Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT debate -
Tuesday, 2 Dec 2003

Vol. 1 No. 31

Transport Infrastructure: Presentations.

I welcome the delegation from Dublin Chamber of Commerce, comprising Mr. Clive Brownlee, Mr. Eugene McCague, Ms Gina Quin and Mr. Declan Martin. Members of the committee have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. Members of the committee should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against any person outside of the House, or any official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. Brownlee

The members of the committee are probably all familiar with the Dublin Chamber of Commerce. It represents business across all sectors, including a wide variety of companies, both large and small.

Why is business concerned with the area of transport? We believe poor transport infrastructure is costing Dublin up to €3 billion annually. Members will have seen how Ireland is sliding down European and world competitiveness tables. Infrastructure, particularly transport, will have a major impact on our competitiveness and future investment. The transport solution must have a vision and strategy, underpinned by infrastructure development and the support of good management.

We believe that through the work the DTO has done, and looking towards 2016, a strong vision was articulated. We give the thumbs up to the vision although we feel that it could be more effectively communicated. It is underpinned by a strong strategy encompassing a combination of metro, Luas, bus, etc. However, a big question mark hovers over the issue of infrastructure and management. Members will be familiar with priorities, the planning process, inadequate finance and the overrunning of projects. The absence of a greater Dublin transport authority, the management of traffic, the issue of competition - particularly regarding buses - and the standards we are operating to are creating difficulties. Compared with other cities, our public transport does not reach world class standards.

There is a multiplicity of agencies with different agendas and priorities. Whether one is from the west, south or east, the Red Cow roundabout affects one. It is a classic example of how things should not be done. The infrastructure was patently inadequate at the outset and is now grossly inadequate. Attempts to get the correct people to meet and plan for the future have been abysmal. The M50 affects everyone in the country. There is a lack of flyovers and proper roundabouts and three lanes on the carriageways. These are real priorities.

There is a need for a greater Dublin transport authority. A greater Dublin land use and transportation authority was promised and it was intended that this would cover strategic land use planning, strategic transport planning and public transport regulation. Under this, the working authorities would operate and there would be public transport providers and a rail procurement agency. This was promised in the programme for Government and we want to see it delivered now. It is the correct step to take and has been strongly advocated by the chamber over the years.

While the national development plan was the correct strategy, it is now significantly behind schedule. Government borrowing can be stretched within the limits of the growth and stability pact, possibly by 1% or 2%. Government spending of 5% of GNP on capital can be stretched to 6% or 7% while remaining within sensible borrowing limits. PPPs have either not happened or have only happened to a small degree. One of the reasons for this is that the PPP process is extremely laboured and costly and is not sufficiently encouraged. When the Government reaches borrowing limits, there is a strong case for bringing in private investment. We feel the impetus behind PPPs does not exist.

We are all suffering from projects that are being delivered late and over budget. Planning takes an age and sometimes does not happen at all. We have some major issues on the M50 and in other areas. We believe there is a lack of clarity on major projects. We fervently support the critical infrastructure Bill and we do not detect a sufficient sense of urgency on planning issues.

We have a series of recommendations. We recommend that the Dublin transport authority be established as promised. We also ask for more capital spending, increased and sensible Government borrowing, improved PPP processes and implementation can facilitate this. We also call for better project management. The metro is a fundamental part of the DTO strategy and while there should be a number of metros around Dublin, the one from the airport into the city centre is the most urgent.

I welcome the delegation to the committee. The delegation has Fine Gael's support in calling for a central planning and transport authority in Dublin. Fine Gael has often made the point that the plethora of authorities has resulted in chaos. Owen Keegan has told us that traffic levels predicted by the DTO for 2016 have already been reached. Perhaps the chamber of commerce will comment on this. How did the DTO come to this figure and how will we cope with it now? This points to the lack of proper planning in the transport area.

What is the chamber's view on the out of town centres such as Blanchardstown and Liffey Valley? Are such centres good or bad? Are they adding to the chaos or helping to alleviate it? Telecommunications companies currently have the right to dig up streets any time they wish. I know the British Government is introducing a Bill to regulate this area and I am sure businesses in Dublin and around the country would welcome a similar Bill here.

I am a little disappointed in that I was expecting to hear some new idea. The presentation by the chamber did not have any new ideas and is a commentary on the Government's lack of action in recent years in implementing the transport strategy. I share the chamber's concerns about the lack of progress in a number of key areas. I agree that the most urgent matter facing Dublin's transport problem is the need to establish a single transport authority. This has been long promised in the programme for Government. Legislation was promised both last year and this year and has not been brought forward. The Minister has told us that it is being put on the back burner.

There is no doubt this is a major problem area. At the last count there were 28 different agencies involved in traffic and transport in the Dublin area, with no one in charge. That is why decision making is so slow and why forecasts for traffic volumes become out of date before the end of the year is reached. I agree this needs to be driven by someone who has overall responsibility and clout with the various agencies. We have raised the matter in this committee and with the Minister in the Dáil. However, there are worrying signs that it has gone completely off the agenda and I am not sure why. Nevertheless, it does not augur well for the ability of the authorities to deal with the problem in the short to medium term.

I am interested in the figure of €3 billion as an annual cost to business. I would be interested to see a breakdown of that figure. From time to time we hear comments that it is costing hundreds of millions of euro and sometimes billions of euro. Can Mr. Brownlee provide us with a breakdown of that cost at some stage? It also strikes me that if it is costing business so much, would the business community consider making a contribution to solving the problems? I am thinking in terms of a small fraction of that €3 billion which could transform bus services in the Dublin area, for example. Just 5% of that figure could make a revolutionary change to bus services. Is there any mechanism for doing that or has Mr. Brownlee thought at all creatively in that regard?

I am interested in a passing comment which was made about Mr. Brownlee's wish to see the bus monopoly broken. I thought it a strange comment to make since the bus services in Dublin are one of the few success stories in the Dublin area as they provide a good, efficient and cost effective service. I would have thought we should be looking for additional bus services and bringing in the private sector to provide new services. What is Mr. Brownlee's view of the Minister's proposal to franchise out 25% of existing services, which will give no net increase in the overall level of services? I would have thought the sensible thing to do, and I hope Mr. Brownlee agrees, is to allow Dublin Bus to continue to provide the service it currently provides and introduce other operators to provide additional services because they are needed.

We all agree the metro is a nice idea. However, we have yet to see any figures supporting it from a business perspective or a cost benefit analysis. Have you done any studies on that matter, given the substantial investment it entails in terms of the infrastructure for the metro and the long delays which are involved in any kind of such major infrastructure project? Have you given consideration to a substantially bus based service which could be delivered cheaper than the metro in a much shorter timescale? We would transform transport in the city within 12 months with a relatively small amount of funding if the emphasis was on improved bus services.

I welcome our colleagues and thank them for taking time out of their busy schedules to appear before the committee. I welcome the parts of the presentation which endorse the strategy as set out in the national development plan. It is an important endorsement, coming as it does from your organisation. The method of its implementation is a matter for debate and will be debated here constantly.

I also welcome your support for the critical infrastructure Bill, which has been mooted as a panacea for many difficulties which you have identified in your presentation, particularly in regard to the fast tracking of project management, which is a concern for you. We hope, as legislators, that we can help that process by short-circuiting many of the roadblocks which many major infrastructural projects face.

In regard to Mr. Brownlee's proposal for significantly increased Government borrowing for infrastructural projects, I gave a wry smile when he suggested it should be stretched up to the stability and growth pact limits, which as we all know are non-existent since last week. I have always thought those limits were an unreasonable constraint on an economy such as ours which is relatively low debt compared with others in the euro zone. If Mr. Brownlee was the Minister for Finance in the morning and had an open cheque book, what sort of extra money would he spend? Using his business hat, what amount of extra borrowing could the economy reasonably sustain without going back to the bad policies of additional borrowing which we pursued in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s?

I welcome Mr. Brownlee. It is important this committee has the views of leaders of industry such as he, particularly in view of his role as president of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce. It is significant to have this kind of input and I welcome that it was so clear and precise. I am not at all disappointed, in fact I am relieved, that he did not come with a plethora of new ideas since hundreds of them have already been floating around. I would like to see us getting on and implementing three or four of the ideas about which we have been bleating for years, particularly the metro. Let us get the current proposal operational before we look for further ideas.

Like Deputy Shortall, to whose knowledge I bow in these areas, she asked an important question about the figure of €3 billion which I would like to follow up. Is that an authoritative figure and what is its provenance? Is it material which has come from the chamber's own research because it is a useful figure to deal with politically? If that money can be saved and invested in the metro, it significantly reduces the apparent cost of the project.

We have recently been told that Luas works are to be suspended for five weeks in order to celebrate the Christmas period. Does Mr. Brownlee have a view on this? Is it a good idea because it seems to be absolutely absurd. On anecdotal evidence, having taken five taxis in the past few days, I asked each driver, expecting them to say it made life easier, yet every one of them said it was a nonsense to suspend work but rather driving ahead with it around the clock in order to get the project finished.

I was extremely pleased with Mr. Brownlee's support for the metro. A number of members of the committee have pushed for this. Before the committee was formed some of us were pushing for this. In regard to the cost-benefit analysis, I believe this has been done on a number of occasions; I am sure I have seen one in the report we have been given.

That was given in confidence.

I am not saying anything other than that the report exists. I am aware of work which has been done in that area.

Four other members have intimated they would like to ask questions. Would Mr. Brownlee like to answer all the questions together or reply to the four thus far?

Mr. Brownlee

Perhaps it would be helpful to answer some of the questions now and my colleagues and I will attempt to cover them all. I thank the members for their questions which were penetrating and right to the point. Deputy Shortall mentioned new ideas. We have been fortunate enough to have an input into the DTO strategy from an early stage and we have managed to have close contact all along. All our ideas, although I am not saying there could not be other new ones, were thrashed out at that stage. Now it is a matter of getting the job done, having it financed and managed and pushing it through. I am not saying we will not have more ideas to add but fundamentally we are supporting the strategy. We reached a point at which we decided that there had been enough debate and we should get on with things, for better or worse. We believe the strategy is sound.

In regard to the question about increased borrowings, the chamber supports the Government's policy of limited borrowing, bringing down our debt equity ratio in company terms and reaching a state of greater stability. We should always be cautious about the overall level of borrowing we reach. I would not advocate any increase in the level of borrowing for current expenditure but for capital, I would. There can come a point at which we start spending so much, because there is so much money in the system, that it results in nothing but inflation, including construction inflation. The money cannot be managed. Our instincts are to support something in the region of a 1% or 2% increase in borrowing, to bring it up from 5% to 6% or 7% of GNP. That amount of money could be managed and spread so that projects around the country could benefit, although we are concentrating on Dublin.

Both out of town and in town shopping are essential. There is a need for out of town shopping for people from outer villages and towns and those who live further out, but we are part of the city centre which can provide a wide range of shopping. Both can be accommodated. The trick is to ensure people are able to get into and out of the city centre so that people have a choice. A question was asked about the single transport authority but I cannot remember its point. Therefore I will return to that later.

On the matter of bus services, although I talked about breaking the monopoly and so on, it is not only a question of that. Dublin Bus operates under extremely difficult circumstances in terms of traffic and so on and can only be tested in terms of an improvement in the roads and facilities available. I believe more services can be added but whatever we do, we should have competition in the area. As it is not good to have a monopoly in any service and I am sure the quantity and quality of the service will improve once there is a competitive arena, I support the introduction of competition.

The metro and establishing a bus corridor from the airport right into town were mentioned. The latter was considered at an early stage and while there were possibilities, the overriding concerns were efficiency, payback and service. It was not just considered in terms of a one year timeframe. We were considering Dublin as a world class European city and in view of this we need a metro service as good as that of Hong Kong, London and so on. This is a reasonable right for a growing city which takes pride in itself. In the light of the decrease in the estimated costs for the metro this is the right way forward.

There were questions about traffic levels reached compared to the DTO's estimates. The DTO's figures in the latest strategy are not too far out.

I am not sure whether Senator Browne was talking about the DTO's traffic figures or those of the original DTI, the Dublin Transportation Initiative, of the mid-1990s. The figures predicted by this body for 2016 have already been well exceeded. The DTO's strategy from 2000 to 2016 is a different piece of work. Even though the amount of traffic is increasing at a rapid rate we are still largely within the projections of the DTO.

The €3 billion cost of transport congestion was mentioned. Like the traders in Moore Street who say something costs "from" €1.50 per half dozen, we use the term "up to". There are no hard and fast figures. The €3 billion mentioned is largely drawn from the EU White Paper on transport which was published about a year ago. It estimated various costs, which are well detailed in the paper, relating to congestion. These costs include everything from opportunity costs to down time to delays in paying people and the cost of things taking additional time and double the number of fleets normally required. It even includes environmental costs and costs for infrastructure replacement. There are other figures. For example, a presentation to this committee was organised by Dublin Bus based on the EU tapestry project, which estimated that the congestion cost due to people using cars instead of public transport in a city the size of Dublin was up to €8 billion. The figures are not precise but they are large - certainly greater than what is being spent. The provision for transport generally in 2004 is €1.6 billion. Therefore, even if we accept the figure of €3 billion, we are only replacing the money lost at half the rate we should.

The idea was mentioned of business making a contribution to public transport. Quite a number of operators are ready to provide services in the Dublin bus markets. The competition model does not preclude additional services, new routes and so on. There is some debate at the moment between Dublin Bus and the DTO about the maximum possible capacity for buses in the city, but the number is finite. While additional buses will be part of the transport solution, they cannot ultimately provide the total solution, nor can Luas, which brings us back to the case for the metro which can carry the volumes of people required in a such a large, spread out city. I will leave the suspension of Luas works over Christmas to our colleagues in the City Centre Business Association as they are much closer to that issue.

Senator Browne asked about telecoms companies digging up the streets. There is an agreement, although people disagree about it, providing a formula for the director of traffic and the telecoms providers. As the telecoms have concerns about costs, there is a stand-off - I do not know the precise state of play. An economic model is applied to the telecoms companies for the costs they would have to incur to dig up the streets.

Mr. Brownlee

On the question of the Luas suspension, Mr. Martin is right and our colleagues will answer that. Regarding whether this was part of the project plan and discussed with the relevant people, this comes back to project planning. If it was the right thing to do in the project plan and will still be delivered on time, that is great. Finally, regarding the €3 billion cost for transport and what business is doing to help, business contributes a huge amount in terms of rates, charges and so on. Frankly, we are trying to bring those costs down rather than find extra ways of contributing. If there are ways in which we can help which is cost effective and of no cost to business, we would obviously look at them.

It would make sense if some of that €3 billion could be used for public transport.

Mr. Brownlee

The way to bring that figure down is to do all the things we are saying we should be doing. Let us get down to doing those, thereby bringing the €3 billion figure down to next to nothing.

With regard——

I ask the Senator to put direct questions because we have another group to meet.

Regarding the DTO, Senator Browne is correct. The DTO, Owen Keegan and anybody else who cares to ask will be told that the DTO figures for 2016 have now been realised. I am surprised at the faith of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce in the strategy of the DTO given that its forecast has already been arrived at. Surely its strategy must be updated in regard to resources and finance. I accept its forecast but we actually have to bring it 13 years forward and then come up with a matching strategy to meet that.

Regarding the Dublin Transport Authority, my concern is to keep the transport issue separate from the land use issue. The programme for Government envisaged that land use be attached to transport development. We have four Dublin authorities dealing with four developments all at different stages. If those four county development plans have to be ratified by a supreme authority again we will never get anything done. I definitely would not agree with that. We must merge the existing transport agencies, but whether we merge them and give them authority over county council development plans is another question, and I would like to hear the views of our witnesses on that.

I am very surprised that the witnesses have not mentioned the infamous tunnel which is supposed to relieve Dublin of gridlock by removing trucks from the streets. What is their stance on the recent NRA statement that super trucks would not be banned and that it is merely a Dublin City Council traffic management issue? Finally, has the Dublin Chamber of Commerce ever looked at the number of car spaces tied up all day by people coming into work and parking their cars? What is its stance on that and does it consider this an issue that should be looked at by the different transport agencies? If we are serious about asking people to use public transport, is it logical to have a situation where a person working 200 yards from Connolly Station has a car space provided by a State organisation in Jervis Street, a 15 minute walk from work, when he or she could get a train or bus into town? What stance does the Dublin Chamber of Commerce take on that?

The same could be said about Leinster House.

I was talking about Leinster House also.

I also welcome the support the Dublin Chamber of Commerce has given to the Dublin Transportation Office and its strategy. It is very welcome that we are starting to see a number of different organisations rowing in behind this strategy, and the witnesses are right that we need to avoid cherry-picking and concentrate on its implementation.

In that regard, I ask why the Dublin Chamber of Commerce is now coming out so strongly in favour of the widening of the M50 and upgrading the Red Cow and other roundabouts as an immediate priority. Would the witnesses not accept that the Dublin Transportation Office position on this has been consistent throughout the whole DTO process and throughout recent years - that any such upgrade of the M50 would have to await the introduction of the major public transport projects or we will get a city which develops along the motorway and the land use pattern will make the public transport projects less viable?

Would they not agree with what the Minister himself originally said about this not being a priority? The Minister said that in July 2003 and now, all of a sudden, he has developed what I would describe as the Red Cow syndrome, a hysterical syndrome as to what we need to do to solve our transport problems. What we have had with the Red Cow is a lot of hysteria about the need to put the Luas on stilts or to do something. The reaction is to do something which, while it obviously has an immediate benefit in terms of providing freeflow from traffic for a short period, will actually provide for an extra 40,000 cars coming into the city and adding to gridlock. No matter how many extra lanes we provide on the M50 these cars have to come off the M50 at some stage and confront gridlock.

Would the witnesses, therefore, not support the position that we should prioritise first, the building of the metro, the upgrade of the Maynooth line, the extension of the Dart line and the building of Luas? Would they not agree with the Dublin Transportation Office's own platform for a changed policy which says that these projects should come first?

I am very glad that the Dublin Chamber of Commerce is supporting the metro so strongly, a position my party would agree with. It is important, as was put to this committee earlier today, to decide this issue prior to Christmas. I am very pleased that the Dublin city business community is rowing in behind the metro proposal and saying that we cannot afford not to have it. Has the Dublin Chamber of Commerce made any presentations to the Department or Minister for Finance on the matter, and what sort of reaction has it got? How would the organisation respond to the reported comments of the Minister for Finance that this is a grandiose project that we cannot afford? What argument would the Dublin Chamber of Commerce put to the Minister for Finance to rebut that argument?

I have two other short questions. In regard to the out of town versus centre of town shopping debate, I would be interested to hear about the Dublin Chamber of Commerce's submission to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the retail planning guidelines and changes to allow bigger out of town shopping centres. Would the witnesses not agree, again, with the Dublin Transportation Office position on this? It made a submission to the Minister saying that a change of the retailing planning guidelines to allow the introduction of 300,000 square feet stores on the M50 - the only location they would probably adopt - would be completely contrary to its plan. Would the Dublin Chamber of Commerce accept that position?

I share the concern of the witnesses regarding a transport planning authority. I have questioned both the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister for Transport, who is responsible, and both were adamant that there is no need for such a planning and transport authority. Given their refusal to countenance one, does the Dublin Chamber of Commerce have advice as to what other authority structure might be appropriate?

I will be very brief. I welcome the delegates and thank them for the brevity and succinctness of their presentation. It is a pity this was not reciprocated in some of the questions put to the witnesses. I have three points to make——

I ask the Deputy to be brief.

I have every intention of being brief. I welcome the support of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce for the metro. If I may be slightly parochial, I presume that support is for the metro project in its totality, all the way out to the wilds of Swords, and not an abbreviate version. I seek clarification of that. Regarding the figure of €3 billion annually, I know Mr. Martin elaborated to a small extent on this but I would be interested in hearing more. Is that total loss to the national economy? What are the principal elements of the €3 billion? Finally, could the Chamber of Commerce elaborate on the section about project management? It is interesting that on 2 December, 160 gardaí were allocated to the running of Operation Freeflow. The transfer of resources, for example, to night time working on construction projects in non-residential areas is worthy of attention and I would be interested in hearing the Chamber of Commerce's views on that. Was that succinct enough?

Very good. Deputy Glennon has set the example for Deputy Breen.

I will be brief. To pursue Senator Morrissey's question about the port tunnel, can Mr. Martin say how the Dublin Chamber of Commerce views the way in which the project has been handled, particularly given that it could cost up to another €100 million to raise the height of the tunnel and try to get the super trucks out of Dublin city centre?

Mr. Brownlee

My understanding, on the basis of the Dublin Transportation Office figures, is that the projections for transport, etc., have not been disproved at this early stage. However, the finances required for the whole strategy increased significantly over the first year or two. My colleague, Mr. Martin, will clarify that. We believe very strongly in the proposed land use and transportation authority. The four local authorities would have their own bailiwicks but the planning and land use for strategic projects would fall to one authority. It is for other people to decide the detail of how that would work but we believe in the overall structure. The Deputies have quoted two Ministers as saying they do not believe in it. Why, if that is so, was it in the programme for Government as something into which we could all buy, which we did?

When the tunnel was being planned and the detail drawn up the super trucks were not a significant issue. That has arisen somewhat later in the day. The time between inception of the tunnel and the start of work is a symbol of our problems but the project management and so on have been good to date and the work is being done properly and within budget. The projections on time still hold good. We should have heard last March whether the super trucks could be accommodated. It is now December and we have not heard. If it is going to cost €20 million and delay the work by three months we support accommodating the super trucks in the tunnel. If it is going to cost €150 million and delay the work by two years because of planning problems we would have serious questions. We would like to hear a definitive answer from the Atkins report, and from Dublin City Council, as to what precisely is the situation. As all of these projects are about time and money, if the time is short and the money is low we support it; if it is the reverse we do not.

The Government should be in a good position to answer the question about car parking.

I am asking the Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Brownlee

I lived in London for several years and the part of the transport system that I used was good so I did not think about using my car. If there is a good public transport system people will use it and less car parking space is required than when the public transport system is not good. As many of us do not have access to a good public transport system people will park their cars there all day. I would say to Government, let us lead by example. I live in County Kildare and like many others coming from that direction and further afield I experience the appalling traffic problems on the M50 which is gridlocked, as is the Red Cow roundabout, all day. While I support all the other elements of the strategy that is not working. The practical solution is to put in the three lanes, and get the roundabouts working; it is self-evident as one can see when using it every day of the week.

We have made cases to all Departments about our belief in the metro. It is probably time for us to go back to the Department of Finance and push the case further from the Dublin Chamber of Commerce and business point of view. We need to reiterate our point of view and hear what the Minister and his officials have to say. We are happy to thrash that out. As for the €3 billion I echo the words of my colleague, Mr. Martin, about this coming from an EU White Paper and I suggest that we make a documented submission of the costs on paper to the committee, if that is acceptable.

I will ask Mr. Martin to cover the square footage of the large shopping centres outside the city. We are very supportive of Operation Freeflow and believe there should be a separate traffic force with limited powers, sufficient for dealing with traffic problems but not for arresting people for crime. We refer to well trained personnel with limited powers to operate as a traffic force all year round.

It is only possible to stop major works such as maintenance works at a peak time such as Christmas which is the only time it can be managed or tolerated. We have fought for, and will continue to lobby for, a year round traffic task force and we would like the committee please to take note of this. I should perhaps have said this in my presentation.

Ms Gina Quinn

The submission on the retail planning is on our website. We said there that we support some limited extension of the sizes of the retail outlets, not specifically to encourage major out of town areas. We expressly said that we would not like to see this development happening on the M50 for the reasons already cited - it would increase traffic in an already congested area. As a major interchange in the infrastructure this is a critical part of development and that is why we have laid such emphasis on it. This is not just about individuals and cars. It is also about moving freight and goods around the country and giving access to the airports and to all major routes. Therefore, it is a very significant part of the overall plan.

The greater Dublin area land use and transportation authority must address land use and transport in tandem because the planning for land use and access by transport is critical if we are to prioritise foreign direct investment, housing and retail development throughout the greater Dublin area. Bringing the co-ordination of an over-arching body to the work of the local authorities is important. As a short-term measure, the critical infrastructures Bill will go some of the way to help in this regard. However, the Dublin Chamber of Commerce sees the greater Dublin area transport authority is critical in the overall plan.

On Senator Morrissey's point on city centre car parking, it is a tricky situation that draws in the concept of congestion charges. In our recent submission on the Dublin city development plan, we stated that there should be no more off-street car parking for commuters as opposed to shoppers in the city centre. There is a problem with the morning and evening commutes with people coming into the city centre. The issue for debate is if a BIK charge was implemented, would it reduce usage? One can argue that it would increase usage in the sense that nobody would leave any space unfilled and the priced elasticity of parking in the city is high. The main issue is to stop the situation getting worse. This was part of our submission to the Dublin city development plan.

If a high quality bus corridor leading to the Red Cow interchange was built and could ensure that the bus journey time was half that of a car, would the Dublin Chamber of Commerce see a switch over to the bus to get into work?

Mr. Brownlee

If I had a guarantee of a half hour commute from Naas and a regular and reliable service, yes I would switch to bus.

We should go for it then.

I thank Messrs. Brownlee, McCague and Martin and Ms Quin for their submission and the clarity with which they answered members' questions. If at any stage in the future they wish to make further submissions to the committee, we would only be too glad to accept them. I take it the Dublin Chamber of Commerce will correspond with Deputy Glennon about his question.

Mr. Brownlee

I thank the Chairman for this hearing and we appreciate the time spent on our submission.

I am pleased to welcome Mr. Paul McElearney, chairman of Dublin City Centre Business Association, Mr. Michael Ryder, company secretary of the association, and Mr. Tom Coffey, chief executive officer of the association.

I want to draw to the witnesses' attention that members have absolute privilege but it does not apply to witnesses. I remind members of the long standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the Houses or refer to an official in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. Paul McElearney

I thank members for the invitation to address the Joint Committee on Transport. As we have circulated our submission in advance, I take it as read and we now invite questions.

I welcome the deputation to the committee. I am sure it is busy preparing for Christmas. How does the association view the success of Operation Freeflow? Speaking with commuters this morning, they claimed that the city centre was more congested than is normal. I do not know if it was because there were not enough gardaí on duty. Will the association comment on this and how the ongoing Luas works have affected business in the city centre?

I welcome the delegation to the committee. I take it that the Dublin City Centre Business Association subscribes to the DTI and DTO strategies. What are the association's relations with Dublin City Council? Some time ago I was a member of the council and I recall that from time to time there were strains between both parties. I like to believe that matters have improved in that regard. Again, on the issue of improved communications between the various agencies, does the association meet with the council on a regular basis? Have some of the differences in the past been ironed out?

I am interested in and welcome the association's proposals in restricting HGVs from the city centre. My understanding was that the business community was opposed to restrictions in this area due to concerns over additional costs over early morning and night-time working. What is the association's specific proposal in term of deliveries in the city centre? Would the association see these occurring outside the normal working day and to what extent is there support for this proposal from industry with regard to additional costs?

What are the association's views on the Dublin Port tunnel? As the association will be aware, when the plans were drawn up, there were regulations in place that restricted the height of trucks. Now, these regulations have lapsed and despite the Minister promising new ones, they have not appeared yet. Apart from the tunnel, it is not environmentally or socially desirable that these super trucks are going through the residential areas of our towns and villages. It is not as if they come off the ferry and go straight into the tunnel. Allowing them on the streets means that they interfere with residential areas. This poses a potential danger and an environmental threat. In the event of regulations being reintroduced, what will the impact be on costs for business and what is the association's position on banning the super trucks? This is something everyone recognises is urgently needed in the city centre. It was promised in the programme for Government but has not yet materialised. Has the group had any indication from the Minister that he may be working on that, or has it fallen by the wayside too?

I will be very brief. I congratulate the group on the very succinct nature of its presentation.

I note that the group refers to both Luas and the DART reconstruction without any specific reference to metro. The group reiterates its full support for the DTI strategy but I would be obliged for its confirmation of its total support for metro, if that be the case, in particular the original proposal that it go as far as Swords.

A figure of €3 billion was referred to at some length in the previous presentation. There is no such figure in today's presentation. What are the group's views on the figure? If there is anything arising from the previous presentation on which we have not touched, but which the group may feel is worthy of elaboration, the committee would like to hear that.

I raised another question with the previous group related to project management and the shift of resources from traditional work practices to more ground breaking work practices. For example, as I said earlier, 160 gardaí were suddenly moved, no doubt from hard pressed areas, to facilitate Operation Freeflow. There must be other areas which have a bearing on the operation and function of the group's members which could benefit from a similar shift of resources from traditional work practices in a range of areas. I would like to hear the group's ideas, particularly regarding night-time working on road works in non-residential areas. The group's ideas on any other similar types of schemes would be very welcome.

I will also be brief. Like Deputy Glennon, I would like to hear that the Dublin City Business Association supports metro. Is it happy with the changes, with the final station routing proposed by the RPA? Apart from the metro, does the group support proposals to link the two existing Luas lines, possibly down through Dawson Street and College Green, as suggested in the original DTI proposal for Luas? Whether we get a metro system, there is a case for that.

The group combines what is probably the best retailing expertise in the city, outside the city and in the city centre. Would the group share the concerns of the Dublin Transportation Office that a removal of the cap on retail space could lead to unsustainable transport patterns on the outer edges of the city?

Regarding heavy goods vehicles and the report published by the group in 2001, the group said that report is not yet implemented, or that while it was adopted, its recommendations have not been introduced. Why? What is the group's position on daily deliveries on the quays or along bus routes, particularly near bus terminals? In College Green, for example, there is a licensed premises right beside the number 37 bus stop. Two trucks can pull up there at the same time and hold up all the traffic on College Green, impeding the buses from pulling in. We are here talking of public transport, yet why is there no co-ordinated effort between the group and perhaps Dublin City Council to solve the problem of deliveries holding up traffic?

Mr. McElearney

There are many questions to be answered in a short time. Some of them are very tricky and require long explanations. We will deal with them as succinctly as possible. I will answer some, Mr. Coffey will answer others and Mr. Ryder will answer some more. Between the three of us we hope to answer all the questions.

We are one of the few business organisations represented permanently on the operational body of Operation Freeflow. It is a great success and has improved each year. Traffic in Dublin city centre is very much dependent on the weather. If it rains, traffic slows to a snail's pace. If we have snow, traffic virtually stops. Somewhat unfortunately, we are weather dependent. Mr. Coffey will focus on more detailed points of Operation Freeflow. I will then ask Mr. Ryder to talk about Luas.

Mr. Tom Coffey

On a fine day like yesterday, Operation Freeflow works. On a wet day it does not, because traffic goes much slower and visibility is poorer. In Dublin over the past three years we have also had so many changes to routes in and around the city that many people have lost their historical memory of routes. Though I have lived here for 40 years I found myself going in the wrong direction the other day. The new directional signposts have helped people enormously. Even when one feels lost, though living in the city, one ends up more often than not in the right spot.

We support Operation Freeflow because without it, the city would stop at Christmas. I will give a few figures. Dublin Bus carries 500,000 people daily. The private coaches which come into the city carry 135,000 people daily. All these people come into the city centre every day. The cars of 40,000 shoppers come into the city centre daily. The commuter car is a problem. We would prefer that such cars would not come into the city and that people would use the park and ride facilities, using public transport for the last part of the trip to the city centre. We are some way from achieving that.

Mr. Michael Ryder

There was a question about the impact of Luas. The first aspect relates to the consumer, who has a choice where to shop, and whose perception has been affected because of the huge works involved in setting up Luas. The perception is that there is so much work going on that entry to the city centre is too difficult. Such a perception becomes ingrained in the subconscious. It has always been a concern of the DCBA that in terms of advertising and communications the project management should proactively inform people, as was done during the so-called Boston Big Dig, that for the gain to come, some pain must first be experienced. There should be promotion of the fact that the city centre is still open, with good availability, good access and good egress. It is regrettable that not enough money was put aside, despite the DCBA submission to the RPA, to handle that promotion, because perception once established is quite difficult to alter.

The RPA planned to have business area communications groups whereby any trader in a particular area could come to what I believe were to be quarterly meetings. To hold meetings in Parkgate Street and to hope that traders would attend is not the way to communicate. The way to do so is to be on the street with the contractor and the RPA representatives and to talk, and to keep talking each day to the traders. There were difficulties in certain areas, but we in the Middle Abbey Street and Upper Abbey Street areas had to form our own working group. Since the start of this year we have had a regular weekly meeting with the representatives of the contractor and the RPA. In that way, business people can at least address the individual situations that occur through the day and by the week. I suspect this has not been the case in areas where we are not represented, possibly including Harcourt Street. I can speak only for the Abbey Street area. In so far as figures are concerned there is none, unless individual businesses wish to make a legal case. That is up to them. Any figures given are apocryphal. Most businesses are suffering pain but I have no figures to give the committee in support of this.

Mr. McElearney

To pick up on one of the points raised by Deputy Ryan, we believe it is necessary to join the two lines. On the metro, I would say to Deputy Glennon that we are anxious that it should get under way as soon as possible and would like to see it going to a variety of places in Dublin as well as Swords. As regards the project management of the metro, they should be digging 24 hours a day, seven days a week. On Deputy Shortall's points as regards Dublin City Council, I am alarmed at suggestions that we have fallen out with our partner, Dublin City Council. We could not possibly have a closer working relationship with the city council.

I am glad to hear that. That was not always the case.

Mr. McElearney

Let me take the Deputy through a few of the things we have done to work closer together. Mr. Tom Coffey, our chief executive, is on some of the SPCs. Dublin City Council has reorganised area management in the northside and southside and introduced public domain officers. We have restructured our street committee to reflect that. The council has formed business forums in which our members are active participants. The area managers are honorary members of our council and come to its meetings 11 times a year. My team of officers and I meet with the city manager at least four times a year to discuss various matters. We see Dublin City Council as very much our partner in everything we do. Our marketing logo contains the words, "Make the city yours". Dublin City Council is our marketing partner in that. We have raised a sum of money and the council has contributed a sum towards the promotion of business in the city centre. I cannot express how strongly we work with Dublin City Council. That is ad idem for all here.

We welcome the port tunnel and believe it is necessary to have it operational to take heavy goods vehicles off the quays. As to whether we believe there is a need for super trucks, the research made available to us varies widely. Out of 6,000 trucks a day that use the port there are 100 super trucks. Does it justify raising the height of the port tunnel to accommodate 100 trucks? We do not think so.

Are not Dublin City Business Association members saying super trucks are the way of the future?

Mr. McElearney

No, members are not saying super trucks are the way of the future. We believe capacity can be increased by lengthening the truck. One can put a trailer on a truck to accommodate as much volume. It is all very fine to raise the port tunnel but are we going to raise every other bridge in the city, too?

Does Mr. McElearney not know that? East Wall was the only one that had to be raised because of all the strikes. The limit is 5.3 metres.

Mr. McElearney

If supercube trucks go down the country, are all the bridges tall enough?

Mr. McElearney should not get caught up in smokescreens.

We will leave that for another day.

Mr. McElearney

We will leave that for another day, but the association is not in favour of raising the height of the port tunnel, nor does it support supercube trucks on the road.

The association would like to see a traffic corps and believes it is necessary. We do not have any further update from the Minister in that regard.

Could the association clarify the situation on restricted deliveries?

Mr. McElearney

I was going to deal with deliveries specifically in the reply to Senator Morrissey's question. I have covered Deputy Glennon's question on the metro. The association is 100% behind it. Will the Deputy please ask the Minister for Finance to get on with it as soon as he can? It is necessary. The association's views on this do not differ from those of the Dublin Chamber of Commerce.

As regards the association's views on project management, the port tunnel is a good example of design and build. We understand it is on budget and is ahead of schedule. Contracts should in future be awarded on a manage, design and build basis as against a plethora of contractors doing X, Y and Z. The association would like to see more park-and-ride facilities. We believe it is necessary to have large scale facilities of this kind on some of our key routes, feeding into the Arrow, the DART, the metro, the Luas or quality bus corridors. It is about accessibility and moving large numbers of people. A bus, train or Luas will carry more people than a single car.

On Senator Morrissey's question about managed deliveries, the association spent a number of years in consultation with the Garda and Dublin City Council in an effort to work out a policy on this. A current survey being undertaken by Hugh Finlay of Trinity College Dublin shows that 85% of all deliveries take place in Dublin city centre between 7 a.m. and 1 p.m. There is a difficulty in so far as we have shared usage of the road in peak times for people coming in and out of the city centre to do shopping and for deliveries. They all have to use the same road. The association believes managed deliveries must take place and that this should happen outside heavy peak times. Mr. Coffey will give the committee further details on that.

Mr. Coffey

The deliveries issue is primarily a Monday to Friday phenomenon in the city centre. The majority are between 7 a.m. and 1 p.m. or 1.30 p.m. Hardly any take place on Saturday or Sunday. Our members take deliveries between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. and it is proving workable. Some people do not want to do it, but the association has put forward its views in a position paper to Dublin City Council. We went before the strategic policy committee on traffic and it adopted the association's position. We await and look forward to its implementation because somebody has to make a decision to do it. One will not get 100% agreement for managed deliveries, but if one is in "government", one has to govern.

On that question of managed delivery, how many of the association's members will be prepared to have restrictions between 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. or from 5 a.m. to 9 a.m?

Mr. Coffey

All the members have bought into a policy, but one can have a flexible situation by having designated 24-hour loading bays. They can have parking meters in the same way as a shopper or a businessman has in a car park. There is no reason deliveries cannot be managed in certain areas. The important issue is that the law should be changed on yellow lines on certain routes into Dublin. If large numbers of people are to be taken into the city centre by bus, taxi or private car routes must be free from obstruction. We are not saying that businesses along those routes should not be allowed, but they must be managed in such a fashion as to allow customers and employees to move around. Otherwise there will not be a business. People who sell products with a long shelf-life are among the groups that do not share our views on this. The shortest shelf-life of any product is the Evening Herald. It is about four hours. Mr. Ryder’s company is a major distributor of newspapers and books. There are companies selling other products with a shelf-life of perhaps six months. There is no reason a company delivering a product with a shelf-life of six months should insist on bringing it in without any regulation in an unbridled fashion. Ultimately, there will not be 100% consensus on this and a decision will have to be made.

The witness has confirmed that his group has bought into this policy and it has been adopted by the council.

Mr. Coffey

It has yet to be implemented.

Is it the council that it is not implementing it or the council with the Garda because of, as one might say, yellow lines, clearways or whatever?

Mr. Coffey

We met in Garda headquarters in Dublin Castle. It was chaired by the chief superintendent in charge of traffic. We agreed to the policy, other groups did not agree and they remain to be convinced. The city council is trying to get them to agree and if they all agree I suppose it will happen at some stage.

What is the position of your suppliers with regard to restricted delivery times? The reason I ask is that if somebody is coming to Dublin to make a delivery, they may find that 50% of their customers are prepared to go along with the 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. or 5 a.m. to 9 a.m. deliveries while the other 50% may not. Because of the tachograph and working hours regulations two drivers may be involved and that could mean an extra cost.

Mr. Coffey

We understand that the actual efficiency in the delivery business has fallen by approximately 30% to 40% in the last few years. We believe, and we know from the people who are carrying out night-time deliveries, that one gets more deliveries done per vehicle. One's efficiency rates go up and one's costs go down. One does have to pay people overtime because if they are working at that hour of the night they have to be paid. Our members run their businesses seven days a week and almost 18 or 19 hours a day, because we have deliveries coming in at night, cleaning people coming at night, stock is done at night and the day time is for the customer. The question is really who should have priority. I can understand that a delivery company would say that they want to do it in a certain way and do not want managed deliveries, but we are retailers and our view is that the customer comes first and therefore the customer should be given priority.

I do not disagree.

The confusion in my mind is that if the witness has approved it and the city council has adopted it, why is it not happening? One talks about project management but this is a classic case where everyone agrees but nothing is happening.

Mr. Coffey

We live in a democracy and politicians will take account of people who might perhaps object to matters on occasion. Sometimes it takes a while to get people to come around, but I am quite optimistic that the city council will introduce a pilot project at least next year, 2004. I hope they will. It says it will.

On trends in shopping in Dublin, how is the witness doing as regards market share compared to the shopping centres? Is the witness holding his own or what is the position? In terms of the changes to the parking restrictions that took place last week, is that an indication that things might be slowing down a bit for the delegation?

Mr. Ryder

We have no facts, but Cork city centre has had Patrick Street dug up for approximately two and a half years; Dublin has the Luas, the port tunnel and the O'Connell Street works. I refer back to my point about the custom and the perception, which has been that it is impossible to get into the middle of Cork. If that is the perception then who has gained but the out of town, suburban shopping centres, despite there being more choice and selection in the city centre. That is an unquantified element of pain that the city centre traders are experiencing and we have to trade out of it. This marketing campaign that our members are running with the partnership of Dublin City Council is an indication of how important it is - it will be over three or four years - to persistently promote accessibility and ingress to the city centre.

As a supplementary to the managed deliveries point, it has to be looked at in the context of greater managed use of time and access down our roads. Peak shopping time is between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Everything must be geared for the retailers to be stopped before then and for them to concentrate on selling, for the services to be able to promote the fact that shoppers' cars are a real economic force and that it is easier for them to come into town, where there is plenty of space in the multi-storey car parks and there is no shortage of capacity except on Saturdays between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. We have to learn as businesses and deliverers to benefit our customers and ultimately we have to manage our time and our space on the roads more effectively.

Mr. McElearney

There were two questions posed by Deputy Ryan who has had to leave.

There is no need to lift the cap on retail warehousing. Retail warehousing in its current shape, format and size adequately meets the demands of the public. There is no need to lift it. There is a lobby group attempting to have it lifted for a sectional interest but there is no need to have it lifted. No additional retail warehouses or super warehouses should be accommodated on or adjacent to the M50 as it would create further traffic chaos.

Out of town shopping was the other part of Deputy Ryan's question. We have no difficulty with it and have always supported the need for designated shopping areas out of town, wherever they are going to designate an area for out of town retailing that would be large enough to accommodate the requirements now and at some time in the future, such as The Square. What one cannot allow is a multiplicity of them as there is no need for them. There is a need for specific regional centres and they are supported.

Is there not a need for competition? I know this is not strictly in the area of transport, but there is a need for competition; one had only to lift any newspaper in Ireland for the last month to see you are being hammered. I would not say this if representatives of the press were present, but you are being hammered as representatives of the most expensive city in Europe and with the highest margins being taken by the retail trade anywhere across Europe.

Mr. McElearney

That is on food; I believe you will find it is on food. On footwear it has dropped.

It is on food but in fashion it is the same because I know people who will tell you that they can buy their "Levis" or "Tommy Hilfiger" or anything else in New York for a fraction of the price and will tell you that the source is the same. I am saying this now because I would not say it if the press were present as it would be wrong.

Mr. Coffey

The prices in the city centre, excluding the American brands, are now 15% to 20% cheaper than they were before we joined the euro as the majority of the retailers in the city centre who are Irish are using the euro as their supply chain and avoiding all the currency charges. The American brands are a decision that was made in the EU where there was a case as you know some years ago to allow the American brands to be bought and sold in Europe at the same price as America. Now you know as well as I do that they are cheaper in the United States than they are here. The Americans have divided the world into three continental groups for their prices. We have become the victims of this and we have very little control over it. If the EU had not made that decision we would be selling these products much cheaper.

Mr. McElearney

One other point, the managing director of one of the large department stores in the city centre and throughout Ireland, whom I met recently, gave me a story on how competitive they were. Their own brand of jeans were available in their shop seven years ago when the cost was approximately €14. That same pair of jeans, which they say is a better make and of better quality, is available today at €5.

On behalf of the committee I thank Mr. McElearney, Mr. Coffey and Mr. Ryder for coming. I apologise that you had to sit around for so long before making your submission but we have a rule here that every member is entitled to put questions to the delegations before the committee. If at any stage you would like to make a submission to the committee, you can send it to the Clerk of the committee. We appreciate the brevity of the presentation and responses because there was the danger of a vote interrupting the presentation.

Mr. McElearney

I thank the Chairman for the invitation offering the opportunity to address the committee.

The joint committee adjourned at 5 p.m.,sine die.
Top
Share