Vol. 717 No. 3
98 Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Transport if his attention has been drawn to the fact that foreign road hauliers are cherry-picking the haulage market here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35058/10]
I am not aware of any specific complaints in this regard. If the Deputy has a particular case in mind, I will have it examined.
Road transport operates in a liberalised market where goods carried for hire and reward are regulated by both EU and national legislation. Decisions on freight movement, including the choice of haulier, are influenced by many factors such as competition and patterns of freight lows between production units and retail outlets as well as supply chain and fleet management requirements.
Over the past decade, freight traffic volume in Ireland has increased substantially. More than 95% of internal goods are moved by road. While the global economic recession has hit hard, many Irish businesses have responded by reducing costs and increasing efficiencies.
To remain competitive today, businesses must strive for the greatest economies on inventory, minimise order lead-in times, provide timed delivery of goods and offer tracing and tracking services. Irish hauliers must work to support businesses by providing services tailored for maximum competitive impact.
Ireland has one of the most extensive short sea networks in Europe with multiple operators and alternative modes of shipping. The roll-on, roll-off and ferry services between Ireland and the United Kingdom are among the most frequent services in Europe.
The past decade has seen a 68% decrease in the amount of freight capacity services serving Ireland to UK and European markets. The development of our shipping network has provided the Irish market with more competition, choice and frequency in accessing global markets.
The recently established all-Ireland freight forum is working to address issues such as enhanced economic competitiveness, sustainability, international connectivity and other matters associated with the movement of goods.
I thank the Minister for his reply. The statement was made by the president of the Irish Road Haulage Association, Vincent Caulfield. Has the Minister any evidence of an increase in the presence of foreign road hauliers in this country? The Minister may be aware of the figures published by the Central Statistics Office which show a drop of 40% in the road haulage business over the past 12 months. The figures put forward by the Irish Road Haulage Association show that more than 200 haulage companies have gone out of business over the same time period. The haulage business is on the rocks and this reflects the state of the economy. Is there evidence of foreign hauliers working in this country? How does the Minister propose to improve the situation for road hauliers?
Such information as to the number of foreign road hauliers is not collated by my Department. Therefore, I cannot honestly say to the Deputy that there are more or fewer foreign road hauliers coming into the country. The Deputy is correct that fewer hauliers are operating from Ireland and fewer hauliers have been licensed in Ireland over the past number of years. This is due to the current economic difficulties. As for trying to help Irish hauliers, the most efficient and effective action the Government can take to help the hauliers is to provide proper road infrastructure to ensure they can move goods around the country and to the ports as fast and as safely as possible. Our record in that regard has been exemplary. Other than such action, there is not much the Government can do to assist individual hauliers as this is an open, liberalised market and we would be in difficulties with competition authorities.
Is the Minister aware of the major financial pressure on Irish road hauliers? The Minister covered some of this in his response but a huge number of hauliers have gone out of business over the past 12 months. Increasing costs are cited as the reason. The Minister intends to put tolls on many of our roads and this will add further cost to hauliers. These are Irish companies being driven out of business. There will be major job losses and the net effect will be more and more people unemployed. Does the Minister have any plans for those under financial pressure running haulage companies?
That is expanding the question somewhat and I am not sure it is directed at the correct Minister.
I accept what the Deputy is saying, that hauliers like everyone else in the economy are under increasing pressure. We mentioned that the number of hauliers has reduced and the amount of goods being carried has reduced over the past 12 to 18 months. The dip in the economy has hit hauliers hard. From the Department's point of view, we cannot intervene directly to support individual hauliers. We try to create conditions to help them as much as possible. The only positive note is that the statistics on licences issued over the past number of years showed a major fall in 2009 to 663, a fall of nearly 300.
There is a related question coming up and I am anxious to call on two further Deputies.
I wish to ask the Minister a specific question on the road haulage industry. My understanding is that road hauliers in Ireland can no longer receive TIR certification, which allows them to operate a haulage route from inside the EU to outside it. For example, if an Irish company wants to go to Istanbul in Turkey, it finds it very difficult and expensive to do so because of the lack of TIR certification.
This is well beyond the scope of this question.
We are discussing the haulage industry.
I will give some latitude but the Minister must have some notice of the question.
Until two years ago, we provided TIR certification through CIE but the service is no longer available. I ask the Minister to address that question. It is a relatively small issue but for a small number of companies it is very important.
It is well beyond the scope of the question but perhaps the Minister can respond.
I take the point made by Deputy Coveney and I will respond directly to him. It is a problem.
The Minister said he does not collate information on foreign hauliers in this country. Will the Minister begin the process of doing so? That would be useful. Will the Minister introduce a scrappage scheme for the older trucks lying idle so that we modernise the fleet? Will the Minister make some concession on the introduction of the working time directive in respect of hauliers?
The contribution contains many questions, some of which are definitely not the concern of the Minister for Transport, the operation of the working time directive being one.
I can respond briefly on the working time directive because it is subject to new rulings from the EU. It is currently under discussion. We have no proposals for a scrappage scheme. In the current economic climate we will not contemplate that. In the past we have tried to encourage the haulage industry to renew the fleet by increasing the standards and facilitating them in upgrading to the next standard of vehicle. Regarding the compilation of statistics, I will check for the Deputy to see if they are compiled. They may be compiled somewhere but I am not sure I see the merit in spending time and resources counting the number of lorries coming in and out of the country from foreign countries. I am not being facetious but it is an open and liberal market and our trucks can do business in other countries in Europe.
99 Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Transport when he will publish the report on the sinking of the Asgard II; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35107/10]
I understand that the Marine Casualty Investigation Board is carrying out such an investigation. However, under the Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Maritime Casualties) Act of 2000 the Marine Casualty Investigation Board is independent of me in the exercise of its functions.
I do not want to detain the House for too long on this issue. It is quite some time since the Asgard II sunk in the Bay of Biscay. The State was subsequently paid the appropriate insurance for the vessel and the money was put into the general Exchequer fund. It also spelled the end of the sail training programme and the Minister for Transport also has responsibility for the marine. I ask in hope rather than in confidence if he has any plans to reignite the sail training programme in Ireland, which could have a valuable contribution to make for many young people involved, as the Asgard II training programme did. I understand that is his responsibility.
Regarding the marine casualty investigation board, does the Minister have a date for the publication of the report on the sinking of the Asgard II?
I do not have that date. Section 8 of the Act states that the board shall be independent of the Minister in the performance of its functions and it is independent of any other person or body whose interest could conflict with the functions of the board. I cannot help the Deputy on this matter. Without being smart, I do not know if the question may be answered if Deputy Coveney raises it with the board.
I understand the report will be published in the coming weeks.
Deputy Coveney has more information on this matter that I do.
The sail training programme is a matter for the Minister for Defence. The Asgard II was managed by Coiste an Asgard and was owned by the Minister for Defence. The sail training programme ran under that Department.
100 Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport if proposals to integrate the Irish Aviation Authority into the National Transport Authority are to proceed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35129/10]
The Irish Aviation Authority is responsible for both safety regulation of the Irish civil aviation industry and the provision of air navigation and communications services in Irish controlled-airspace. It is proposed to integrate the safety regulation function element of the authority into the National Transport Authority. The policy to amalgamate the IAA's regulatory functions, as well as the Commission for Aviation Regulation, into the NTA is aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of Ireland's regulatory environment.
However, a major audit of Ireland's aviation safety oversight system by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, ICAO, has been under way since last year. This audit will have important reputational implications for the State and the IAA and for this reason, it has taken priority over the proposal to re-organise the IAA. The final report from ICAO will be completed by the end of this year and I understand that the outcome will reflect well on aviation safety oversight in Ireland.
An incremental approach has been followed in assigning new functions to the NTA with the initial focus being on functions currently being discharged by the bus licensing division within the Department, the Railway Procurement Agency and the Commission for Taxi Regulation. Once this phase of integration has been achieved the amalgamation of aviation-related functions will be progressed.
That was a detailed answer and it is difficult to get a clear message from it. I look forward to reading it later. I have met the National Transport Authority and as yet there is no expertise on aviation in that body. A distinction must be made between regulating bus services, rail services and taxis and operating Irish airspace from a regulatory, safety and air traffic controller point of view. I am cautious about amalgamating the Irish Aviation Authority into the National Transport Authority unless there is clear separation if they are under the same roof because they are entirely different industries. The question is whether the Minister still plans to go ahead with that and, if so, what is the likely date for moving the Irish Aviation Authority into the National Transport Authority office because it seems to be a long way off?
I accept the Deputy's point about differences in modes of transport. That is always the subject of debate when one talks in terms of getting rid of what some call quangos and regulators, as Deputies on all sides of the House have been saying in recent years. The reason they were set up separately at various stages is because people felt it was better to keep them separate. Now the mood seems to be that we should bring them all together. I accept Deputy Coveney's point; it would be important in the move to the National Transport Authority that it is a distinct function. This will be part of the approach we take. There is a distinct expertise. The value of moving the operation over to the National Transport Authority is that a lot of the back office and administrative services can be carried out by existing staff which reduces overheads.
The ICAO report is finished and we should have it by the end of the year. That will inform the final decision on the matter but it is still intended to move the safety regulation over to the National Transport Authority. Moves will be made in that regard in the year. The National Transport Authority will have taken over the other functions that we mentioned earlier. We should be in a position to do it some time in 2011.
The National Transport Authority will be the umbrella quango established by the Minister. The taxi regulator, the National Roads Authority and the aviation authority will all come under its remit. Will the Minister answer for those matters that come under the overarching remit of the National Transport Authority? Will he be prepared to answer questions in the House on those matters? The National Transport Authority will take over all of those bodies shortly.
The current practice will stand. The Minister will still remain responsible to the House for questions on matters of policy. The bodies will be directly responsible for day to day operational matters. Members of the Oireachtas who wish to query the day to day operations of any of those organisations will have the opportunity to do so, first, through the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport and, second, through the Committee of Public Accounts on financial matters. The Minister will remain responsible for policy in all of those areas.
I have a brief question for the Minister on the Irish Aviation Authority. Does he plan to follow up on statements made last year following industrial action by air traffic controllers and to take action and produce legislation if necessary to ensure we do not have a repeat of what happened in Belgium and Spain last week so that Irish airspace is not closed down by less than 300 air traffic control staff? Fine Gael is trying to draft legislation in this area at the moment.
That is a separate question.
I am just seeking the support of the Minister in that effort. I would like to get an answer from him if that is possible.
I welcome the Deputy's efforts to expand the question but it is not in order nonetheless. If the Deputy is offering I will not stop the Minister from answering.
I will obey your ruling, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
The problem with responding to fishing questions is that a lot of fishing can be done.
Exactly, so if you rule me out of order, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I will sit down.
I did follow up with the Irish Aviation Authority specifically and with colleagues in government. It is a matter for the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation under labour law. The Irish Aviation Authority is pursuing this matter in negotiations with the unions involved and in the context of the Croke Park agreement.
101 Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Transport if his attention has been drawn to the recent national survey of goods published by the Central Statistics Office for 2009 which shows that road haulage of goods has dropped by 40% over the previous 12 months; if hisattention has further been drawn to the fact that many hauliers are unable to maintain payments; his plans for protecting the industry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35072/10]
The Central Statistics Office has recently published its 2009 Road Freight Transport Survey. This survey covers both licensed operators and other hauliers. In 2009, Irish registered goods vehicles transported 148 million tonnes of goods by road. This represents a decrease of 40% on the previous year and an overall decrease of 9% on the 1999 figure. In light of the current global economic recession, some downturn in trade is not unexpected. However, more recently published shipping traffic statistics on export and import volumes indicate an increase in the volume of exports from April to July 2010.
The recession is impacting on the haulage business and while some hauliers have gone out of business many have sought to consolidate business, reduce costs and increase efficiencies. The number of operators licensed by my Department to carry goods for hire and reward has, on average, remained fairly constant. Although there was a reduction in the number of licences issued in 2009, statistics show an increase in the number of licences issued in 2010, over the 2009 figures.
The Deputy will appreciate that road haulage operates in a liberalised market. The main supports which the Government can provide are through our significant investment in road infrastructure, which improves the efficiency and competitiveness of the sector, and through our enforcement of licensing conditions, which protects legitimate operators from being undermined by those who are unwilling to comply with the conditions.
The problem is we have a road infrastructure but no trucks are moving on it. The decline in goods transported by 100,000 tonnes is a considerable amount of haulage. A decline of 40% in one 12 month period is enormous, as the CSO statistics reveal. It is not comparing like with like to say that exports increased. That is largely due to foreign direct investment. We are talking about the lifeblood of the economy where goods are being brought for consumption throughout the country.
The Deputy should ask a question, please.
This industry is now floundering. Most of the hauliers who are going out of business are family operations. Their businesses are going into oblivion. What can the Minister do to provide some succour to them in these difficult days? No business sector other than the construction trade has suffered so much.
As I indicated earlier to the Deputy, there was a dip in the number of licences issued in 2009 but I am pleased to report that it has increased again in 2010. Up to 30 September there was an almost 10% increase in the number of licenses issued which may indicate some increase in the business. As I said previously a number of times — I will not try your patience, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle — it is a liberalised market. I do not dispute that it is difficult at this time but there is no direct aid we can give to any individual haulier in the current circumstances.
Does the Minister accept that there is a link between the usage of motorway infrastructure and the amount of money people are charged to use it through tolls? Does he accept that if we introduce a series of new tolling booths on our motorway infrastructure, it will have a negative impact on the number of haulage vehicles that use our new excellent road infrastructure and drive them into towns such as Abbeyleix, Durrow, Fermoy, Mitchelstown and all the other towns that have benefited from the motorway infrastructure that has bypassed them? Is the Minister taking that into account in looking at the possibility of introducing new toll booths on national road and motorway infrastructure?
When I get the report to which the Deputy adverts, I am sure the NRA will have taken those matters into account, and I will certainly take them into account. They are reasonable points to take into account if one is talking about charging people for the use of the roads. On the general point, regardless of this morning's newspaper reports, the indications I have currently are that the levels of diversion from motorways as a result of tolls is very low.
It is 17%.
From my information, it is lower than that again in regard to heavy goods vehicles because, overall, the advantages in using a motorway right through from one end to the other outweigh the disadvantage of the toll fee.
One section of the M50 is tolled at present so people using one part of the M50 pay the toll charge while those that use other parts pay nothing, which is not a very fair or equitable system. One can introduce toll systems that will reduce the cost for some, although more people might be caught at a lower rate. Issues like this need to be discussed and considered.
On tolling in general, road pricing has a role to play, particularly in urban areas in regard to reducing carbon emissions and improving health and the environment.
102 Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Transport if he will take an active role in ensuring that the 15 recommendations made by the Railway Accident Investigation Unit in the report on the Malahide viaduct collapse on the Dublin to Belfast rail line are implemented without delay; if he will make a report to Dáil Éireann on their implementation in the interests of public safety; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35051/10]
111 Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Transport if he will consider extending the remit of the Railway Safety Commission to ensure the enforcement of recommendations made to Iarnród Éireann by independent bodies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35135/10]
120 Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Transport if he has studied the report compiled by the Railway Accident Investigation Unit on the collapse of the Malahide viaduct, County Dublin, in August 2009; the steps he proposes to take in relation to the findings of negligence against Iarnród Éireann in implementing safety standards and the equally serious findings against the Railway Safety Commission in enforcing those safety standards; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35042/10]
133 Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Transport if he will direct Iarnród Éireann to examine the hundreds of railway underbridges and viaducts over an agreed period of time to reassure the public that these old railway structures are safe for use in the modern day; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [35052/10]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 102, 111, 120 and 133 together.
The Railway Safety Commission is the independent statutory body charged with responsibility for ensuring the implementation of recommendations made to Iarnród Éireann by the Rail Accident Investigation Unit, which is the independent body responsible for accident investigations. On its publication on 16 August last, I acknowledged that the report of the Rail Accident Investigation Unit into the Malahide viaduct collapse in August 2009 was an important report into a very serious event. Thankfully, due to the speedy actions of the train driver on that day and the effective operation of all post-accident procedures, there were no fatalities or injuries to any members of the public or staff. However, I recognise that the report gives a detailed and worrying account of the inadequate maintenance and inspection regime in Iarnród Éireann of recent years which failed to safeguard the viaduct structure from the impact of scour and erosion in Broadmeadow Estuary.
I wrote to the chairman of Córas Iompair Éireann on 17 August last emphasising the importance of implementing in full the recommendations made to Iarnród Éireann by the Rail Accident Investigation Unit and the Railway Safety Commission in its compliance audit. I referred to the importance of regular progress updates to be provided by Iarnród Éireann as part of the monitoring of the railway safety investment programme funded by my Department. In addition, I asked the chairman to provide an early update on the progress of the implementation of the Rail Accident Investigation Unit and Railway Safety Commission recommendations.
Since the issue of the Rail Accident Investigation Unit report on 16 August 2010, I understand from the Railway Safety Commission that eight of the recommendations have been completely implemented and seven are at various stages of implementation. As indicated in the Rail Accident Investigation Unit report itself and from updates received from Iarnród Éireann, significant changes have now taken place to meet the shortcomings identified and to ensure there is no repetition of this incident. Iarnród Éireann has identified and conducted detailed surveys on 105 bridges that are particularly susceptible to scour because they traverse water and has not found any scour-related risks with any of these bridge structures. There has also been a substantial reorganisation of the Iarnród Éireann civil engineering department, including the appointment of a new chief civil engineer and a technical manager for civil engineering.
Under section 35 of the Railway Safety Act 2005, the purpose of the investigation into the collapse of the Malahide viaduct was to improve railway safety by establishing, in so far as possible, the cause or causes of the incident with a view to making recommendations for the avoidance of such incidents in the future. The Act provides that an investigation report recommendation shall in no case create a presumption of blame or liability for a railway incident. As the independent regulator, the Railway Safety Commission has the power to bring sanctions under the Railway Safety Act 2005. I understand that, based on the evidence in the Rail Accident Investigation Unit report, the Railway Safety Commission is considering what sanctions, if any, are appropriate or possible under legislation.
I thank the Minister for that comprehensive reply. It is a miracle nobody was killed. If the 300 people on the train had all ended up in the estuary, it would have been an absolute tragedy.
The report of the Railway Accident Investigation Unit made 15 recommendations, 14 of them directed at Iarnród Éireann and one — or perhaps one and a half due to an overlap — directed at the Railway Safety Commission. The recommendations demonstrated the most gross negligence on the part of Iarnród Éireann in terms of its maintenance, standards and practices. As recently as three days before the near tragedy, it had carried out an examination of the bridge and could not detect the scouring that had taken place, which was to bring about the failure.
Eight of the findings have been implemented. Why have the other seven not been implemented? Since the findings were of gross negligence in regard to both Iarnród Éireann and the Railway Safety Commission itself, which had a duty of enforcement and supervision which it did not fulfil but simply took the word of Iarnród Éireann, is the Minister considering taking this on board himself? It is not just a matter for the Railway Safety Commission to consider whether there will be prosecutions because there may well be prosecutions in regard to the Railway Safety Commission itself, as well as in regard to Iarnród Éireann. Will the Minister consider the matter in that context?
We cannot speculate in regard to prosecutions.
I do not want to say anything that might prejudice any action the Railway Safety Commission might take, and I hope the Deputy will respect that. I agree with him it was a miracle nobody was killed or seriously injured. I also agree that we should not depend on miracles to prevent accidents such as this or to prevent fatalities. Although I do not want to prejudice anything that might happen, I agree the reports certainly point to a whole range of different issues, such as knowledge management and the type of inspections, including structural inspections, that were carried out. There were shortcomings in those areas and it is a miracle nobody was killed.
It is important that we allow the Railway Safety Commission to complete its work. With regard to the comment on the Railway Safety Commission, which concerns an issue that has been rectified, it was more its fault that it accepted what it was being told rather than double checking it. That is certainly something that will not happen again. From everybody's point of view, the best course is to wait until the Railway Safety Commission decides what it will do in regard to this matter under the statutory powers it has, because it is the body with statutory powers in this area. When that work is done, as Minister for Transport, I will consider the wider issues in regard to whether we can strengthen the oversight role of both the Railway Safety Commission and the Department.
The Rail Accident Investigation Unit did a very good job in its report in exposing a litany of examples of gross incompetence, mismanagement and negligence by Iarnród Éireann, or Irish Rail, that very nearly resulted in a tragedy that would not have been forgotten for many years.
Is the Minister satisfied that the Railway Safety Commission, RSC, is adequately resourced? I am not, having met its representatives at a committee meeting last week. Is he satisfied that the RSC has sufficient teeth so that it need not rely on the word of Iarnród Éireann alone — with the benefit of hindsight, doing so has not been advisable — and can undertake the kinds of investigation necessary to test regularly the quality of safety assurance on our rail network? Is his Department in discussions with the RSC to ensure we have a more robust regulatory mechanism, one that is independent of Iarnród Éireann and can undertake random and regular testing of the rail infrastructure, be it rolling or fixed, and allow the public to have more confidence in the rail network?
Regarding the Deputy's general question on the commission, the teeth given to it by the legislation are based on the EU's railway safety directive. We closely follow the systems and procedures mandated at EU level and implemented throughout the EU. The Department of Transport meets the RSC formally once every six months to review corporate governance issues and other matters that arise from the latter's work. However, this must be done without prejudice to the RSC's independence.
Has it asked for more resources?
I am not aware of any State body, Department or organisation in the public sector that is not looking for more resources. They would all like to get more resources and I would like more resources for my Department. Nevertheless, investment in rail safety amounted to €1.172 billion between 1999 and 2008. A further investment programme provides for a total expenditure of €513 million between 2009 and 2013. From the point of view of the Department and the Government, it is disappointing to say the least that, given such investment, something like this could occur. I want the RSC to——
We will take a final supplementary question from Deputy Costello.
We need to reassure commuters across the country that rail lines are safe. Much of the work was built in the century before last. There are hundreds of viaducts and nearly 2,000 underbridges and so on. Why can we not have all of the recommendations? Only seven of them have been taken care of so far. When will the rest be implemented to reassure all commuters that travelling by rail is safe and that the standards that are supposed to be in place have been implemented?
When will the EU railway safety directive be up and running? The standards are stricter, but the RSC will be in charge of its implementation and I am afraid that the investigation of the Malahide viaduct collapse showed the RSC was not up to the job.
We will have a final brief reply.
What changes does the Minister propose to make to the RSC?
The Deputy has asked a question.
The RSC has confirmed that it has responded fully to the report and to the recommendation that affected it directly. The commission will ensure it will not find itself in the same position again.
It will not make the same mistakes.
With more than €1 billion invested in the past ten years, it would be unfair of the House to send the message that we are still operating on railways that are more than a century old. There are places where the railways are more than 100 years old but substantial parts——
Viaducts and underbridges.
——of the railways, including all of the viaducts and bridges to which the Deputy referred, have been inspected and cleared since the incident in question.
Recommendations Nos. 1 to 3 have been implemented in full. Recommendations Nos. 4 to 6 are taking longer to progress because of training matters and so on. Recommendations Nos. 8 and 9 have been implemented in full, but recommendation No. 7 is being progressed. Recommendation No. 10 is being complied with in full, as is No. 11. Recommendation No. 13 has been implemented in full, but recommendation No. 12 is being progressed. Under recommendation No. 14, the RSC is to review the process for the closing of recommendations made to Iarnród Éireann by independent bodies. This recommendation has been implemented in full and recommendation No. 15 is being progressed.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
