Vol. 1037 No. 5
5. Deputy Mark Ward asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide details of the fines for service failures over the past two years for Dublin Bus and Go-Ahead; and the reasons and rationale for deciding these fines. [20734/23]
According to information I have received from the NTA, almost €4 million in fines were incurred in 2021 and 2022 by Dublin Bus and the private operator Go-Ahead. Will the Minister provide the details of and rationale for these fines for service failures over the past two years? Will he put his response in the context of this morning's news of Greenpeace saying that Dublin has the worst public transport system in Europe?
Publicly subsidised bus services are provided on the basis of public transport service contracts made between the relevant operators and the NTA. These contracts are a requirement of the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, which sets out the broad parameters of the contracts. The contracts are published and available to view on the NTA's website.
As the House will be aware, the vast majority of subsidised bus services operating in Dublin are provided by Dublin Bus, with the remainder provided by Go-Ahead Ireland. I assure the Deputy that I am fully aware of the service delivery issues relating to these operators over the past two years and the negative impact these issues are having on the travelling public. I reassure him that my Department has been engaging regularly with the NTA on these service issues and we continue to keep the situation under close review.
Many operators continue to experience staffing difficulties in terms of recruitment and retention of drivers and mechanics. Unfortunately, this is impacting on the quality of service provided to public transport users. That said, the NTA closely monitors the contractual performance of operators in respect of reliability, punctuality, regularity and customer service quality. Accordingly, deductions are imposed on operators where performance standards specified in contracts are not met. In 2022, €8 million and €2.4 million was deducted from the contracts of Dublin Bus and Go-Ahead Ireland, respectively. This represented an increase on the 2021 figures of €700,000 for Dublin Bus and €300,000 for Go-Ahead Ireland and was commensurate with a drop-off in the quality of service provided.
The rationale behind this system of deductions is to improve the reliability, frequency and overall quality of our public transport offering so that we can continue on our path in shifting towards more low-carbon transport solutions. While acknowledging the frustrations felt in certain areas, I am informed by the NTA that the system of deductions has resulted in significant aggregate improvements to operator performance and service experience by customers in recent years.
I thank the Minister for his response. I will have to compare the information I received from the NTA with what he just said. In 2022, more than €2.85 million in fines were incurred by Dublin Bus and Go-Ahead - €1.642 million for Dublin Bus and €1.212 million for Go-Ahead. In 2021, their total €1.134 million in fines comprised €697,000 for Dublin Bus and €437,000 for Go-Ahead. Despite Go-Ahead only having 10% of bus routes in Dublin, it amassed 42.5% of fines in 2022 for failures in punctuality, reliability and service provision. In 2021, it accounted for 38% of fines. There was an increase of 152% in the total fines incurred by Dublin Bus and Go-Ahead between 2021 and 2022. The Minister has to admit that the situation is getting worse. Does he agree that the privatisation of our bus services has failed the consumer, and what is he going to do to buck this trend?
The key problem has been in getting drivers at Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann, Go-Ahead and other private operators. Every bus operator will tell the same story. To address this challenge and help close the gap, we engaged with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and secured agreement for 1,500 work permits for drivers who are needed across the country. Deputies will have seen Dublin Bus's major advertising campaign, which I understand has been successful. Private operators, Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann are starting to get the staff they need. When speaking with Bus Éireann about this subject in recent weeks, it told me that it was starting to deploy more female drivers, which is helping it to close the staffing gap that caused the problem. Increasing permits and broadening the scope of advertising are the best ways of solving the problem.
I understand the issue with drivers, but there is also a difference in parity between drivers at Dublin Bus and drivers at Go-Ahead. The latter do not have contracts or conditions as good as the former and Go-Ahead is not as attractive a workplace as Dublin Bus. This is an issue with the private provider.
Go-Ahead operates the 76, 18, L51 and L52 routes in Clondalkin, Palmerstown and Lucan. The 76 route goes to Tallaght. Residents contact me regularly having missed appointments at Tallaght Hospital because their buses did not turn up. BusConnects is not fully connected. There are residents in Lucan who watch helplessly as bus after bus passes them by full. Residents in Newcastle and Rathcoole, which have two of the fastest growing populations in the State, feel abandoned because of the lack of services.
I am all for getting people out of cars and onto public transport, but the Government must provide adequate public transport to do this. What will the Minister say to those in my area who are missing school, work and hospital appointments?
It is never tolerable if people miss a bus service, particularly if the operator is not delivering on its contract agreements in respect of regular services.
That is why we have the system of regulation and fines and of holding those companies to account. Despite all these problems, particularly regarding the difficulty in getting drivers, what we have seen in the past year is public transport numbers increase very significantly, beyond what they were before Covid. That is unusual by international comparison; most other countries have not seen that. I believe that the combination of the 20% and 60% reductions in fares and some of the priority measures we are only starting to put in place is starting to see these bus services really increase and expand.
We have a lot of work to do. It is critical that we get the BusConnects project through planning and that we start delivering it and, in the interim, look at other measures in Dublin city centre and elsewhere where we can reallocate road space in order that the buses get through. The best way of solving this problem is not just by having as many drivers as we can get but also by making sure the buses are not stuck in traffic and that is what we are committing to do.
6. Deputy Maurice Quinlivan asked the Minister for Transport the steps being taken to improve suburban rail services in Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20769/23]
As part of the Limerick-Shannon Metropolitan Area Transport Strategy 2040, there was reference to establishing a Limerick commuter rail service. As an aid to developing the strategy, detailed assessment of rail proposals was undertaken. The assessment identified a programme for a commuter rail network to be developed. It included, in phase 1, stations at both Moyross and Ballysimon and the potential of other stations on the existing rail line that would include Corbally and the Parkway Shopping Centre area of Limerick. Will the Minister outline what steps have been taken to date by his Department or the National Transport Authority to realise this ambition?
The National Transport Authority published the Limerick-Shannon metropolitan area transport strategy, LSMATS, in December of last year. The strategy was prepared by the NTA in collaboration with Limerick City and County Council, Clare County Council and Transport Infrastructure Ireland, with the co-operation of Iarnród Éireann, and provides a roadmap for sustainable transport in the region for the next 20 years.
Proposals for investment in rail under LSMATS include a new station in Moyross, which I announced last October as a pathfinder project to be delivered within the next three years; a new station at Ballysimon, along with park-and-ride facilities; an increase in the frequency of services on the Ballybrophy line to two trains hourly; an increase in the frequency of services on the Ennis line to three trains hourly; dual tracking of the line from Limerick Junction to Colbert station; and the upgrading of Colbert station.
LSMATS also proposes a detailed feasibility study to determine future investment in rail infrastructure and commuter services in the Limerick area. The proposed study will assess future development in the region, evaluate future demand based on projected increases in population and economic activity and outline medium- to long-term investment in rail. Options around investment in improving existing infrastructure and investment in new infrastructure will be examined in detail, including the reuse of the Foynes and Mungret lines, a future rail line to Shannon and future stations at appropriate locations integrated with high-density transport-orientated development.
The Deputy can be assured that progress is happening on the ground now, as evidenced by the completion of the Ballybrophy track-relaying project last year, the commencement of the Foynes line rehabilitation works this year and the well-advanced plans to upgrade Colbert and Moyross stations' inclusion in the pathfinder programme of projects.
It will come as no surprise to the Minister that I have concerns about LSMATS, particularly when a vital piece of infrastructure such as the northern distributor road is removed from the second iteration of the strategy without consultation and against the wishes of the vast majority of elected members in both Clare and Limerick. It is my understanding that this was done under the Minister's instruction. Under the rail section of that document it commits, as the Minister said, to a new rail station in Moyross that would match the demand for travel in that area. I speak specifically of a station in Moyross and its potential. The people of Moyross have worked really hard in recent years to transform the area. They have campaigned for it no longer to be the cul-de-sac cut off from neighbouring estates that it was for years, and its success was the start of the development of the Coonagh-Knockalisheen road. Moyross and its surrounds are an area prime for development and investment. It is close to the city and perfect for a park-and-ride area. Limerick's main sporting grounds, Thomond Park, and Gaelic grounds are close by, if a train were delivered, and a connection has the potential to open the area to visitors and investors alike. It was in the original Limerick regeneration plan but, unfortunately, was not progressed, so I welcome the Minister's comments on that.
I think a station in Moyross will transform that part of the city. As the Deputy said, it is close to the university and Thomond Park and to an existing community that would really benefit from the connectivity with the city. That has already been improved with the new bus services, which have been hugely popular. I visited Moyross last year and got a real sense that the people there are dying for good public transport. I disagree with the Deputy and think the future of Limerick is about development along the existing rail infrastructure in particular. I think there is huge opportunity with the underutilised rail infrastructure and I think the future is in a metropolitan Limerick rail system. The Shannon region, I think, extends from the Ballybrophy line and Nenagh up to beyond Cloghjordan and Roscrea even. That can be seen as part of the region because many people commute from the likes of Nenagh into Limerick. Similarly, reopening the Shannon-Foynes line has huge benefits for Askeaton and other towns along the way. I think that is the future for Limerick.
You will get a chance to come back in, Minister.
Make no mistake about this: the northern distributor road will be delivered by Sinn Féin in government or anyone else, except Deputy Ryan as Minister. When we talk about suburban railway services in Limerick, we need to factor in all services and people's experiences. The Minister mentioned BusConnects as well. A lot of it is positive. We ourselves made a submission to that. It is to be hoped it will be taken on board. It needs to be safe, reliable and affordable. Unfortunately, the situation around Colbert station in Limerick and Parnell Street in the heart of the city needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are huge issues around street drinking, street violence and associated problems with crime and criminality that need a co-ordinated response. The staff in Colbert station do a great job but they cannot solve this on their own. People often tell me they do not feel safe approaching the station or at the train station itself. While we deliver more train services, we need to ensure that taking the train is an enjoyable experience and one that should be safe. That includes inside the station and coming up to the station. I believe that the Minister and I share the same ambition when it comes to improving connectivity across the metropolitan area while simultaneously reducing transport emissions.
Deputy Leddin wishes to come in.
I am absolutely shocked by Deputy Quinlivan's insistence that the northern distributor road will be delivered if Sinn Féin is in government.
Deputy Leddin is the only person in Limerick or the mid-west.
It makes an absolute mockery of Sinn Féin's claim to be at all serious on climate or planning. The northern distributor road is absolutely the wrong project for Limerick. The right project for Limerick is laid out in the Limerick-Shannon metropolitan area transport strategy. It is incredible investment in rail and bus infrastructure in Limerick and Clare, and I welcome the Minister's comments. I welcome the ambition to deliver a rail link to Shannon airport, reopening the Foynes railway line. We need to be talking about a new railway station at Raheen, particularly. It is not talked about enough. There are 7,000 or 8,000 people working there every day. Those should be priorities. Moyross and Ballysimon have to be priorities. This is what Limerick should be doing and absolutely not the northern distributor road.
The House will not be surprised that I agree with Deputy Leddin. It is an either-or. We could go with a roads-based sprawl development, and Limerick could spread out into Clare on an unsustainable roads development system, which has not worked for Limerick. Limerick should be much bigger. Limerick needs to grow and needs to be much larger, and I believe it can grow around a sustainable transport system. If you try to do both, you will undermine the sustainable option.
The only people saying that are the Minister and Deputy Leddin.
It will not be viable. The housing will not be put in the right places. There will not be this 15-minute city concept, which we need to develop in Limerick, and we will not connect particularly those communities that were left isolated and without public transport systems, often people who could not afford a car. We need to think of them. There is a social justice issue in this. Public transport belongs to and provides for everyone. A car-based development model, which is unsustainable in environmental terms, is also socially regressive. The cities of the world that think in that direction, even Los Angeles, are tearing up the highways and freeways and starting to put in rail-based solutions because they know that is what makes cities work and what makes cities attractive to live in and prosper in, and we want Limerick to prosper.
7. Deputy Brian Leddin asked the Minister for Transport if he will develop plans to target electric vehicle, EV, grants towards lighter, smaller vehicles to encourage a market for the types of electric vehicles frequently observed in other European cities, which are generally priced lower than the €14,000 threshold that is set for eligibility for grants in Ireland, with a view to ensuring that the new vehicle fleet is as efficient as possible and less of a safety risk to pedestrians and cyclists than heavier sport utility vehicles, SUVs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20804/23]
I ask the Minister if he will develop plans to target electric vehicle grants towards lighter and smaller vehicles to encourage the market for the types of electric vehicles that one frequently sees in other European cities. These are generally priced lower than the €14,000 threshold that is set for eligibility for grants in Ireland. This would all be with a view to ensuring that the new vehicle fleet is as efficient as possible and less of a safety risk to pedestrians and cyclists than the heavier SUVs. I ask the Minister to make a statement on the matter.
The Government has already committed significant funding to support low-emitting vehicles through the national development plan, which currently includes an allocation of almost €500 million for the period from 2021 to 2025 and additional support from the climate action fund.
This funding includes both capital grants to support the purchase of EVs and capital funding for the delivery of EV charging infrastructure.
Further funding has been allocated in 2023 to ensure the continued transition to EVs. This underpins the Government’s commitment to making EVs accessible to all. This funding will continue to incentivise the switch to electric vehicles as well as enabling the expansion of a fast and rapid electric vehicle charging network to stay ahead of demand.
There are currently almost 85,000 EVs registered on Irish roads as of the end of January. That number is expected to increase as the price of EVs continue to fall relative to their combustion engine equivalents. It is expected that as manufacturers ramp up EV production, costs will become more comparable to traditional combustion engine cars within the next number of years, which will make the total ownership much more attractive and competitive, particularly given fuel prices trends.
A number of new vehicles entered the market last year with a trend towards smaller and mid-size family cars. An additional number of new market entrants are expected to further expand the availability of more affordable EVs starting this year. Further affordable segment models are expected to be announced as new EV focused manufacturers enter the European market.
Our EV incentive system is weighted towards the lower cost and smaller end of the market. An EV purchase grant award is available to vehicles with a maximum cost of €60,000. This grant has been reduced to €3,500 from July this year. There is a further generous vehicle registration tax, VRT, rebate available to EVs, with the maximum amount available to vehicles costing less than €40,000, and no VRT relief available to vehicles costing more than €50,000.
As per the terms and conditions of the EV grant programme, privately purchased vehicles of category M1, that is, passenger vehicles with no more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat, with a retail price of €14,000 or above, are eligible for grant support. Any privately purchased M1 category vehicles with a retail price of below €14,000 are currently not eligible to receive grant payments.
I thank the Minister. He will get an opportunity to come back in.
What we are seeing at the moment is the transition of our vehicle fleet from a smaller mid-size vehicle fleet to one comprising large vehicles particularly. SUVs are being sold at an alarming rate. Many of those are electric vehicles. The policy needs to evolve such that we are heavily supporting the smaller and lighter vehicles over the heavier SUV-type vehicles. The reason to do this is not only do those smaller and lighter vehicles make more sense in our urban areas where there is limited space and they are safer for pedestrians and cyclists but there is a significant climate benefit as well. A heavier EV still uses a lot of fossil fuels. At the moment, we are at 60% fossil fuels; even in 2030, we will still be at 20%. There is, therefore, a climate reason to do this.
I agree with the broad thrust of what the Deputy is saying whereby 50% of the vehicles being sold in the current market are typically characterised as SUVs. They are larger, have a bigger environmental footprint and contain a greater amount of steel. There are concerns around safety for pedestrians and others. If a person is hit by an SUV versus a lighter and smaller car, there are real implications to that. Therefore, I absolutely agree that our strategy should be towards moving to lighter vehicles.
I would also argue for a move towards more car sharing rather than outright car ownership because most of our cars are parked for 95% of the time. There would be real efficiencies as well as cost savings for the public if we can incentivise and support that, which we will do through further measures.
I will continue my discussions with the Ministers for Finance, and Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to examine the various tax and other incentive systems we have. They are evolving and have changed quite significantly in the past two years in terms of which cars are eligible for the VRT rebate. We will continue to review and evolve this towards moving to a more sustainable transport fleet.
Colleagues and I from the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action travelled to Amsterdam two weeks ago. We saw how these smaller, dinkier type vehicles are quite prevalent in cities similar to Amsterdam. I had previously seen them in Rome. From conversations I have had with my colleagues on the committee, I think there is a cross-party appetite to go in this direction. Everybody recognises now that we do not want our cities full of SUVs even if they are electric. I ask the Minister to explore this further with the aforementioned Ministers. I would like to think there will be support across the Houses for an approach that will see a smaller and lighter vehicle fleet coming into being ahead of heavier and larger vehicles.
The other thing that will help in that direction is that the market itself is changing. A large number of the international manufacturers in Europe and beyond are starting to provide options that are cheaper, lighter and more compact. I believe there is a real market for that.
Many people say they cannot switch to electric vehicles because of the cost issue. That will start to be resolved as many those smaller, more affordable and more sustainable vehicles come on the market. That will also help us in terms of whatever support measures we put in place. We will know there is a lighter, cheaper alternative, which is what we want to promote.
8. Deputy Thomas Gould asked the Minister for Transport if he will consider instructing the NTA to delay the closing date for submissions on BusConnects Cork STC routes pending publication of traffic data. [20744/23]
Will the Minister consider instructing the NTA to delay the closing date for submissions on the BusConnects Cork STC routes pending publication of the traffic data? The NTA plans will have serious consequences for businesses, workers, constituents, communities and people's lives. That is why the publication of the traffic data in advance of the closing date is essential.
Under the National Development Plan 2021-2030, BusConnects programmes will be substantially delivered in all of Ireland’s five cities by the end of the decade. These programmes will significantly enhance the quality of public transport in our cities and also include the parallel development of high-quality cycle lanes.
BusConnects will be hugely transformative for all five of our cities, including Cork. Like all transformations, it will require change. I agree that it is important that this type of change is communicated in a way that allows people give their feedback to assist with that change.
In June 2022, the NTA published proposals for a network of sustainable transport corridors, setting out the type of bus and cycle infrastructure along those key corridors. Public consultation regarding these proposals ran until early in October 2022, with close to 3,000 submissions received.
These submissions were all carefully considered by the authority and have informed the most recent round of public consultations on what are now the preferred route options for the 11 corridors. The consultation launched on 30 March and will run for eight weeks until 25 May. The most recent round of consultation is being supported through various different means of engagement with the public including specific public information events and community forum meetings along the corridors, as well as the usual advertising and leafletting one would expect.
The Deputy will acknowledge that transport modelling is a highly complex and technical area and I have been advised that it is most useful to undertake it when the details of schemes are broadly finalised, which is not the case yet. Undertaking and publishing detailed traffic assessments at a stage designs are evolving and changing means that the published analysis quickly becomes invalid as even small items, such as the introduction of turn restrictions at a junction, can alter and invalidate the analysis work undertaken.
I encourage everyone to put their views forward regarding the published material and at the various events and meetings being organised so that the proposal for the corridors can be developed further to the stage for which the Deputy calls. That would allow for the type of detailed transport modelling referred to then be done.
I support BusConnects. We need bus BusConnects in Cork, but we need it to be credible. The first round of consultation was done by the NTA without traffic data, which means the routes that were drawn up did not have the data to support them, which does not make sense. As we have all said here, we must be led by data and by science. Public transport interventions should be evidence-based. They should reflect the need on the ground, and they should be credible. Instead, we got proposals that were not even viable and that caused huge concern among communities. Even the NTA possibly agrees with this because there have been huge changes to the original plan compared with the plan we are looking at now. This creates an imbalance of power between communities and the authority.
Communities in places such as Mayfield, Ballyphehane, Knocknaheeny and Bishopstown do not have the same resources as the NTA but they have local knowledge on the ground that we need to include in the plan.
I fully agree with the Deputy. As I said, that local knowledge helped to inform the significant change that took place between the first and second iterations. That will continue to be needed. Public representatives also have a key role because they represent the people and have similar knowledge of the area. Both councillors and Deputies have a critical role to play. I encourage everyone to take part and make their views known by 25 May.
I have a concern which comes from my experience of the Dublin BusConnects project with which I was involved as a local representative. I had a similar experience. Similar to Cork, the original routes focused too much on lane extensions and creating big corridors rather than building communities. In both instances, the NTA shifted and changed towards much more of a community-orientated approach, which is all to the good. The concern I have is the length of time it has taken since then. Time is required for consultation but we need to be quick thereafter in developing specific traffic data and building routes. The delay, more than anything else, is not serving communities.
To this point, there has been no delay. I have put in a submission. I met representatives of the NTA for two hours this week, and I thank them for that. With Councillors Kevin Collins and Mick Nugent and my personal assistant, we went through the proposal line by line. This plan needs to be credible and the people of Cork need it to work. We want to get people out of their cars, but if we do not get this plan right now, there will be consequences down the line. We are talking about an expenditure of €600 million. One of the main proposals is to remove traffic along the main spine roads in Cork city. I live in Cathedral Road and there is talk of installing a bus gate on the road, which will drive people up Wolfe Tone Street, Cattle Market Avenue, Blarney Street and Sunday's Well. Anyone who knows Cork could tell the Minister that St. Declan's Road and Gurranbraher Avenue are terraces. We need BusConnects to listen to the people and we will work with it as best we can.
I absolutely agree about the consequences of not listening and the need to avail of local knowledge. I am glad the Deputy had a two-hour meeting with the representatives of the NTA. I have been involved in transport campaigning for 30 or 40 years, and in every single instance I can recall where we restricted traffic in some way, there have been valid concerns about what will happen to the neighbouring streets and areas, and people have felt it will not work. I cannot think of a single example where we have reversed such a decision because the fears that some people had were not borne out in the outcome. People do like when there is provision of better public transport. The great attractiveness of some of these projects is not just that they improve the transport system but that they improve the streets and the whole city. That will be the experience in Cork. It is not easy. Change is never easy to deliver and there are understandable fears. However, it is our job as public representatives to make the final decisions, assisted by the NTA, so that we make the leap. It will be a leap to a much more attractive, effective and successful Cork city.
It will not be possible without the northern ring road. That is the point.
9. Deputy Gino Kenny asked the Minister for Transport if he can clarify any plans to remove or penalise workers who avail of car-parking spaces in their workplace; how any scheme aimed at removing or charging for such places might affect front-line workers or those with no viable public transport option due to their shift patterns and workplace location; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20771/23]
This question relates to a clarification on any plans either to penalise workers who avail of car-parking spaces in their workplaces or to remove those spaces.
The Government’s position on parking, including workplace parking, is largely reflected in the recent climate action plan. Broadly speaking, the plan recognises the role of car parking, and the availability and price thereof, in people’s choice to use a car, and the associated impacts this can have on climate emissions as well as on traffic congestion and the efficient operation of our urban areas.
Within the context of managing traffic and transport demand, the plan also includes a commitment to develop a new national demand management strategy. For clarity, transport demand management is a term that is used to describe mechanisms for increasing efficiency in the transport system by reducing travel demand rather than increasing capacity. As part of the process to develop this strategy, consideration will be given to a range of measures to support such efficiency. Some of these will be parking related and will be considered and informed by the five cities demand management study, which was published in 2021, and the modelling analysis undertaken by the NTA to inform the transport input to the climate action plan. The removal of free workplace parking was highlighted as one of many potential measures for consideration. However, I want to be clear that there are no plans at this stage to remove workplace car parking for those with no viable public transport options.
The Government fully recognises that any demand management measures, including possible measures related to workplace parking, can only be effective and equitable when alternative and more sustainable public transport and active travel options are readily available. The Government also understands that significant cohorts of the population are locked into their car dependency by virtue of location or work-related shift patterns.
The Government will continue to invest in active travel infrastructure and public transport services to support greater travel options for all workers, including front-line workers, with a particular focus on large public sector hubs such as hospitals, ensuring those who have no other options are not unfairly penalised. In this regard, the climate action plan encourages public sector bodies to lead by example and specifically encourages them to support their staff, service users and visitors by promoting the use of bicycles and shared mobility options as an alternative to car use by creating and maintaining complementary facilities, including secure and accessible parking, shared mobility parking and charging stations, as appropriate.
I thank the Minister. The Climate Change Advisory Council has called on the Government to implement a levy on workers who get free parking in urban areas. The idea behind that is to change individual behaviour. However, as the Minister has stated, I am sure people do not want to be in their cars for hours on end. It is the last thing they want on their way to work. However, there are cases where there are no alternatives, particularly public transport alternatives. More than ever, people are cycling, availing of a car pool, or walking or running to work. That is very good. However, if there are no alternatives to the use of a car, particularly public transport alternatives, I do not see how the Government could take this provision away from ordinary workers, particularly front-line workers who have no alternatives to their cars. If public transport links around the country were better, people would avail of them rather than being stuck in their cars.
I think such a levy goes back to the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997.
It is in legislation from 2008.
It must have been updated further. Either way, the point is that we have been talking about this for a long time. It is not an easy one. It is very sensitive. In many cases, people were locked into certain transport systems because of 50 or 60 years of car-dependent planning. We need that to change. It is about a combination of measures and not any one. We want to avoid punitive measures, pointing fingers, blaming people or pricing them out of things. It is about reallocating space, including car-parking space and road space, so that the alternatives become cheaper, quicker and preferable. We need to get into a virtuous circle rather than where we have gone in the past 40 or 50 years whereby, because everything was designed around people having and driving cars, there is gridlock that will not work for anyone. We saw during the pandemic that we could change things. We showed that work patterns can change. Having promised something for 20 years, this is the opportunity to do it.
The Minister will not be signing off on the measure. There is a provision in the Finance Bill 2008 that can be signed by the Minister to introduce a levy on workers. It is good that he will not be signing that. There is a lot of corporate greenwashing going on. I will give the Minister an example. Liffey Valley Shopping Centre introduced staff car-parking charges in October 2022. The average workers, who may not have an alternative to the use of a car, will pay €600 per year to park their cars to go to work. That is the equivalent of a pay cut for workers who are on an average wage. The shopping centre has introduced sustainable travel between cycling and public transport but the public transport links were not there when that decision was made. This is corporate greenwashing at its worst because it penalises ordinary workers just to come to work.
In the first instance, I believe it is the Minister for Finance who has the signing order on any such measures and he or she would have a key role in anything.
I go back to the point I made already that we cannot do this as a punitive thing where certain workers are forced into a workforce transport mode and then have the conditions change from under their feet, as it were.
This speaks to a wider issue. We have seen in this city the real cost to everyone from the way in which we saw the rezoning of the outer city, often involving corrupt planning, and even the design of that motorway which was, by definition, going to be unsustainable and very expensive for people in respect of time, fuel costs, and so on. That is the real problem we have; it is that cost. It is the hours stuck in traffic that is costing people as well as the car parking, which is a real problem.
That is all history now and goes back 30 years-plus but what do we do now? We create the alternatives. The bus is super-fast, super-quick and super-cheap. That gives and allows people an option. We must look at the whole transport system in this city, in particular - the same applies in other cities - to see if we can retrofit more sustainable practices to something that, by definition, was not.
10. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide an update on the implementation of camera enforcement as part of the BusConnects programme; if this measure will be brought forward as part of a road safety strategy by his Department, as outlined to the Oireachtas Committee of Public Accounts in 2022; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20240/23]
24. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide an update on progress since November 2022 on the implementation of red light cameras across the road traffic network and the stated commitment to further develop camera-based enforcement by An Garda Síochána, including at junctions and for management of bus and cycle lanes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20239/23]
Will the Minister provide an update on the implementation of camera enforcement as part of the upcoming BusConnects programme and if this measure will be brought forward as part of a road safety strategy by his Department as outlined to us at the Oireachtas Committee of Public Accounts in 2022?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 24 together.
With the State having incurred the investment required to deliver BusConnects, it is vital to ensure sufficient enforcement is in place to protect the benefits of that investment from widespread breaches of the restrictions applying to bus lanes, cycle tracks and junctions. To effectively ensure this outcome, camera-based enforcement will be required to augment the on-street activities of An Garda Síochána.
In addition to supporting BusConnects in its operational phase, camera-based enforcement also has a wider role to play in enhancing road safety, particularly at junction locations. This type of arrangement is in use internationally, where camera detection of certain breaches of regulation is linked to the issuing of fixed penalty notices. Feedback and evidence indicate that such provision is very effective in enhancing compliance with the relevant traffic legislation.
Action 67 in the Road Safety Strategy Phase 1 Action Plan 2021–2024 sets out the need to "further develop camera-based enforcement by the Gardaí, including at junctions and for management of bus/cycle lanes, building on existing and recent legislation through establishing suitable cross-agency administrative arrangements; and, where any legislative issues are identified, to consider and develop agreed proposals to remedy them". The Department of Transport has arranged for the National Transport Authority, NTA, to undertake the first phase of this action, namely, to establish and chair a working group to make recommendations on how it should be progressed. It is intended that this group will report back on progress made to the road safety transformation partnership board comprising the relevant agency CEOs and senior officials from Departments involved in delivering the road safety strategy, which I chair. The subsequent steps for implementation, including addressing any legislative issues that may be identified, will be determined by the Department when this phase is completed.
Having established the working group, which is inclusive of representatives of An Garda, local authorities, Transport Infrastructure Ireland and the Department of Transport, the NTA has in tandem commissioned research on international practice in this area to inform the working group's considerations. The NTA anticipates that the working group's report will be finalised and provided to the Department in the third quarter of this year.
Can I ask the Minister of State for some clarification on that because this is obviously an issue on which I have gone back and forth quite a good deal with the Department? I have had at least seven or eight engagements with the Department on the issue in the past 18 months or so.
In June 2022, we were told that legislative measures might or will be required in due course. In September 2022, when he followed this up, we were assured the legislation required for these cameras is in place and that no further legislation would be needed. The Minister of State has just outlined that the working group might make recommendations for legislation, so it would be very useful if there was some clarification on that.
As the Minister of State knows, BusConnects relies on bus gates to work. In the same manner in which red lights are treated on bus lanes, the efficiency of BusConnects will be lowered if we cannot get the red lights working. It is very important. We had tender documents out in 2015 and 2016 for the pilot projects on Blackhall Place, Benburb Street, Con Colbert Road and Queen Street. We are now in 2023, so that is eight years we have been thinking about doing traffic red light stuff.
Section 81 of the Road Traffic Act provides for the use of camera apparatus to capture the constituent of an offence in the case of a number of offences under the Road Traffic Acts. Failure to obey a red light is a contravention of Article 30 of the road traffic regulations of 1997, and these regulations are made under section 35 of the 1994 Act. The offence of not obeying a red light is therefore an offence under section 35 of the 1994 Act and is therefore covered by the provisions of section 81 of the 2010 Act. As a consequence, I am informed that the law is already clear in providing for the use of cameras to provide evidence of violation of red light rules.
The Deputy also referred in her question to an update following an appearance at the Committee of Public Accounts, where I believe the Deputy was engaging with one of my officials on this issue in respect of the road safety strategy, how we can effectively implement BusConnects, the wider deployment around public transport, and establishing a structure to deal with this. I believe the National Transport Authority favour the overall direction around camera-based enforcement being fleshed out in terms of how we deal with that, inclusive of red light running. We intend to implement that in a more coherent way and that is what the working group will do. There is the wider operational piece, which is important, together with the investment around that, which the working group will also be dealing with.
It is very useful and good to know that there is a working group in place and that progress is being made. Could we get some more information around that working group, because one of the issues which arose in the Committee of Public Accounts is the fact that, like so much in transport, it falls between a number of agencies? Am I to take it the NTA is the lead point and will provide the leadership on this? The Minister of State mentioned that this working group report might come through in the third quarter. Will we be seeing the bones of a business case that will then go to the Department of Finance or to the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform? What would we expect to be the outputs from that working group?
I am interested in that question because I recently had the opportunity with the Committee on Environment and Climate Action to visit the Netherlands. It is interesting there, where there is a very high cycling culture, that they make less use of red lights and allow many more what would be left turns for cyclists here and in their case would be right turns where the light is red for oncoming traffic and it is safe to do so. They have zones where there are sharks teeth signs to indicate to motorists to yield to cyclists. On the issue of red lights, and I agree with the camera enforcement, which is a good thing, we also need to incorporate those other sorts of ideas into the thinking of the working group.
I thank both Deputies for their thoughts on this. The working group is inclusive of representatives of An Garda, local authorities, Transport Infrastructure Ireland and the Department of Transport. The NTA is taking the lead in this phase, with the recommendation to be made in the third quarter of this year. We also need to look at international best practice if we are making significant investment and a transformation in how we embrace active travel within our cities and towns. Is important we ensure it is properly adhered to in the legislative context and within enforcement. The group will be doing that. It is positive that it is not to happen in the third quarter of 2025 or in the never-ever space. The working group is coming back, it has commissioned the research to look at the international best practice, and it will then move on its recommendations. I appreciate Deputy Hourigan's engagement on this and her work on the Committee of Public Accounts as well as the input of Deputy Bruton on the Amsterdam experience.
11. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Transport if he has considered that free access to shared cars or hourly car library schemes should be part of free public transport; what he anticipates the impact of this could be on reducing private car ownership and use; if this was taken into account by a report (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20785/23]
A Greenpeace report published today has found that Dublin is the capital with the least affordable and most complicated ticketing system in all of Europe. Luxembourg, Tallinn and Valletta, where public transport is free, are rated top. Has the Minister considered the impact that including free access to car library schemes as part of free public transport would have on reducing private car ownership and use and was this taken into account in the Ernst & Young Global Limited report?
Could I politely suggest that the Green Party Minister might pay more attention to what Greenpeace has to say rather than paying corporate accountancy firms to undermine the importance of free public transport?
There have been significant initiatives in the lifetime of the Government to improve public transport, particularly its affordability. There was a 20% reduction for all users and a 60% reduction for those under 24. In Dublin, 90-minute fares were introduced, so you can go from one public transport mode to another with a single fare. Only last week, new fare structures were introduced that recognise the system was overly complicated and that there were inequities in the scheme. The new fare structure is designed to improve the overall provision. There are significant changes coming and we will have to introduce further changes, many of which will include shared mobility initiatives, which have a key role.
We would need more precise details on the free car access scheme the Deputy proposes. I will welcome those details when he responds to me. Shared transport is of increasing importance as a strategy in our effort to reduce emissions from transport and is critical in reducing our dependency on a car-based system. Last year, the Government approved the publication of the new sustainable mobility policy that noted the trend toward shared mobility globally and also noted this trend was evident in Irish cities, through shared car and bike schemes already in operation.
My Department is currently exploring the development of shared mobility options, including an e-mobility hub model for the five cities, consisting of charging infrastructure for shared electric mobility solutions such as e-bikes and e-scooters, in addition to car clubs operating electric vehicles, EVs, for short-term hire. The core idea of the hub is that it provides readily accessible, emissions-free transport options to the public, making it easier for people to make the kinds of journeys that can help us to achieve our climate and transport objectives.
A report commissioned by the National Transport Authority, NTA, examines the impact of free fares on public transport. It concludes that funding a free public transport system would cost an additional €540 million in Exchequer funding per annum at a minimum. Free public transport would see a reduction in walking and cycling and a reduction in car travel of only 1%. The NTA report is the latter one to which the Deputy referred.
That report was effectively rigged. It managed to come up with a car usage reduction figure of 1% by running simulated modelling based on current trends across the country, where public transport is mainly poor or non-existent. Most car users do not have access to public transport alternatives, meaning that making public transport free would not change their car usage. The point, however, is that there does not have to be a choice between expanding access to public transport and making public transport free; we need to do both. That is precisely where the idea of a shared car or hourly car library scheme comes in. There are journeys that people take occasionally that are not easy to take on public transport, therefore requiring the use of a car. At the moment, the main choice people have is to own a car, an environmentally costly thing to build and an expensive thing to run. It makes much more sense to have cars available on a common basis, where possible. There are private schemes of this kind, such as that of GoCar, but such a scheme should be part of the public offering. The Ernst & Young report did not take this into account and assumed that if someone needed to take a private car journey occasionally, he or she would need to own a car.
I am keen to get the details. I used to do a lot of hitching over the years. Is that what the Deputy is talking about? Is it a hitching scheme?
No. It would be like using GoCar but through a public system.
Would the driver be paid?
The driver would have access to the car and get to use it. The driver would be an ordinary householder.
Our mobility hubs will provide a very good example of that. I look forward to rolling them out right across the country.
The only aspect of Ireland's public transport ticketing system that the Greenpeace report praises is free public transport for people over 66, people with disabilities and carers. It states that, apart from this, there are no best-practice elements in the ticketing system. It finds that Dublin has the second most expensive daily public transport costs in Europe, second only to London, which of course has a much better transport system. The report praises free public transport and climate tickets as some of the most popular policy interventions to tackle the climate crisis. It states that if even 5% of car trips were shifted to public transport throughout the EU, oil demand could be reduced by around 7.9 million tonnes. We can already see what impact free public transport would have from the large increase in public transport use that was a consequence of the 20% reduction in fares last year and the 50% reduction for young people. The bottom line is that we do not have to choose between investing in expanding access to public transport and making public transport free. We will have a cumulative surplus of €65 billion over the next five years. This is what we need to do for the climate and to address the cost-of-living crisis.
On the basis of the initiatives I mentioned, including a reduction in fares of about 60% for those under 24, we are seeing a significant increase in public transport here by comparison with other European cities. The Deputy is effectively saying we should provide cars to people for free.
A certain amount-----
Would that not just blow our climate budget and public transport system? Free cars for everyone would-----
Not for each individual.
Just some individuals.
No, not to any individual. They would be collective, for a library.
So everyone would have a free car.
Everyone would have the use of a car for a certain number of hours per month.
In that would lie madness, given the traffic implications, to say the least.
13. Deputy Sorca Clarke asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide an update on his Department's engagements to date on the reopening of Killucan train station, County Westmeath. [20741/23]
I want an update on the Department's engagement on the reopening of the Killucan train station on the Mullingar–Sligo line. I am aware the Minister is very familiar with this area and met members of Westmeath County Council a year ago or so. I have been asking questions about this matter since the Minister's predecessor, Mr. Shane Ross, was in the Department. There has been a lot of talk about the train station but it has not been matched by any significant action to date. Any update that the Minister could give would be much appreciated.
I am glad to confirm that my Department has engaged with Iarnród Éireann on a possible future station in the Killucan–Kinnegad area. An initial discussion on the potential reopening of Killucan station took place between my Department and Iarnród Éireann on 15 June 2022. Following this discussion, Iarnród Éireann was asked by my Department to prepare an estimate of the level of funding that might be required to progress a feasibility study considering new station options in Killucan and the surrounding area.
Earlier this year, my Department met again with Iarnród Éireann and subsequently made funding available to the company to allow it to undertake a Killucan–Rathwire and Kinnegad area transport environs study. As well as considering the former station at Killucan, the wider geographic scope of the environs study will help to ensure the optimal location for any future potential station is identified with respect to population, transport demand and proximity to the existing network. This study will provide the necessary analysis to determine the viability of a future station in the area if such a station is deemed appropriate by the study. Ultimately, if the opening of a new station in the area is to be progressed, it will be necessary for Westmeath County Council to develop the business case in line with the requirements of the public spending code. I am informed that the council has been informed of this position; however, this study is a vital first step and it is appropriate that it be funded by my Department.
The Deputy may wish to note the ongoing work on the all-island strategic rail review, the results of which will inform the development of the railway sector in Ireland over the coming decades.
I welcome the announcement on the funding of the study. It is a positive step but we need to be very clear. The Minister spoke earlier about people being stuck for hours in traffic. I challenge him to find somebody within the greater Kinnegad area who has not had that experience. The Minister also spoke about retrofitting bus services. We need to be honest when we speak about Killucan train station. The line already exists. There was a train station in situ until the early 1960s. The campaign has been ongoing for decades. What is the starting date of the study? What will be its duration? When can we expect a decision from Iarnród Éireann on a finalised study?
I do not have the detail on the exact starting date but am sure it is imminent. The funding has been provided. Given that the starting date is for a study rather than building works, I see no reason it should not be in the immediate future, but I will revert to the Deputy on it.
I mentioned Westmeath County Council in my contribution. It is important that we frame the decision not only as a transport decision but also as a housing decision because it is critical that we get transport-led development and that we know, when putting in new transport infrastructure, that we can put in housing infrastructure with it. It is a matter of having the water services, schools and all the other elements in place. The selection of the best spot for a station of the kind in question depends on the council's plans not just for transport but also for housing and all the associated services.
Unfortunately, this was a situation where housing was delivered first and the transport has lagged behind. Since this train station closed in the 1960s, the area has seen a massive rise in population of approximately 300%. About 8,000 people live within 5 km of this station. If you extrapolate from those figures, the population numbers get higher and higher. The line is there. It already exists. What is lacking to provide a reliable and sustainable mode of public transport for people in that area is for the trains to stop at a train station.
I have looked at this issue and the local area in detail. The historical train station is 1 km or 2 km from the village of Killucan and there is no housing adjacent to the station. This is one of the issues the council must consider. If we do put a station, where will we put it on such a route? What are the housing plans for the area? It would be hugely beneficial if we connected the two and made sure it was not a station removed by any distance from the main housing centres.
Given its location, it would service more than the town of Killucan.
