JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT debate -
Wednesday, 24 Sep 2008

Parking Facilities: Discussion with Iarnród Éireann.

Vice Chairman

Now we have the representatives of Iarnród Éireann. I draw attention to the fact that while Members of the Oireachtas and the committee have absolute privilege, the same does not apply to witnesses attending the committee. Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The next item on the agenda is the discussion with Mr. Dick Fearn, chief executive of Iarnród Éireann, and his colleagues Mr. Barry Kenny, manager corporate communications, and Mr. Niall Grogan, CIE group property manager. All three are most welcome. I understand Mr. Fearn has a short presentation.

Mr. Dick Fearn

Thank you. I distributed to the committee a short presentation and I will go through the key points. I thank the Committee for this opportunity to discuss our introduction of pay-and-display parking at the Iarnród Éireann station car parks. We have introduced the policy so far at DART stations and those on the northern commuter line, which runs from Connolly Station to Drogheda and Dundalk. We will go forward with further implementation on our north western line, which is the Sligo line out to Maynooth and Longford, the south western commuter line from Heuston Station to Kildare, Carlow, Portlaoise, and Athlone, and the south eastern line to Gorey and Rosslare, although the commuter business is primarily through Wicklow, Arklow and Gorey.

So far, 37 stations in that area have car parking facilities, comprising a total of 5,000 spaces. It is a high demand area for commuter services and car parking stations. We have a major programme to expand that car parking and we plan to do that over a period of time to meet the increasing demand for such facilities. In total we plan more than 13,000 additional car parking spaces. This is not a marginal but a very substantial increase around our network. Whereas we get very substantial capital support through Transport 21 for many of our investments, we must contribute to the funding of these facilities and to the upkeep, maintenance and general management of our station car parks. For this reason Iarnród Éireann, within CIE, decided we should introduce car parking charges in the commuter area. In doing so, we were mindful of the need to set parking rates at nominal levels in order to ensure the overall cost of commuting by rail maintained its significant competitive advantage over commuting by private car. The parking charge introduced at our stations has been set at €2 per day or €8 per week as an incentive to regular commuters. In response to customer demand, a monthly rate of €30 will also be introduced shortly, offering even greater discounts. These rates compare extremely favourably with car parking charges at other public transport facilities, on-street parking charges in Dublin or other towns in the Leinster area. I have submitted a table showing a broad range of competitive charges. In south County Dublin several railway car parks are controlled by the local authority, the charges at which vary between €3 and €5 per day with no weekly or monthly discounts. Iarnród Éireann is offering better value. The Luas service has several park-and-ride facilities with charges at €4 per day with no weekly discount. At some sites the charges are per hour which mount up to significantly greater than the charges we are making.

Pay and display parking has been introduced at our stations on the northern line from 1 September and the DART line from 15 September. Pay and display parking will be rolled out across the rest of the commuter network through October and November. In addition, pay and display parking will be introduced at several intercity locations in December and on the new Cork-Midleton line and new Cork commuter stations in 2009. Pay and display parking will be managed at these locations by Nationwide Controlled Parking Systems, NCPS, on behalf of larnród Eireann and CIE. Disabled users will be exempt from charges.

There was pay and display parking already at stations such as Leixlip Louisa Bridge and Sallins. The introduction of pay parking at Leixlip Louisa Bridge, for example, resulted in a greater propensity of spaces being used by commuters from further afield. Commuters living in close proximity who got into the habit of driving to the station are now less likely to do so. This has freed up many spaces. A rough survey of users of the parking facility showed many were coming from Clane, Dunboyne and other areas of counties Kildare and Meath not directly connected to the rail network. This has freed up parking spaces for those who most need them and who are gaining a real added advantage to gain access to the rail network. Our enhancement and expansion of these car parks will give even more capacity accordingly and, without going through every single station, I have set out in the paper a series of locations where in the next few months work will be under way to expand the level of car parking. The committee will see set out in the paper the dates of our implementation programme. We have already implemented it at several stations and we have found so far a very high level of compliance. The introduction to date has been successful.

Vice Chairman

Everyone wants to speak and ask questions. I propose to ask Deputy O'Dowd to speak first and then Deputy Broughan. After that I will return to the three remaining members.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I thank Mr. Fearn and his colleagues for coming today. I requested their attendance and I have several questions. The first question for Mr. Fearn is: did he consult any rail users before introducing these charges? Was there any consultation process?

Vice Chairman

Perhaps the Deputy could ask all his questions at once.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

In his commentary Mr. Fearn referred to the upkeep, maintenance and management of the car parks and these costs were one of the reasons he introduced this charge. It is certain that at the stations in Drogheda and Laytown there is nothing to manage. There is a roadway and a space that was always there. The company has not invested or added value in Drogheda station, for example. The company is not spending money there and never has. This might be deemed a rip-off of consumers who have no choice except to use the car park. The company is adding no value by introducing this charge. This is a cynical money-grab by the organisation. No works have been commenced. The company says it will improve and provide more car parking spaces in these stations. However, the company has done no work and does not have planning permission. Therefore, any moneys the company acquires cannot be used for a considerable period of time for the purposes for which it says it is necessary.

Since the chief executive is employing NCP, or whatever it is called, to do the work of policing the car parks, the moneys received are being used to pay these people to do this work with very little profit for Iarnród Éireann. If and when the company builds multistorey car parks, the cost per space to maintain that investment will be extremely high. It will cost a good deal more to park at the railway stations than is proposed at present. I am concerned about the way this was been done, that it is a rip-off, that the company has not consulted, that it has not done any work or added any value.

Several issues have arisen regarding the money people pay. One point made at the time of the introduction of these charges — I believe it was this company but I am not sure and perhaps Mr. Kenny can respond to this issue, which was in the media anyway — was that they could be included in the tax saver system. It may not have been Mr. Kenny but the idea was that the money the consumer pays for using the company's car park could be used as part of the tax saver system. Has the company approached the Minister for Finance to make that change? Does the company agree it would be much more equitable if such charges that consumers must pay were included? We are discussing regular weekly, monthly and annual commuters and such a system will at least bring some relief to commuters.

The company initially introduced pay parking in Gormanstown last year. It involved — I believe nobody disagreed with this — a new, secure car park with CCTV systems and there was greater security. The company introduced a charge of €2 per day and, in fairness to the company, €5 per week. People paid that because they believed it was fair. The company has seen fit to raise that charge from €5 to €8 per week and God knows what else it will be. I accept the company has made many improvements to the rail system and I know it is aware of and alert to commuter needs. However, the company has broken faith with many commuters who see this as money grabbing. If the company consulted and the charge was more reasonable with discounts for weekly, monthly or annual commuters, it would be much more sensible and much more acceptable. There are four weeks in a month and eight fours are 32, so the monthly discount is €2. Is that right? That is a paltry discount. I have looked at what happens in other jurisdictions, in the United States and so on, and there are much more significant reductions, in particular quarterly reductions for commuters.

Another point is where car parking spaces are allocated. The company must provide car parking space for employees, and I have no difficulty with that. However, sometimes the staff car parks are in the prime position and nearest to the entrance to the railway station. Perhaps that could be looked at because if people are working all day they may not need to be as near as some commuters have to be, particularly those who arrive late.

This has been introduced without proper consultation, but with service providers such as Bus Éireann. I agree that if people have used their cars to get to the railway station and have a choice they will walk. That is good and there is nothing wrong with that. However, in most country areas where people have no choice there is no public transport alternative. Have CIE and Iarnród Éireann sought any response from Bus Éireann or other private providers regarding a bus commuter service to the railway stations? This would make much more sense. Walking or cycling to work if one can is the fundamental objective. The commuters I am talking about have no choice and they feel they are totally ripped off by the company. What has been done is entirely wrong.

I thank the delegation for their time here. In their submission they refer to different charges, including some in County Kildare and also how cheap their company is when one compares car parking in Drogheda. However, on rail fares, a point I have made before is that if one considers what the commuter pays in Drogheda, Laytown or Dundalk, compared to what they pay on the other side of Balbriggan — the distance between Drogheda and Balbriggan is about one third of the distance between Drogheda and Dublin — the fares are double. A day return in Drogheda is €16.40 versus €7.30 from Balbriggan. Monthly fares are €175 versus €103. The company is ripping off commuters in the fares already there and the delegation has not addressed that issue. The last time the company sent a delegation here, they undertook to look at this issue, but the fact is that once they pass Balbriggan, commuters pay a hell of a lot more, in some cases almost double what others are paying. There is no equity or fairness in that.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I also welcome Mr. Fearn, Mr. Kenny and Mr. Grogan. Did they consult the Department of Transport or the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on the introduction of these charges? It seems that the objective of the Minister and the Department is to get a modal shift away from cars into public transport, including trains. The company received a huge tranche of funding under T21 for that purpose, and it seems to have introduced a policy which goes against the grain of what the Department of Transport would want. People have asked me if these charges will be regulated. Who do we turn to for regulation? The Minister is effectively the regulator, but will the DTA, be involved in this?

The fear everybody has is that it is €8 now; will it be €10, €12 or €20? Would the delegation agree that the introduction of these charges at so many stations has been a PR disaster for Irish Rail given that it had received much commendation and credit for the introduction of new rolling stock, the Sligo line and so on? I sampled some of the new trains over the summer holidays. All the good publicity has been wiped out at one stroke because everywhere rail users seem to be very angry.

The headline on the current edition of Rail Users Ireland is “Park and be taken for a ride”. It clearly sees the charges as an additional stealth tax of €500 on top of the cost of the rail ticket, which is grotesquely unfair. Even at this stage, is this not something that should be reconsidered and reversed by Iarnród Éireann? Another Government would certainly look at reversing it because people are so angry about it.

I note that comparisons have been made with various other parking centres. It seems ludicrous to include car parks in central Dublin. Surely the whole purpose of having car parks and their penal parking rates of €2.70 per hour is to ensure people travel by bus or train; therefore, I do not see the logic. Together with my Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil colleagues, we have all received many emails from irate people, in my own case in the Portmarnock area, from locations along the DART line. People from Portarlington are complaining about poor levels of service, in addition to this extra tax whammy as they see it. Many are asking why there is not more integration with bus services, perhaps using feeder buses to enable people from outlying towns to access rail services. Clarke Station in Dundalk is a case in point. There should be some system whereby the necessity for such charges would be obviated. In general, this has been a public relations disaster for the company. It has wiped out much of the credit Iarnród Éireann was gaining from Transport 21. I would like the company to re-examine the matter.

As regards the revenue involved, Iarnród Éireann is getting €1 million, while National Control Parking Systems is getting €2 million. Is that the actual breakdown of revenue? It represents less than 1% of Irish Rail's revenue. Therefore, is it worth all the grief and hassle which we are now enduring? There are also negative impacts for those who might be prepared to do a modal switch.

In the past I was critical because Iarnród Rail had so many opportunities with local authorities, for example in Dublin, to develop major park and ride facilities to expand greatly DART use in places such as Raheny and Howth Junction in my constituency. However, the company never bothered to take any of these initiatives, yet we now have this roll-out which leaves a sour taste in commuters' mouths.

Mr. Dick Fearn

Many questions have been raised and I will try to handle them with the assistance of my colleagues. I will come to my colleague, Mr. Grogan, concerning the precise arrangements with the contractor and the issue of how much money we get and how much the contractor gets. Mr. Grogan will be able to help us in that regard.

First, I will deal with the issue of consultation. We advised our user groups, the people with whom we regularly discuss our services, that it was our intention to introduce car parking charges. We advised them in advance of doing so and why we were introducing the policy and how in the current——

Vice Chairman

To whom did Mr. Fearn talk?

Mr. Dick Fearn

We have a series of what are known as commuter user groups which tend to be station or route-based. It is a good policy, as we like to have direct communication with our passengers and this is the way we can do so. Increasingly each year, more user groups are being formed and the dialogue is constructive. We understood one of their objectives was to see better and increased numbers of car parking spaces, as well as better car parks, improvements in lighting, security and marking. As I said in my statement, we have a substantial programme around the network. It is by no means complete. It has not even been started at some stations, but will be. It is an ongoing programme. As I mentioned, we have many proposals at stations to do this.

We advised user groups, representatives of our customers, that we intended to charge for parking and that in the current funding environment such charges would help us proceed with the policy of providing better car parking facilities. I believe that was an appropriate decision.

I was asked where the decision had been made and who had made it. We made the decision with the support of the board of Iarnród Éireann. Like any other owner of property, it is our responsibility to decide how we will use that property to the best benefit of our business.

It is only a relatively small proportion of customers who use an individual station who bring their cars to it. At some stations it would be as low as a single percentage figure — up to10%. At other stations it might be more — up to 20%. At no station would a majority of passengers park their cars there. Therefore, the passengers who choose to do so are gaining an extra benefit and service. Through this nominal charge we are reflecting the fact that they are gaining an extra service and we will invest in improving it. As a result, we are adding value. At some car parks the physical manifestation of that added value — new lighting, new spaces and new security system — is not yet visible, but it will be. It is part of our overall policy to do so.

We talk to bus operators about having bus connections to stations. Across the network we have a number of such rail-bus connections, although they are not hugely successful. They operate punctually and normally connect well with train services. They are not growing, unlike use of the service and car parking facilities. In investing in our car parks and charging a nominal fee for that service we are reflecting what the customer demonstrates by his or her actions what he or she is looking for.

On the issue of the tax saver and perhaps including the charge in the monthly charge, we spoke to other parties. As regards the Luas, there is a parking fee which is included in the cost of a season ticket. The cost of parking is exempt from the tax saver ticket. The Department of Finance has not included the parking fee within the cost of the Luas tax saver ticket. We have decided that the best way to manage this is through a contract, the basis of which is that the contractor will work on the appropriate criteria we have set out.

Reference was made to the position in other jurisdictions. We would be at the extreme lower end of the charges league compared to anything else with which I am familiar in this jurisdiction and the jurisdiction across the water.

Vice Chairman

How costly is the contractor?

Mr. Dick Fearn

I will ask Mr. Grogan to provide information on the contracting arrangements.

Mr. Niall Grogan

We engaged in a competitive tender process in respect of the management of car parks. We received applications from all the major companies involved in car park management.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Was it a public tender process or did it involve people who already worked with Iarnród Éireann?

Mr. Niall Grogan

It was a public tender process, the first part of which involved suitable applicants applying to be included in our list. We then went back to the list during our management process.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

If one did not make it on to the first list, one could not apply for the second.

Mr. Niall Grogan

Correct.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Therefore, it was not totally public. I am not being critical.

Mr. Niall Grogan

It was totally public.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

What was the timescale involved between the two?

Mr. Niall Grogan

Less than 18 months.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

It was at least a year.

Mr. Niall Grogan

It would have been, but I am not saying it was. I cannot be exact.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Mr. Grogan stated it was 18 months.

Mr. Niall Grogan

I cannot be exact.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Mr. Grogan said it was 18 months.

Mr. Niall Grogan

I cannot give the Deputy an exact answer.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

The advertisement could be placed today and I could go on the list but then it could be at least a year — Mr. Grogan said 18 months — before the company approaches those people and picks one of them based on the objective criteria.

Mr. Niall Grogan

We did not go to those people and pick one of them.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I did not say the company did.

Mr. Niall Grogan

We asked them to tender.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

The company asked only people who a year earlier said they might be interested.

Mr. Niall Grogan

It is possibly that timeframe.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Was the first tender placed in the European journal and so on?

Mr. Niall Grogan

Yes.

Mr. Dick Fearn

It is normal for all our contracts that go through the European journal and open procurement to prequalify because people often apply who cannot meet the criteria. We prequalify and then we go to the full tender process, which is normal.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Is it similar to metro north for which there are first and second tenders?

Mr. Dick Fearn

It is a prequalification and then it is out to tender. It is a normal arrangement in all EU procurement processes.

Mr. Niall Grogan

We have been through a competitive process and, naturally, the cost is a large element in the decision and the recommendation on who is the contractor. I will not discuss the cost because it is a confidential matter and we will tender this again in due course. However, I can confirm the figures that have been mentioned at this meeting are nowhere near the mark. The lion's share of the money will go to Iarnród Éireann.

Vice Chairman

Is it 50%?

Mr. Niall Grogan

A greater proportion of the money will go on payment of VAT. That will mark it for the committee.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

The taxpayer is giving Mr. Grogan a subsidy to run his organisation. It is not acceptable that he cannot be transparent with us regarding this contract.

Mr. Dick Fearn

We have a competitive tender process and, at a point, as with all our contracts, we retender to obtain best value. One cannot stay with a single contractor forever and, therefore, one retenders. If we discuss monetary terms, we will not maintain an open competition. However, as Mr. Grogan said, a greater percentage of the money will go on VAT than will go to the contractor.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I acknowledge what Mr. Fearn said. However, where State agencies are involved which are subject to the Freedom of Information Act — I know Iarnród Éireann is not — the normal process is that only information relating to the successful tender is put in the public domain. It would be right and proper for the company to put this information in the public domain. The taxpayer is entitled to this, as are the commuters paying the fees in the car parks. I do not suggest there is anything illegal about what the company is doing but the public service culture demands that the company would do that.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I do not totally agree with Deputy O'Dowd. Iarnród Éireann is a State body but it is also a commercial company. The State will increase rather than decrease the number of commercial companies, given the current unbelievable financial crisis and disgraceful events that we have had to endure over the past number of weeks in the banking sector. Such bodies must operate commercially. However, we should know the amount of revenue this scheme will generate. It will appear eventually in the company's annual report for this year.

Mr. Dick Fearn

We have given information about our charges and the number of spaces we intend to provide and we have indicated that the money we are paying the contractor to manage this is a relatively small percentage of the total revenue. As well as VAT, a substantial amount of the revenue will be taken in by the company to be reinvested in car parks.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Hard pressed commuters would like to know whether all the money raised by the company will be invested in parking facilities. Is it hypothecated or can it be utilised to plug a gap somewhere else?

Mr. Dick Fearn

This year, next year and each year throughout our expansion programme we will spend more in expanding and enhancing these car parks than we will earn in revenue. We get grants for our capital investment but we need more funding to carry out this expansion programme in the way we are going to carry it out. This helps us fund it. It is only part of the funding. I can reassure the committee in that regard.

Deputy Áine Brady

While I welcome the huge expansion of car parking facilities in Leixlip at Hazel Hatch, Louisa Bridge and in Sallins, I am disappointed at the charges being introduced when we are trying to encourage more people to use public transport. At Louisa Bridge the weekly charge has been increased from €5 to €8. When Mr. Fearn spoke about the changes at Louisa Bridge he pointed out that commuters living near the railway station tend not to use the car park. However, it is unfortunate that we are not giving rail users the great incentive of the €5 weekly charge. People from Clane, including me, use Louisa Bridge station because it is impossible to find parking spaces at Maynooth. I am sure the management of Iarnród Éireann is aware of the many representations I have made regarding Maynooth, which I know is a very difficult one as the Maynooth train station is boxed in by housing development. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to look at Maynooth. With the electrification of the Maynooth line will come extra passengers and an increased requirement for park and ride.

Will the extra revenue from the increased parking charges be ring-fenced for extra park and ride facilities? Has Iarnród Éireann noticed an increase in the number of commuters using Louisa Bridge and Hazel Hatch stations where there are greatly improved parking facilities? Mr. Fearn has told us there is extra use by people who live a distance from the stations, which is good and significant, but is there an overall increase in commuter numbers at those stations?

Is Iarnród Éireann in regular contact with local authorities with regard to providing designated park and ride facilities at train stations?

Deputy Michael Kennedy

I was disappointed when Iarnród Éireann introduced parking charges, particularly in the current context when we are succeeding, to a reasonable degree, in getting people to use public transport. Like my colleagues, I am told by commuters that they were disappointed when charges were introduced.

How soon will the income from parking charges be reinvested in upgrading car parks? I refer particularly to the car parks in my constituency of Dublin North, most of which are substandard and severely lacking in capacity. I would be concerned to learn that the income from parking charges, as well as grants, was not spent on upgrading car parks. There is a major problem, particularly at Portmarnock, Donabate, Rush and Lusk stations. Balbriggan, Skerries and Malahide also need improvement. There are major capacity problems at all of those stations.

I am particularly disappointed by the speed of the upgrade. I instance Rush-Lusk where planning permission was obtained for another 156 spaces and now the company is submitting a new application to Fingal County Council in respect of the same land. I do not understand the reason for this because there does not seem to be much difference between the original planning application and the current one. I am particularly disappointed with the charging structure and this is the reason I am demanding an instant increase in capacity and facilities and the operation of CCTV. The Portmarnock land was given free of charge to the company by Fingal County Council, although Mr. Fearn may not be aware of this, as he was not in Iarnród Éireann at the time. I was a member of the county council at the time and remember having the so-called pleasure of passing the motion to give the land for the purposes of parking. We need to provide capacity as quickly as possible. Customers are disgruntled at having to pay. It is not possible to walk to the station in areas such as Rush and Lusk and there is no bus service. Both stations are far removed from the towns. Because people are unable to find a car space, they are parking in ditches and ploughed fields and dumping their cars in order that they can jump on the train. I wish to make this point as forcefully as I can.

There is a need for public representatives, Iarnród Éireann, Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann and the Luas company to make a strong case to the Minister for Finance and the Revenue Commissioners on the taxation issue and monthly tickets. There is no point in the company referring to the deal it has concluded with the parking management company with regard to how their fees and those of Luas are extracted. If people are prepared to buy a monthly or an annual ticket and they can obtain tax relief on their rail fares, it should also include the parking fee. I suggest the committee make this an issue.

Could some of the parking spaces in the existing car parks be reserved for those who buy their weekly or monthly tickets up front? I have received communications from people expressing their exasperation that having paid their weekly fee of €8 or the monthly charge, they are unable to find a parking space at the station and have to dump their the car in a ditch. I suggest there should be reserved spaces for those who prepay, as this would lessen the public's frustration.

Deputy Frank Feighan

I thank Mr. Fearn, Mr. Grogan and Mr. Kenny for their attendance. I congratulate them on Iarnród Éireann's achievement on the Sligo line because for many years there were complaints and arguments on radio stations about it. The service is a tribute to the investment and work the company has put into the line.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

It is a case of good government. A lot of money has gone into Transport 21.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Will the Deputy be saying that in three weeks' time?

Deputy Michael Kennedy

Deputy Feighan is not giving back that new, beautiful train but I would take it on the northern line if he does not want it.

Deputy Frank Feighan

Unfortunately, it is 25 years too late——

Deputy Michael Kennedy

In Dublin North and Deputy O'Dowd's area.

Deputy Frank Feighan

I remember having to come to Dublin in 1991 dressed as a ghost as a way of describing the service on the Sligo line at the time. I acknowledge both the European funding and Government funding which has been provided at last. I was somewhat upset by the introduction of parking fines along the northern route and hope they will not be generally introduced throughout the country, as they detract from the good work Iarnród Éireann has done. Perhaps the company will discuss such matters with the members of the committee to try to iron out any difficulties in this regard. As politicians, we represent our constituents who are Iarnród Éireann's customers. This meeting is useful in that context.

I ask the Vice Chairman to indulge me as I mention another issue.

Vice Chairman

The Deputy should not go too far astray.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

Save the railways.

Deputy Frank Feighan

The western rail corridor, Ireland's newest railway line, will connect the gateways of Sligo, Galway, Limerick and Cork. Commuter routes will also be developed along the corridor. We are anxious to ensure services are delivered in a real and positive manner. There needs to be seven or eight services a day, with short journey times, on the line. The services will have to be promoted sufficiently, as Iarnród Éireann needs to demonstrate that it is dedicated to the line. The western rail corridor needs to be one of the company's top priorities. It is a significant and admirable aspect of regional development in the west.

Deputy John O’Mahony

I support Deputy Feighan's comments about the development of the western rail corridor. It is a significant project for the west.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I would like to return to a few points made earlier. When the parking charge of €5 a week was initially imposed at Gormanston, people accepted that it represented a genuine attempt by Iarnród Éireann to offer a discount to regular commuters. While people objected to the fee in principle, they accepted the bona fides of the company. As I said, commuters believe the proposal to increase the charge to €8 is no more than an attempt to grab money from them. I am worried that the charge will be raised further as time passes and costs increase. I acknowledge that Iarnród Éireann has stated the amount it will spend on upgrading facilities at the station will be more than the amount it receives from this charge. Nevertheless, the company is using the charge as a source of income. Will Iarnród Éireann assure the committee that it will stick to its word? How can the increases which will be imposed be benchmarked? It seems the increase will happen anyway. I am worried about the company's credibility and integrity in that respect.

I would like to raise another matter.

Chairman

The Deputy should be brief.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I asked for the issue in question to be raised at the committee on previous occasions. I want to get it off my chest in the presence of the representatives of Iarnród Éireann.

Vice Chairman

The Deputy is doing well.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I do not think I am. I have just started.

Deputy Frank Feighan

There is not much more left.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

There is a lot more left. Does Iarnród Éireann pay commercial rates on its properties? I do not know whether it does. If that is the case, will the rates levels in those places where charges are being imposed have to be re-evaluated? Will that be an extra cost on the company? Will such additional expenses be recouped in the form of increased parking charges?

I am interested in the advertisements published by Iarnród Éireann before it reaches deals with companies such as Nationwide Controlled Parking Systems. How many companies are shortlisted before one is chosen? How can Iarnród Éireann be sure a cartel is not operating in this sector? I am not suggesting there is a cartel. I do not know how many companies are usually involved in the process, but how can Iarnród Éireann be sure they do not fix a price between them in advance of that process? How does it benchmark the price it is charged? I acknowledge that its officials will not answer that question and I am angry about it. How does it know that it is getting good value for money within the limited group of shortlisted companies? How does it know what happens in the time that elapses between Iarnród Éireann writing to all the companies which operate in this sector and some of those companies being put on the list?

Vice Chairman

All the questions have been asked. I ask Mr. Fearn to respond to them.

Mr. Dick Fearn

Many questions have been asked. I will ask my colleague, Mr. Grogan, to answer the specific questions relating to commercial rates, the properties in Rush and Lusk and the competitiveness of the tender process. My other colleague, Mr. Kenny, has a good local knowledge of some of the specific questions Deputy Brady asked about the Maynooth line. I will ask him to answer those questions.

There was a general theme to a number of the earlier questions, especially from Deputy Áine Brady and Deputy Kennedy, which was the need for capacity and improvement, whether we will ensure all the money goes in the right direction and that we are doing the right thing. My commitment to the committee is "absolutely yes". That is why we are doing it. We are doing it because our customers have made it clear to us that improving and expanding our car parks is a key part of customer service. When we opened the new car park at Leixlip Louisa Bridge well in advance of this more general policy of paid parking, in the first year we saw a 20% growth in the number of passengers travelling from that station. The very fact that we had a high quality car park, albeit with a charge, attracted people to use the service. We believe that as we work through the network and the policy, such will be the case generally. That is the main argument that underpins what we are doing.

In implementing the policy we have had to make some specific decisions. We have decided that the weekly charge should be €8. We felt that was a fair charge with an in-built discount compared with paying every day in recognition that large numbers of users are weekly. There is a simplicity to it because one does not have to find change for the machine every day. Customers have asked whether they can pay per month. There is a modest discount also for a month given that a typical month is longer than four weeks. There is a simplicity and benefit to the system that enables people to pay one charge up front. We are doing this to benefit the customers in the long term with better car parks and to provide the funding to enable us to do that. That is why we have put the policy in place and set the charges accordingly.

I will ask Mr. Grogan to help out with one or two specific questions on Rush and Lusk and the commercial rates and competitive arrangements.

Mr. Niall Grogan

In response to Deputy Kennedy's questions on Rush and Lusk, we had a planning application for a number of car parking spaces. To achieve the extension, we bought land with some houses. An issue arose regarding a house in the middle of the area where we wanted to expand the car park. Having bought it, we can provide more spaces and it makes sense to submit another planning application. We would love to go ahead with it straight away but we must lodge a planning application.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

Will Iarnród Éireann be able to remove certain unauthorised inhabitants from down there?

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

They are gone.

Vice Chairman

We are dealing with answers only. We cannot have any more questions. I will wind up the discussion in five minutes.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

The houses were demolished yesterday.

Vice Chairman

What about rates?

Mr. Niall Grogan

We pay rates.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

Are spaces being reserved for prepaid customers?

Mr. Dick Fearn

That would be very difficult to manage. People choose their own daily arrangement. Some people book a weekly ticket and pay €8 but then do not park every day because it is simpler for them to do so. Other people choose different times because, increasingly, they work flexible hours. Other people may not drive to their local car park but go to another one because they like the train service from a particular station. It would be very difficult for us to have reserved spaces going unused while other people were looking for spaces. We will not offer a facility for reserved spaces but we are committed to offering more spaces overall so that, increasingly, we will be able to accommodate all those who want to park. That is the general philosophy.

Mr. Barry Kenny

As a former constituent of Deputy Áine Brady, I am familiar with the Maynooth area. We have examined a number of issues there and we had an option for a multi-storey car park on the narrow existing land bank we have. It was apparent from early on that there would be significant planning difficulties with that as the residents of Silken Vale, who are adjacent to the area, would have been a significant issue. We are aware the local authority was looking at the Harbour Field and possible underground facilities in that area.

Mr. Grogan's department is engaged in consultation regarding a site adjacent to Tesco that will soon be required. If we were to pursue that option, it would require the co-operation of Kildare County Council, which has been excellent in terms of car-park developments, such as that at Louisa Bridge. Such co-operation is required simply because issues associated with a proper canal side walkway, lighting, and so on would have to be resolved. We consider all opportunities as they arise because we simply do not have land in certain areas and need to enter partnerships.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

I want to know the timescale for the Portmarnock development.

Vice Chairman

I have been very flexible and we have discussed the subject thoroughly.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

I asked a question about the timescale for the extension at Portmarnock, Rush and Donabate.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

How does one know one is getting a good deal when there is a confined list? How does one test value for money given the closed competition at the end?

Mr. Niall Grogan

I do not agree with the point on closed competition. There was a competition and we invited qualified contractors.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

How many?

Mr. Niall Grogan

I would say there were in the region of five.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

How does Mr. Grogan know value for money is being obtained from the winning contractor?

Mr. Niall Grogan

We set our criteria and ask the contractors to tender in accordance with our corporate governance guidelines and the rules of the Department of Finance and the European Union. We are following the book in the tender process. We must all follow the rules and cannot do otherwise. We obtain very good value for money and had a very competitive process, which I know because the bids on the tender were significantly at variance with one another.

Vice Chairman

On that optimistic note, I must adjourn the meeting.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

What is the timescale?

Mr. Barry Kenny

I do not have the precise answer. In Donabate, temporary planning permission was granted and we are seeking permanent planning permission. I do not have a timescale but can contact the Deputy directly on the matter. Rush and Lusk are subject to the revised planning rules.

Deputy Michael Kennedy

What about Portmarnock?

Mr. Niall Grogan

On Portmarnock, we have an arrangement with the developer on the adjoining site. It was a condition in his planning permission, which was very helpful.

Vice Chairman

I thank the delegates. We have had a very good meeting. The constituents that contacted us were not happy about the charge. A good job is being done in respect of rail travel itself and it must continue to be done because it is very important.