Vol. 713 No. 2
38 Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Transport the meetings he has had with CIE and the Railway Procurement Agency regarding the delays in the DART Interconnector until 2018; the reason for the delay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26645/10]
70 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Transport if he has been briefed by Irish Rail since its unexpected announcement that the critical Dublin rail interconnector project will be delayed by at least three years until 2018; his views on the manner in which the delay was announced; if he has satisfied himself with the Irish Rail’s explanation for the delay on this project; his further views on whether same could be expedited; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26824/10]
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 38 and 70 together.
Since 1 December 2009, the implementation of the DART underground project is a matter under the remit of the National Transport Authority, NTA. Officials from my Department and the NTA hold monthly monitoring meetings. Following a request from my Department, the NTA arranged for a presentation by the DART underground team from Irish Rail to coincide with the monthly meeting on 25 May 2010. Irish Rail advised that the change in the DART underground timetable is driven by practical and technical considerations.
The first consideration is that the railway order application may take longer than originally planned. This is based on the experience of metro north. The second consideration is that construction and testing are now estimated to take longer than earlier projected. This includes allowing for the extension of the project from Heuston to Inchicore and also arises from a decision to use two tunnel boring machines instead of four. This change to fewer tunnel boring machines lessens the environmental impact of the project and reduces costs considerably.
Irish Rail also advised that these are conservative estimates on the timeframe and it is possible that the PPP company may make substantial improvements to this programme by, for example, using innovative techniques. It is also possible An Bord Pleanála can reduce the time taken to consider the railway order application, having regard to its experience on metro north. The Government remains committed to the earliest possible start-up date and the speediest possible delivery of this project consistent with securing best value for money. It will continue to pursue all available opportunities to shorten the delivery timescale.
Can the Minister answer this question clearly? The last day we had Question Time in the Dáil with the Minister, he said he was not aware of the statement by Irish Rail that the DART interconnector timetable had been significantly altered. Who did the Minister meet from CIE that morning? Is it true he was briefed on this issue by CIE that morning?
No, that is not true. The subject never came up. I met the board members and the chief executive of CIE. I try to meet the boards of companies under the aegis of the Department of Transport once a year and it was such a meeting. In the middle of the day, I became aware of a statement issued by CIE and Deputy O'Dowd raised the matter in the House. Deputy O'Dowd suggested CIE had changed policy and decided the opening of the project would be delayed until 2018. Deputy O'Dowd asked if this was Government policy and I replied that it was not. It was not Government policy then but it is a fact that in the design phase of this project, it was estimated the DART underground could be operational within four and a half years of construction. However, when the project went into the detailed design phase, the company involved estimated the construction phase, including testing and commissioning, would take six years to complete. That is where the matter arose. It did not arise because of a change of policy or because CIE decided it would not follow Government policy.
Government policy on this issue is that it is delivered in the shortest timeframe possible, and we are now informed this is the shortest timeframe possible.
Apart from the board, did the Minister meet any officials or employees of Irish Rail that day and, if so, could he tell us who they were and the jobs they held within that organisation?
On the same point, the Minister almost threw a wobbler here at the end of questions that day. It seemed as if he had been left in the dark by CIE. That is certainly the impression he gave us, and the House. How does that tally with the answer he gave to Deputy O'Dowd?
The Minister gave us some information but the public expected that metro north with the Railway Procurement Agency, RPA, and an interconnector with Irish Rail would go in tandem, yet we now find that metro north is much further down the road, so to speak, than the interconnector. Has the Minister done any analysis as to the reason that should be the case? The Minister then tells us that for environmental reasons they will use two boring machines rather than four but this would appear to be a significant reason for the delay. How will we handle this major project if it is not done in tandem with metro north? In terms of the stations — St. Stephen's Green and so on — we have shared facilities. The RPA is building a box, as it calls it, for the interconnector but it seems to be haphazard. Has the Minister confidence in Irish Rail that it can deliver this major project?
On the big dig, we heard about the Broombridge line this morning. The statue of Daniel O'Connell, our great liberator, is due to be removed from O'Connell Street in the near future to facilitate these works. Can the Minister give us an updated report now from the big dig committee? What is the position regarding the big dig committee? It appears that, because of the slowness of the interconnector, we may be getting into a position where we will have chaos in the centre of Dublin for over a decade rather than a smart building programme over three or four years, which would get it done quickly. Incidentally, I understand there is no chance of having metro north completed by the anniversary of the seminal event in 1916 which led to the foundation of our State. Work will be ongoing on it when, hopefully, we will all be present outside the GPO for that ceremony. It all seems very vague. The Minister appeared to be flabbergasted that day and I wonder what happened? What did they do to him?
Whether I was flabbergasted is the Deputy's interpretation. I made it clear there was no policy change because the question put to me by the Deputy was that the statement CIE had made had changed the policy. I made it clear that CIE does not make policy; the Department and the Minister make policy. As I said at the time, I was not aware of the statement before it was made, which is not the normal protocol with CIE on operational matters such as this one and, therefore, from that point of view, that was a breach of protocol as far as I was concerned but I was not flabbergasted. I was at pains to point out that it was Government that decided the policy on this issue. The Deputy might want to put down a specific question on that.
If I meet somebody when I arrive to visit a State agency, even the person on reception, I will always say hello to them. My recollection is that is what I did that morning. I probably met a few personnel from Heuston Station. I met with the board. A number of officials were waiting to brief the board on whatever was on the agenda on that particular day. They were the people I met on the day. I had conversations with all of them but I did not have meetings with people and discuss interconnectors or anything else.
39 Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Transport the discussions he has had with the Dublin Airport Authority’s new chief operating officer on his plans for the company and its end of year 2009 results; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26707/10]
As indicated to the Deputy in my reply to Question No. 77 of 5 May 2010, the annual report and accounts of the Dublin Airport Authority for 2009 were published on 27 April and were lodged in the Library of the Houses of the Oireachtas the same day.
I noted that falling passenger numbers caused by the recession led to the Dublin Airport Authority's gross profit reducing by 10% on the previous year. The Dublin Airport Authority's group profit in 2009, excluding exceptional items, was €38 million as compared to €78 million in 2008.
Despite the 2009 results, I welcome the continuing efforts of the company to achieve efficiencies in the current difficult market conditions. The success of the company's cost recovery programme reflects well on the contribution that employees can make to the Dublin Airport Authority's financial performance and to enhancing its ability to operate the airports more efficiently in the future.
The recent appointment of a chief operating officer is an organisational matter for the Dublin Airport Authority and I have no function in the matter.
In line with normal shareholder contacts, I met with the board and management of the company on 14 May last and discussed with them strategic issues and the company's plans for the future.
The Dublin Airport Authority lost €13 million last year. The debt it has now is closer to €1 billion, which is a great deal of money. The company paid its chief executive officer €638,500 in 2009. It appears many people are very well paid in this company. Sixteen directors were paid €187,000 in fees. The chairman will get almost €20,000 per annum. The point is that these people are very well paid but they are not producing the goods. They are losing money and they need a radical shake-up. The approach of the Government and the Minister is not challenging them sufficiently. I am aware these are difficult times for the airport authority but it is clear that while the executives are very well paid, they are not producing the goods on the ground.
I would not agree with the Deputy. The group operating profit before exceptional items was €62.7 million. When the exceptional items are included, it recorded a loss of €13 million. The two exceptional items were in respect of the DAA's cost recovery programme. It spent money on trying to ensure improvements were made to all aspects of the operation of the airport. That cost approximately €46.5 million. There was a charge of €11.3 million on an asset impairment. The first year it made a loss after exceptional items, and it would be unfair to say the Dublin Airport Authority is not doing a good job. We are in the throes of a major problem internationally in the aviation sector. The number of passengers passing through the airport fell significantly. That is not a direct fault of the Dublin Airport Authority but a direct result of the general economic position we are experiencing. It will have a sizeable debt. That is on the basis of providing top quality, top class infrastructure at the airport for passengers and customers generally. It is unfair to say that these people, some of whom are high profile and would not be making money on the basis of a €12,000 fee, are not doing their job.
A total of €638,500 is a lot of money.
It is €12,000 for each of the directors. The Deputy mentioned the directors were getting €187,000——
I said the chairman was getting €20,000 per annum.
——and from that point of view the criticism is not justified. The airport is well run. It has delivered on its projects. Terminal 2 will come in on schedule and within budget and will provide a fantastic facility for people arriving into this country.
The Minister acknowledged that in 2009 overall passenger traffic was down. At Shannon Airport it was down 23%, while in Europe and the UK it was down 13% and 7% respectively.
The Minister meanwhile has shelved plans for granting autonomy to Shannon Airport management until 2011. This is unacceptable for the airport's management as it is forced to work with one hand tied behind its back. In the past the airport performed well when management could make its own decisions, particularly in the time of Brendan O'Regan and Liam Skelly. However, a conflict of interest between the Dublin Airport Authority and Shannon Airport has arisen. For example, the Dublin Airport Authority would like to have the Lynxs cargo company locate in Dublin when Shannon is vying for it too.
Does the Minister plan to address this structural deficit or will he continue to leave Shannon Airport management in limbo? It is to the detriment of the airport that its management cannot make its own decisions.
The Deputy is incorrect in claiming I shelved plans for the separation of Shannon and Cork Airports from the Dublin Airport Authority. Due to the severe economic downturn and its effects on the international aviation industry, the chairs, boards and management of the various airports requested me to postpone the planned separation of the Dublin, Cork and Shannon Airports from the one authority. They believed it would not be prudent considering the economic positions in which they found themselves.
Next year, it is intended to examine the various possibilities for separation. I will listen carefully to the board and management of Shannon Airport if they want it to be separated from the Dublin Airport Authority to run their own affairs. Their decision will carry much weight with me, so long as everyone knows the consequences of such a move.
My question was about the management structure and having its own autonomy.
The Deputy cannot have it both ways.
Shannon management is operating with one hand tied behind its back as it is the Dublin Airport Authority that makes all the decisions for it.
Deputy Breen, allow the Minister to conclude without interruption.
The way to making their own decisions is to become an independent company. I am agnostic on this matter and have listened carefully to all sides in the debate. However, once an airport decides to go independent, it will no longer have the protection of the larger organisation. It will be on its own. If that is the final decision——
Does the Minister believe Shannon Airport can survive on its own?
As long as people know the ground rules in this matter. I do not know too many people involved in Shannon Airport or the wider Shannon region who believe the airport could have survived the current downturn in the aviation industry.
That is correct.
The chair, management and board of the airport made the right decision requesting a deferral of the autonomy plans during this downturn. If people change their minds, I will take their points on board.
The Minister misunderstood my question but I believe he knows where I am coming from. It is about Shannon Airport management making its own decisions without having to go back to the Dublin Airport Authority for approval. There is a conflict of interest when it comes to both airports trying to attract new investment projects reporting to the one authority.
I know exactly where the Deputy is coming from. Some people would like to have no responsibility and just access to the cash. I am not saying that applies to Shannon Airport management. However, a subsidiary company cannot be able to spend moneys belonging to its parent company unless it is prepared to take responsibility. The structure is not in place in the Dublin Airport Authority for this. If we do agree to separate the airports, it will mean Shannon becomes responsible for all of its decisions, generating its own income and ensuring its own survival.
These are difficult economic times.
That is why we made that decision but it may change next year.
The difficulty is that one cannot have a company which is part of a larger company making its own decisions while the larger body pays for it. It is getting the balance right that is important.
Next year, I would be open to the airports deciding to take the route of separation from the Dublin Airport Authority.
The Dublin Airport Authority's annual report states it has €640 million in cash-in-hand while it had over €800 million the year before.
Is the Minister aware that a lucrative licence for running the eight bars in Dublin Airport was issued by the authority without a tendering process? Is that appropriate for a State company?
Is he concerned the authority was involved in a property development company, Turckton Developments, with Liam Carroll's group, Dunloe Ewart, which has substantial liabilities to a building society of €34 million? Did the Minister approve of this or examine——
The Deputy may want to put down a separate parliamentary question to elicit this information.
Has the Minister discussed with the Dublin Airport Authority its whole approach to property development? While I commend it on its work on terminal 2, the fact it is involved in this development company, Turckton Developments, raises some concerns.
Mr. Declan Collier, chief executive officer at Dublin Airport Authority, will appear before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport this afternoon. His overall remuneration package last year came to over €600,000 while his basic salary is €348,000. Does that accord with the guidelines rightly laid down by the Government on executives' salaries in semi-State bodies, given the overall national fiscal position?
The Deputy will appreciate I do not involve myself in the day-to-day operational matters of the authority. I am not aware it has broken any procurement laws or otherwise. If the authority wants to set up subsidiary companies, a general policy is in place that they cannot be a drain on the main company and must operate separately to it. It also cannot add to the costs of passenger travel, well supervised by the regulator. I am not aware the authority is in breach of any laws.
40 Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Transport the progress of the dual carriageway from Derry to Aughnacloy which was agreed with the Northern Ireland Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26638/10]
Under the agreement of March 2007 between the Irish and British Governments on a funding package to support the restored Northern Ireland Executive, the Irish Government made a commitment to provide funding of £400 million or €580 million in a roads investment package for Northern Ireland which will contribute to the upgrading to dual-carriageway status of the A5 road from Aughnacloy to Derry.
The A5 project is being implemented by the Northern Ireland Roads Service. A project schedule with key milestones has been established and the project is being progressed in accordance with that schedule. To date, the second key milestone has been achieved, that is, the identification of the preferred route. Overall, the expected completion date of the project is July 2015.
I welcome the assurance from the Minister and I take it he will give an assurance that the funding will be in place and that there will be no hold up in the scheme. It was agreed at the time that there would be a dual carriageway from Derry to Dublin. There is a missing piece and I seek clarification on the situation. In particular, I refer to the road from Aughnacloy to Castleshane, which is still a difficult main road but not a dual carriageway. Will the Minister indicate the progress, if any, that has been made and whether he will be in a position to fund the NRA to ensure that section of the road will be improved such that there will be a through road from Donegal and Derry to Dublin?
That is a matter for the NRA. At the moment, the NRA is reviewing all the road projects identified for the coming five to ten years and the matter will be considered in the context of that review. It will be based on a range of criteria, including the likely traffic numbers on the road etc. The matter is under review. When the review is finished, the NRA will be in contact with the Department and, when necessary, the subject of funding will be dealt with in the annual Estimates process.
What is the Minister's view on this matter? Does he accept that it is not reasonable or sensible to have a dual carriageway from Derry to Aughnacloy but not have a link up with the two and one road at Castleshane? Development will depend on the Minister and his Department being prepared to fund the NRA. What is the Minister's view on a common sense approach and the urgency of the matter?
I support the views of Deputy Crawford. The A5 project is an exciting and interesting development, linking Derry to Dublin, one of our great cities. I support Deputy Crawford's comments. At issue is the Ashbourne road on our side. The area in question is near the Ceann Comhairle's territory as well. As Deputy Crawford remarked, we did not see the gap and the NRA maintains it has nothing on the matter. We support Northern Ireland in this regard but we must look after our side of the road. Will the Minister urge the NRA to come forward with the necessary plans to ensure we are ready to meet up at Aughnacloy?
I would be pleased to receive anything from the NRA but I will not pre-empt what it decides as the best way to link the two roads. That should be done in the most cost effective and efficient way possible and I await the NRA's proposal in this regard. It would be unfair of me to pre-empt the matter. I am not an engineer. I foresee there will be a good deal of traffic involved and I have no doubt, given the expertise the NRA has, that it will take that fully into account before making a proposal to me. Once the proposal is made to me and the Department, I will have to prioritise the projects I believe are the most important. This is an important project.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
