am trying to be helpful.

I will try. Deputy Gilmore stated that I had not communicated with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment or the IDA and he based this on a statement made by Deputy Broughan, I presume on radio or in a briefing. This is untrue. I did and if the Deputy accepts this I will withdraw——

I accept that the Minister has a different interpretation of information which I have and which his colleague gave me also.

I must say that——

We cannot debate it now.

——I contacted the——

I am afraid I must bring this——

——executive in the——

——particular debate to a conclusion and move on to Priority Question No. 2.

I accept the Minister was reporting in good faith if he withdraws his term.

I will withdraw the term as long as the Deputy realises that he was misinformed or misunderstood what he was told because I checked it with the IDA executive.

We will have a question later.

Public Transport.

Thomas P. Broughan

Question:

2 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Transport if he has reviewed the public service obligation to CIE; if he will ensure that the fleets and services of Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann are protected and maintained and that the current programmes of cutbacks are halted in view of the role that the bus services play for urban and rural commuters and workers; if he has encouraged the State bus companies to come forward with new initiatives to increase passenger volumes; if he has ensured, from discussions with those companies, the early introduction of integrated ticketing, real time information, AVL and other technical transport improvements; if he has investigated the cancellation of certain attractive commuter bus tickets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13928/09]

The mandate of CIE and its subsidiary companies to provide reasonable, efficient and economical transport services remains as set out in the Transport Acts 1958 to 1986. It is a matter for CIE and its subsidiaries to fulfil this mandate from within the financial resources available from fares and Exchequer funds. This statutory base for the funding of public service obligation services has been reviewed in the light of EC Regulation 1370/2007 and a new contract based regime is to be implemented later this year, in accordance with the provisions of the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 and the proposed public transport regulation Bill.

The annual Exchequer subvention to CIE in 2009 in respect of its public service obligations is €313 million, an increase of 65% on 2000. This includes over €120 million for bus services in 2009. Bus services have also benefited from significant capital funding of €148.7 million over the period from 2006 to 2008. Despite these high levels of funding and fare increases over the years, Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann are facing a very difficult financial outlook in 2009 due to declining passenger numbers in an increasing cost environment. In response, both companies have put in place cost recovery plans involving measures to increase revenues, change pay, allowances and work practices and rationalise services.

The companies must implement cost recovery plans, as it is not open to the State to compensate for current losses being incurred by CIE given current constraints on the Exchequer, EU state aid rules and, in particular, the "market investor" principle, that is, governments must act in the same way as a commercial investor and are not permitted to give terms to transport operators that are unduly favourable, for example to write-off part losses.

As part of the effort by both companies to maintain and increase passenger numbers, the Deloitte report identifies significant scope within Dublin Bus to improve services to customers, increase efficiencies and save money through, for example, redesigning the network, eliminating unnecessary duplication and improving information to the customer.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

Both automatic vehicle location, AVL, and integrated ticketing have been identified as important reform measures by the Deloitte report. The AVL system on the Bus Éireann fleet is expected to go live this summer. Plans are also progressing to install real time passenger information, RTPI, road sign displays on a selected number of stops on a trial basis. The Dublin Bus AVL system will be rolled out on a test basis later this year, with the system being installed across the network in 2010. Associated with this, the roll out of RTPI by Dublin Council will commence in 2010.

Integrated ticketing in the greater Dublin area is being introduced on a phased basis, based on smart card technology. A progressive approach is being adopted to allow customers to familiarise themselves with using the new system and to permit transport operators to undertake the necessary testing associated with the integration of the technologies involved.

A smart card for Luas services has been available on all Luas services for some time. Smart cards are also now in use on Dublin Bus services in respect of a number of integrated ticket products such as annual and monthly integrated bus and rail and bus and Luas tickets. During 2010 smartcards with an electronic purse will be available to almost all public transport users in the greater Dublin area.

With the exception of the single standard fare, decisions regarding ticketing structure and ticket types are a matter for the companies taking account of operational, commercial and customer factors.

Does the Minister accept that, as clearly shown in the Deloitte report, at 29% the public service obligation, in other words the subsidy received by Dublin Bus, is among the lowest in city bus companies in the European Union? It is bottom of the old 15. The subsidy of 12% is the lowest of any major regional company.

Was the Minister informed or did he have discussions on the huge range of cutbacks at Dublin Bus where approximately 1,000 scheduled journeys are being cancelled and services on a range of routes such as the 123, 19, 13, 13A, 11A, 45, 121, 122, 172, Euro buses and Nitelinks are being slashed? Was the Minister aware of this during recent months or is it something else in his portfolio he did not know about?

The Minister referred to the efficiency of Dublin Bus but he will remember that Deloitte gave Bus Éireann a clean bill of health and stated it was very efficient. Why is Bus Éireann losing 150 buses? Does the Minister accept the recent comments of the distinguished journalist, Fintan O'Toole, that what he is doing shows personal contempt by him and the Government for people, particularly those on low incomes, senior citizens and all of those dependent on buses? It is a fact that we will have cutbacks of at least 10% when passenger numbers have reduced by only 3.5%. At the worst of times, the Minister is showing utter contempt for people who use buses.

The Deputy is correct if one considers only the amount of PSO on a current basis which is being paid to Dublin Bus. It is one of the lower amounts in the OECD.

This does not take into account the sizeable capital investment made in buses which has not been done in most other European countries. If we were to compare like with like the situation would not be as black and white as the Deputy stated.

Deloitte told me it considered the capital.

With regard to whether I was informed of the cuts, I informed CIE of the 10% rate increase and of its subvention. In turn, it informed me of what this would mean and that ultimately the company would end up losing €100 million unless cost and efficiency measures were taken. Dublin Bus expects losses of €31 million. As I stated to the Deputy it is not open to me under law or competition rules to further subsidise a company or to put further money into it. The taxpayers of this country are paying €313 million into public transport. The Deputy is well aware that we do not have the freedom and flexibility we had previously with regard to the amount of money we can invest. It must be spent very efficiently and well.

Does the Minister have confidence in the management team at Dublin Bus? Is he confident it can lead an innovative and dynamic bus company given that we have been waiting for almost 20 years for a range of technical measures such as real time information and integrated bus ticketing? When does the Minister expect the industrial relations issue to be resolved?

The Minister has a grave responsibility across a range of issues with regard to bus transport. In particular, the Minister is the regulator for fares and has approved personally all the increases in basic fares this year. He has not introduced required legislation. The Minister will bear much responsibility if bus transport is brought to a halt in coming weeks.

It is a neat transfer. I hope management and staff at Bus Átha Cliath are innovative and that they start to implement Deloitte very quickly. I have spoken to the unions and to management about this and they are very enthusiastic. The NBRU, SIPTU and other unions told me they had no problems with the network and that it was not their business but the business of management. They might have changed their minds since then. If management and the unions are flexible and innovative and implement measures such as AVL, the integrated ticketing system which is coming on stream and real time passenger information——

When, 20 years ago?

The network review would save much money and would provide a much better service for the people of the city. The answer for Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann is to try to increase passenger numbers and they need to do this very quickly.

Some passengers have gone home to Poland.

Road Network.

Fergus O'Dowd

Question:

3 Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Transport the effect recent Government directions will have on the roll-out of Transport 21 transport infrastructure projects; the amount of financial resources he has provided to local government for transport infrastructure projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14020/09]

Transport 21 continues to provide the strategic framework guiding the Government's investment in national roads and public transport up to 2015. However, in the light of the changed economic circumstances, it has been necessary to review NDP investment priorities across all Departments. To facilitate this review and in order to provide the Government with maximum discretion in making decisions on future funding allocations, all Departments in receipt of Exchequer capital funding were asked to ensure that no new contractual commitments, in respect of Exchequer capital investment, were entered into without advance approval from the Department of Finance. It is important to stress that this temporary arrangement only applies to new contracts. It will have no impact on existing contractual commitments involving expenditure for my Department of almost €2 billion in 2009.

The allocation of grants to local authorities for national roads is a matter for the NRA. My Department issued allocations to local authorities in February for regional and local roads. These comprised a total capital allocation of €495 million and a current allocation of €126 million. All existing Estimates provisions are subject to review as part of the preparations for the supplementary budget on 7 April.

Is it not a fact, as a result of this circular letter, that local authority work is coming to a halt up and down the country? Is it not now the time to put thousands of people to work who have become unemployed due to the building collapse? They can be put to work improving our local roads, local bypasses, dangerous bridges and visibility at junctions. The Government can select small and medium-sized enterprises to do this work. The circular stated that all expenditure must equal total income, which means that the authorities cannot borrow unless they have the money in the first place, and that buying for the construction of purchased assets must be controlled. This is the key time to have these schemes operating in our local authorities up and down the country.

I would not disagree with the Deputy that now is a key time for effecting road works. Between now and the middle of the summer is usually the best time of the year for this. The local authorities will know their final allocations and any changes to those allocations following the budget next Tuesday, so they will not have to wait too long. We are spending almost €2 billion on capital projects. Under this new system, the Minister for Finance has already sanctioned €143 million — at my request — for regional and local roads to ensure that local authorities could start their work for this time of the year.

There will be no undue delay after 7 April. I will not waste any time getting the information out to the local authorities about whatever money is in the local and regional roads budget or with the NRA for the national roads.

This is a key area in which there is no activity. Up and down the country councillors are calling me and my colleagues to tell us that no work is being done on the roads. Significant works can be done locally and they are labour intensive. Thousands of people can be put back to work very quickly without much technology. There are hundreds of thousands of people unemployed and there is no opportunity for them to do the works.

Local authorities around the country have selected key local improvement schemes that make a significant difference to the local network and the local economy, but the Minister's full stop on local government expenditure on roads is entirely unacceptable. It does not make sense and it is an absolute disgrace at this time.

If the local authorities are carrying out no work, then that is a cause for serious concern. They have already got——

They are letting people go.

—— €126 million in allocations, of which €14 million has been drawn down until the end of March. I do not know what they are hoarding the money for if they are not doing anything.

Dozens of workers in local authorities have lost their jobs as a result of the Minister's direction.

The €126 million should be enough to keep them going until after 7 April.

Road Traffic Offences.

Fergus O'Dowd

Question:

4 Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Transport the reason for the delay in the introduction of legislation to allow for testing of drivers for alcohol and substance abuse at the scene of accidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13832/09]

The text of the road traffic Bill, which, inter alia, proposes a reduction in the legal blood alcohol content level for drivers and introduces measures for the mandatory testing for alcohol of drivers involved in road traffic collisions, is currently being drafted and is nearing completion. The Road Traffic Acts already provide that a member of the Garda Síochána may test a driver involved in a road traffic collision for alcohol. The Acts also provide for the testing of drivers in relation to drugs. If a garda is of the opinion that a driver is under the influence of a drug or drugs to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle, he or she may require that person to go to a Garda station and further require that person to submit to a blood test or provide a urine sample.

There is as yet no reliable system of preliminary roadside testing for drugs, but the Medical Bureau of Road Safety is keeping abreast of developments in this area. The draft road traffic Bill includes provisions for "field impairment testing", which consists of non-technological methods by which gardaí can make a preliminary assessment about the possible presence of drugs.

The fact is that the Government gave a commitment in October 2007 to bring in this legislation. We have waited until now, but it still has not come in. There is no reliable method to hold the Government to account here. They made a promise in 2007 but it has not happened.

We all support the road safety campaign and the reduction of deaths that has occurred, but is the Minister of State aware that PARC also received this promise from his predecessor? When his brother was Taoiseach, he gave the same commitment. The reality is that until a driver knows that he will undergo mandatory testing for alcohol and drugs when involved in an accident, there will be no more significant reduction in road deaths. It is not good enough for the Minister of State to say that it is being prepared. It will never happen under his Ministry.

I might have been a bit over-optimistic previously, but I think the Deputy got mixed up in his years. It was October 2008 that the Government——

It was in October 2007. I have the headline here.

It is not appropriate to display materials in the House.

Well here it is.

It was in October 2008 that the Government approved the drafting of the Bill.

It is not October 2009 yet. We hope to enact provisions so that breath testing can be undertaken as a matter of course, subject to any overriding medical considerations, rather than the current authority where the garda may do it. We want to make that the norm, even though we must allow for some medical issues. Legislation takes a while to prepare and it goes back and forth a bit. There is always pressure in the Department and in the Parliamentary Counsel's office, but it is coming.

I do not think that response is good enough. The promise was made in October 2007 and the Government made the decision then. Fianna Fáil has been in the Government for too long and it does not have the drive or the energy to bring this in. It is something which the Road Safety Authority is anxious to see enacted.

The Government is totally knackered at this stage.

Absolutely. When will the Minister of State give an absolute commitment for the legislation to be brought before the House? Will it include the commitment to reduce the amount of alcohol that can be consumed before driving?

We are working on it. Drafts of the legislation have been done. I got caught before for being over-optimistic, so I do not want to say that it will happen in two weeks or two months, but a substantial amount of work has been done and we are committed to bringing it in.

When will it be brought in?

It could be a month or it could be three months.

Road Safety.

Shane McEntee

Question:

5 Deputy Shane McEntee asked the Minister for Transport if he has satisfied himself that the Government road safety strategy and the Road Safety Authority are adequately resourced to meet set targets and Government objectives; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14022/09]

Road safety is a priority for Government, and the Road Safety Strategy 2007-2012, which was launched in October 2007, is a key safety initiative. The overall objective of the strategy is to bring Ireland in line with best practice countries in road safety terms and to reduce the number of fatalities to no more than 60 fatalities per million or 252 fatalities per annum, the figure stated in the strategy. The strategy contains 126 actions with target completion dates. It is being successfully implemented with the involvement of a number of Departments, the Garda Síochána, and other agencies, and there has been a sustained reduction in the number of people killed on our roads.

Last year yielded the lowest number of fatalities on record and records began in the late 1950s. The downward trend continues this year, with a further reduction of 19 this year. The funding of other Departments and their agencies involved in road safety is a matter for those Departments. In the light of the current difficult economic situation, the final allocation to the Department of Transport and the Road Safety Authority for this year will be published in the Revised Estimates Volume following the Supplementary Budget Statement next Tuesday. In that context, the 2008 allocation included a special provision to reduce the driver testing backlog. This objective was achieved and the RSA is maintaining the driver test waiting time at ten weeks.

The RSA will continue its activities in 2009, making best use of both Exchequer funding and the fee income generated by the agency. The road safety strategy remains the way forward agreed by the Government, for the RSA and for all other agencies involved, with the objective of continuing to save lives and reduce injuries on our roads.

As Fine Gael spokesperson on road safety issues, I have always supported the Government in respect of measures on road safety. I have no doubt that following the last time Oral Questions on transport issues were taken in the House, there will be no cut in any support for road safety in next week's budget, except for the €20 million allocation to reduce the waiting list for driver licences. However, the figures provided by the Minister of State could have been thrown out the window following events last week in Slane, County Meath. In recent years, there have been surveys costing €700,000, €500,000 and €200,000 carried out, yet we are still no further down the line.

I put a question to the Minister for Transport who is from my country and who has seen certain events take place in Enfield. I realise the bridge cannot be built in Slane within the coming four or five years. However, will he instruct the National Roads Authority to divert all heavy vehicles from Slane? Meath County Council made such a provision in Enfield several years ago in the interests of road safety. This evening, I must meet the families of those who were involved in that accident, which could have thrown the whole road safety strategy and road safety results out the window. I have not played politics on this matter before. This is a general question, but it is a serious issue.

It is a very serious issue.

I will not play politics, but it seems some people are beginning to play politics regarding promises related to Slane bridge. Until Slane bridge is built, will the Minister, who has the authority to do so, instruct the NRA to remove heavy vehicles from Slane?

The first question was if I could guarantee if there would not be any cut for the allocation of the Road Safety Authority next Tuesday. I cannot because it would be altogether wrong of me to try to guess what the Minister for Finance intends to do next week. We have all heard about different taxation and revenue raising matters and cutbacks in various Departments. I cannot guess the answer. We must wait and see how it works out. I am not an authority on Slane, but I replied to an Adjournment debate matter on the issue. I indicated that approximately €500,000 would be spent this year by the NRA in the planning of the project. I do not often travel through Slane.

The Minister of State would be a good deal safer if he did not.

When the Minister of State is fleeing the country, he may go that route.

I realise the problem. Construction will not start this year, but I understand €500,000 will be spent on the planning and design of it. One accident cannot send all our hopes and dreams out the window. The figures for January and February were very good this year. The figures for March were dreadful until St. Patrick's Day, but thankfully, since then, there was a period of eight or nine days during which no one was killed on the roads. It is the case that one believes everything is going well one month, but one accident can blow it out of the water.

Some 22 people have been killed on that bridge between McGruder's Cross and Slane. We could have had 22 killed all at once. Since the Minister has the authority, will he provide the money to the NRA to build a bridge? I am realistic and I am aware that cannot take place, but I call on the Minister to give the authority to the NRA to stop heavy goods vehicles, except for those with a licence to do business in the area, from entering Slane. That is the only measure the people of Slane will accept.

I suspect from my days in the local authority such a decision is more relevant to the local authority in question. In Dublin there are three tonne limits, areas where trucks are forbidden and a HGV cordon around Dublin Port which was introduced by Dublin City Council. I am subject to correction, but banning trucks from a given area is a matter for the local authority rather than the Department.

No, the NRA is the only relevant authority which may do so.

Top
Share