On behalf of the committee I welcome Dr. John Lynch, Mr. Dick Fearn and Mr. Barry Kenny from Iarnród Éireann. I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that members have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. We could nearly have the witnesses before the committee on a full-time basis at the rate we are going.
Rail Network: Discussion with Iarnród Éireann.
Dr. John Lynch
I wish there were attendance payments and things would be grand.
I invite the witnesses to make their presentation and there will be questions and answers afterwards.
Dr. Lynch is paid €210,000 per year to come here.
Dr. John Lynch
I am not complaining. I thank the committee for the invitation to discuss the Malahide viaduct, the Rosslare to Waterford line and the investment programme for rail infrastructure.
By way of introduction, I wish to point out that Iarnród Éireann has been transformed since 1999. In many respects the railway is unrecognisable from that time and the management team has succeeded in overseeing a massive development programme, with improvement in efficiencies and productivity and also in service expansion. Our infrastructure investment programme has encompassed safety-critical renewal of existing infrastructure and development of new infrastructure and has been complemented by a record programme of fleet investment and station improvements. The period 1999-2009, inclusive, saw measures to address safety, comprising 534 miles of track renewal which, in ten years, is more than has occurred since the foundation of the State. Some 889 level crossings have been closed or upgraded. This was important in order to reduce risk significantly and works out to be about 90 crossings per annum. There have been signal upgrades across the radial network. Two hundred and thirty bridges or other structures have been upgraded or renewed, some 23 per year, and there was associated safety investment on train radio systems, cuttings, embankments, safety management systems and training, among others.
This represents a total investment of €1.17 million in safety investment alone, from a total of €2.7 million. An independent assessment under the Government value for money programme and policy review initiative identifies that programme objectives were met and safety and value for money goals achieved. Furthermore, networking infrastructure enhancement has been delivered, increasing the capacity of the network and opening new lines. This included upgrading the DART, increasing its capacity by 100% since 2004 and improving accessibility. Heuston Station was upgraded together with an important project called the Kildare route project for tracking, namely, to enable the faster trains going to Cork, Waterford and Galway and also allow for commuter services. We have a new dockland station which has allowed for increased frequency from Clonsilla and will facilitate the Dunboyne commuter services which opened this year and the Cork-Midleton commuter line which commenced in July 2009. The first phase of the western rail corridor was launched recently, joining Limerick and Galway. In addition, we have 14 new stations and improvements in accessibility and car park investment in dozens of stations.
Our infrastructure investment programme has been complemented by fleet renewal and fleet maintenance investment which has seen our inter-city fleet transformed from the oldest in western Europe to the newest, with quality, comfort and frequency improvements on many routes. We have doubled the DART fleet, increasing its dedicated commuter fleet from 44 carriages to 180. We were into decentralisation long before it ever became popular, with maintenance facilities in Drogheda and Portlaoise.
The total investment of this programme over ten years was €2.7 million, roughly one ninth of the money required for Anglo Irish Bank at present. That programme was delivered at €40 million under budget. The investment continues, with major projects such as the DART underground which will connect Connolly and Heuston Stations and continue to Inchicore with stations along the route. This means that electrification can be started on most of the Dublin and outside Dublin network for the future.
We also have had to increase city centre signalling to allow greater frequencies go through the centre of the city. The extension of the DART network to the northern line, the Maynooth line and Hazelhatch, and Clonsilla to Dunboyne, will be completed by September. The Transport 21 programme asks for the delivery of phase 2 of the western rail corridor, to Tuam. The third five-year rail safety programme encompasses further investment in infrastructure as well as safety management systems.
I shall move to the issue of the Malahide Viaduct. As I said, there is a constant thread throughout our infrastructure investment programme, namely, safety. This illustrates, as do a range of key safety indicators, that our safety standards have improved in a continuous way and that rail remains the safest mode of land-based transport in the country, as it is internationally. The nature of safety is such that we can never identify the accidents prevented over the years. However, because of this programme of work, undoubtedly this has been achieved.
We are all fully aware, however, of the major accident which occurred on 21 August 2009 and the major tragedy avoided is due in no small part to our driver, Keith Farrelly, our signalman, Andrew Penrose and the colleagues and trainers who assisted them in their careers. Iarnród Éireann immediately established an investigation into this accident. As is the goal of all accident investigations, internal and external, our purpose was to establish the facts of the accident and identify actions necessary to ensure that such accidents would not occur again.
Our accident investigation was independently chaired by Mr. John Buxton, a UK-based chartered engineer who specialises in structural issues. It also drew on the expertise in hydrology in UCC, headed by Professor Eamon McKeown. As required by statute, our accident investigation was completed within six months of the accident. It is then required to be forwarded to the rail accident investigation unit and the Rail Safety Commission. We did this on 19 February. The rail accident investigation unit will now undertake an independent investigation which will be completed on 21 August 2010. It will consider the evidence of the Iarnród Éireann investigation as well as any other primary or secondary evidence it deems necessary as being relevant to the accident.
Whereas internationally in rail and air accidents it is standard practice that only the independent authorities' accident report is made available publicly, over many years Iarnród Éireann has a policy that key findings, conclusions and recommendations of reports of major accidents are made available to the public. I have attached our published summary to this statement but will summarise the key findings. The primary finding of the accident investigation is that the nature of the structure of the Malahide Viaduct and the crucial role of the causeway was no longer appreciated by those in Iarnród Éireann responsible for its maintenance. This occurred in large part due to the changed maintenance procedures which resulted from grouting on the causeway, undertaken in 1967, which engineers of the time felt would give the causeway long-term protection from scour. Climatic, oceanographic and hydrological changes over the decades have increased the hydraulic head and hence the effective erosion in the waterway flowing in, and, more especially, out of the Broadmeadow Estuary over the causeway weir.
Although the report from the sea scout leader on Monday 17 August was responded to in a professional manner, a misunderstanding developed in subsequent conversations so that the engineer delegated to inspect the viaduct on Tuesday 18 August understood the report of the sea scout leader, Mr. Barrett, to relate to cracks or missing stones in the pier structure rather than in its foundations. Therefore, the presence of faults on the piers which were not of a serious structural nature appeared to explain to the engineer the reason for Mr. Barrett's report and consequently inspection did not lead engineers to question the stability of the structure of the viaduct.
Iarnród Éireann again apologises to its customers for the major disruption caused by the accident. Our responsibility to our customers is to ensure we take the action necessary to address the issues identified in the report and to ensure we do not experience such an accident again. A range of actions have already been taken, most crucially in respect of strengthening and restructuring the Malahide viaduct in a period of just less than three months and the detailed underwater inspection of all other bridges over the water on the network. Furthermore, other actions and recommendations will strengthen systems and procedures to equip our colleagues on the front line of safety with all knowledge and expertise required to optimise safety. We will implement any recommendations arising from the rail accident investigation unit.
I refer to the Rosslare to Waterford route, which the Chairman requested we address. Our investment programmes have delivered significant expansion of our network in recent years in terms of the service offered and passenger numbers. Alone among State organisations Iarnród Éireann consistently reduced staff numbers during the boom as the application of new technologies were introduced and greater efficiencies achieved. From 2002 to 2008, the number of passengers per staff member increased by 55% and consistent growth in the former was delivered by continuing best practice in controlling the latter. However, as we are all aware the past two years has seen a different environment.
We have continued to ensure there are efficiencies and controls. Passenger numbers are declining due to reduced economic activity. Nevertheless, in that past year we achieved our fourth highest passenger numbers on record. Reduced passenger revenue together with the dramatic reductions in Government's subvention have created a very challenging financial environment. To the credit of the management of Iarnród Éireann this has been addressed to date without a major impact on service levels. Some services continue to expand on existing and new lines. In 2009, further cost reductions were achieved by suspension of the national pay agreement, restrictions on overtime, the adjustment of train lengths to match capacity and reduced demand, changes to the timetables of trains and a continuing programme of voluntary severance. These and other measures have led to additional savings of more than €30 million in 2009.
Subvention has now been further reduced. The Rosslare to Waterford route was one of several identified in the McCarthy report which must be examined in light of low patronage. Whereas Iarnród Éireann is maintaining services on other routes identified and is seeking to lower the cost of operation on such routes, we cannot ignore the situation on the Rosslare to Waterford line, which is unsustainable. The line on which one train per day operates has experienced very low patronage for many years. Currently, approximately 25 passengers travel on the route with the revenue at only 2% of operating costs. In addition, the sugar beet freight business, which sustained the viability of the line, was discontinued by Greencore in 2006. We endeavoured to develop the service but the offer of a Wexford to Waterford connection for more than 12 months has had a minimal uptake, always in single figures. In recent weeks, Iarnród Éireann has surveyed the customers on the route in terms of origin and destination and has discussed with staff working on the route redeployment in Iarnród Éireann or voluntary severance and has examined possible alternative services which could be provided to the customers of the route. We will confirm shortly alternative bus routes for customers on the route, which will be comparable in cost and journey time to current railway services and will operate directly to the Waterford Institute of Technology, to which the majority of the line's passengers travel. It is difficult from a financial, economic and environmental basis to make a case for continuation of services notwithstanding our efforts in recent years to introduce new options, to boost traffic on the line and to offer heavily discounted fares.
While the finances speak for themselves, rail transport is a volume-based business. The population of the communities along the route are very small and all the intermediate stations serve populations of less than 500 people. Furthermore, from an environmental point of view a bus carrying 25 people will generate a lower level of emissions than a train with a small number of people on board. We will continue to explore the possibility of establishing a heritage railway on the route with interested parties which would benefit tourism. We regret having to suspend services on the route. Our business is always railways and we wish for railways to play the greatest possible role. However, we cannot sustain the losses on this route.
I will refer to a number of issues briefly. At an earlier meeting, I asked for details in respect of an internal audit report which was referenced in the Baker-Tilly report. Subsequently, I was invited to a meeting in Inchicore which I attended with senior executives, including all three present today and the deputy chief executive. Issues were raised at the meeting which should be a matter for the public and this committee meeting. I seek clarity on the briefing I received. Is there any reason that could not be given in public to the members of this committee? Perhaps it is my fault that I did not clarify whether it was a private meeting with the delegation and I wish to be professional in this matter. I am rather concerned about what I heard at that meeting and I request that the members of this committee in public, be given the same briefing I received. The delegation may address this matter later on. This is a matter about which I am greatly concerned. I refer to the Malahide viaduct. Has the delegation received a safety audit from the Railway Safety Commission in respect of theMalahide Estuary?
Mr. Dick Fearn
Yes, we received an audit report. The final report was issued only this week by the Railway Safety Commission. The draft report, first issued some weeks ago, was brought to my attention by the Railway Safety Commission. I visited the commission with my chief engineer to discuss the issues raised. The report does not concern the causes of the Malahide viaduct collapse and the Railway Safety Commission made that very clear; it is a safety audit. The commission carries out several audits on different aspects of the railway, which is part of its role. We treat those audits seriously, discuss the actions that arise from them and we determine action plans. In this case, the chief engineer and I have been to see the Railway Safety Commission. At the draft stage, we raised several issues which the commission has taken into account and the final report will be issued this week. I have requested my engineering team, headed by my chief engineer, to come forward with the actions they will take as a direct result of the issues raised in this audit. The audit is primarily concerned with systems and procedures. It is not one which examined the specifics of the measurements on site and so on. It examined the systems, procedures and standards we use for civil engineering maintenance.
Is it not a compliance audit?
Mr. Dick Fearn
Yes. Several aspects include the extent to which procedures are being implemented and other aspects including recommendations about changes to procedures.
Is it possible to give the committee a copy of the final report?
Mr. Dick Fearn
It is not our report. It is the Railway Safety Commission's report and any distribution of it outside Iarnród Éireann would be a matter for the Railway Safety Commission. We have taken the matter very seriously, as we do with all the commission's reports. This is part of our routine business with the Railway Safety Commission and the reason the commission was set up. We are tackling these matters and determining the necessary actions to take.
Can I respond to Mr. Fearn? I have a copy of the Railway Safety Commission report for 2009 which refers specifically to the undertaking and compliance audit into the Broadmeadow viaduct incident, but was written last week before Mr. Fearn received the document. It is something about which I am deeply concerned because it contains issues of grave significance — I use the word "grave" because what almost happened there was extremely serious. The Railway Safety Commission is breaching the spirit of its own rules. It is not, unfortunately, at this moment in time subject to freedom of information but in its 2008 and 2009 reports it states it will operate in the spirit of it. I am very concerned about the content of this, the nature of the changes which have to be made and the lack of transparency from the Railway Safety Commission and the delegation.
I understand the delegation has a significant compliance safety audit report; we do not know what is in it yet thousands of my constituents pass over and back on the viaduct every day. With respect to the report we received from the delegation, the key issue raised by it was that it lost "its corporate memory" in regard to the construction and the methodology of the construction of the Malahide viaduct. Journal 143 of the Irish Railway Record Society, which is referenced on the Internet, can show the delegation that the complete method of the construction and nature of the unusual construction which went in there is a matter of record in the railway history books. I find what happened there totally unacceptable and incredible and we are very lucky that hundreds of people were not killed, something which Irish Rail acknowledges.
I want to reference the delegation today with my concerns about safety. The Railway Safety Commission has included two compliance audits of Iarnród Éireann's safety management system. The first focused on the management of rail defects and the second on managerial organisation. Could the delegation list what has not yet been implemented or what needs to be implemented regarding that? On outstanding issues regarding the care of the viaduct and outstanding safety issues which have not yet been dealt with, which go back four or five years, I understand the delegation is completely rewriting its safety procedures. Is that a fair question? I am anxious to get the information in a transparent and open way from the company.
Mr. Dick Fearn
I will answer some of the points raised. The Deputy raised the October 2000 report in the journal of the Irish Railway Record Society. It published an article ten years ago which was written by a leading railway historian and former member of our staff, but it was about the historical description of the bridge.
It was February of this year, I understand. It is not an issue here. I do not accept the delegation did not know what was going on there.
Mr. Dick Fearn
I will try to explain it. The person concerned was an operating manager, not an engineer. The article was not an engineering article, rather, it was an historical reference of the bridge. The issue which arose was very clearly demonstrated by the detailed work done by an independent expert from across the water and by an excellent hydrological study done by UCC, which found that the erosion took place on the weir and the grouting of the weir which had been done three or four decades ago had created an environment in which the railway engineers did not understand the implication of the erosion of the weir, as distinct from the erosion of the piers. In 2006 the bridge scour report we commissioned clearly said the piers were not eroded and the water was flowing between the piers, but that we should inspect them every six years. There was a lack of understanding in the company about the role of the weir and because of the very detailed engineering assessments which have been done since the collapse we now understand the implication, because of the viaduct, of the weir. The 2000 article was not an engineering assessment.
Is part of the problem the use of contractors?
Mr. Dick Fearn
No, not at all.
It was a 12 page article and the historic issue is there. I do not doubt Mr. Fearn's integrity but I do not accept the corporate memory could be lost on that bridge and I do not accept it as a reasonable or valid statement. I return to the fact that the delegation has a compliance audit from the Railway Safety Commission which is of grave and serious concern. I again ask if the delegation will tell us what is in it, what it has done and what it has to do.
Dr. John Lynch
In regard to the issue of corporate memory, it came from our independent investigator.
The person I heard speaking was the spokesman for Irish Rail, Mr. Kenny.
Dr. John Lynch
That may be so, but as I said earlier we had Mr. John Buxton, who is an independent investigator.
I do not care who you had. The point is the company knew——
Deputy, through the Chair.
Dr. John Lynch
I am only trying to explain that is from where it came.
You cannot explain it; that is my point.
Dr. John Lynch
I am only trying to explain from where it came. Mr. John Buxton, who is the independent investigator, stated this.
To take that point, was the use of private companies which were brought in by Irish Rail a factor in the loss of corporate memory, to whatever extent it happened? Engineers on the ground might not have been our engineers.
Mr. Dick Fearn
It was not. We have our own engineers, structural engineers and maintenance teams. What led to a lack of knowledge over time of the role of the weir was, in effect, work which was done three or four decades ago to try to preserve the weir with the grouting that was done. The investigation demonstrated that water was piping underneath the weir and wearing away the viaduct. It could not be seen from above. It was not found by the divers who went down on our behalf in 2006 because the nature of importance of the weir was not understood. It was not a matter for contractors at all.
Mr. Fearn is saying that the 2006 report was defective because it did not alert Irish Rail to the imminent danger and the fact that the piers were standing on the weir. In other words, it gave Irish Rail very bad advice.
Mr. Dick Fearn
To be fair, the people who compiled the report did so in a diligent way. They sent down divers and did a lot of detailed measurements, which have been used by the hydrologists in UCC and so on in order to learn more about the erosion. The report did not say that there was a serious risk of collapse. It said we should re-examine for scour within six years, which was clearly our plan. In fairness to the people who did that, the detailed understanding which we now have because of the work we have done was not available at the time to them or to ourselves. We now know, and have taken very thorough assessments of all our other structures, that this is something for which we need to look. We have found only one other structure on the network which is constructed in a similar way. We have done a detailed inspection of it and there are no causes for concern at the current time. We shall continue to investigate it on a permanent basis.
Is Mr. Fearn saying that there is a permanent way of following this? It was an incredible near-disaster. The last time I met Mr. Fearn I asked him if he ever bought lottery tickets — there is a big jackpot tonight — because the team was incredibly lucky, and the hundreds of people involved were the luckiest. Thanks be to God it did not happen. I refer to Rogerstown and various other places on the network from the line Irish Rail opened out of Limerick last week to our territory in north Dublin. Is the chief executive now saying he can stand over everything that happens on every centimetre of the permanent way?
Mr. Dick Fearn
In parallel with the investigation into what happened at Malahide, we carried out a very thorough inspection across the network. We focused initially on structures across water where there were potential risks and carried out very thorough and detailed examinations. We have taken on board some of the recommendations made in terms of future inspections and their frequency. I confirm that the lessons learned from what happened at Malahide and the technical information we have gained have been used thoroughly across our network.
In regard to the permanent way, I note that tonight in Wellingtonbridge, south Wexford, a meeting is to take place, at which a number of managers are to appear, including Mr. Emmet Cotter and Mr. Myles McHugh, as well as my colleagues Deputies Howlin and O'Shea. I was in touch with the chief executive to say it should be mentioned at the meeting that Iarnród Éirann was effectively announcing the closure of the Waterford-Rosslare line. It does not make sense that within days of opening a new section of the western rail corridor, Limerick-Athenry, it is shutting down a spur of the network. I have been contacted in recent months since this became a threat. I also know the chief executive was contacted about his proposal concerning an historic or local tourist facility and Rail Users Ireland wants to know why Iarnród Éireann sold the line. Did it sell the line? What was the level of usage in having one train per day in each direction? It has asked, for example, why did Iarnród Éireann not run a train service every two hours between Galway and Rosslare, why it did not provide a limited Sunday service and why it did not offer a much cheaper single ticket? I have had my run-ins and arguments with Mr. Michael O'Leary, but if he was in charge of Irish Rail, it is possible he would provide a free service between Waterford and Rosslare. Could someone travelling part of the western rail corridor not be allowed to travel part of the journey free? Mr. O'Leary might introduce a €1 fare on the line from Waterford to Rosslare or something as dramatic to try to get people onto the trains. It has been mentioned that there were only 25 people on the train. There are people who love trains and who want to use them, including students travelling to Waterford. A replacement bus service has also been mentioned. It is a sad day.
Surely the company should be expanding the network. Following a general election the Labour Party will want to expand the rail network. We want to have a much bigger, better utilised and top quality public transport network, particularly railways, yet the company has come before the Joint Committee on Transport to say it is closing a rail line. That is crazy. It must be the first time in years that it has come before the committee to make such an announcement. My colleague in south Wexford, Councillor Joe Ryan, says the company must give the transport authority notice of this measure. Is it not possible to give this service one last chance in the next two or three months?
I was unable to attend the opening of the new section of the western rail corridor a few weeks ago but I note the Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, rightly asked the public to use the service. That is a fair point. If a service is provided, people should use it but is it not the job of the company to encourage the public to travel by rail and do whatever is necessary to sell the railways? Sometimes I get the feeling from executives of Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus that the impetus is to try to sell the bus service. I am not saying the chief executive of Iarnród Éireann is not trying, but can we not be more creative and retain the Rosslare-Waterford service as part of the western rail corridor which we hope will eventually be extended to Ballina. That is what should be done, rather than the chief executive telling the committee a rail line is being closed. It is crazy.
Mr. Dick Fearn
Perhaps I can answer some of the points raised. The new line which has just been opened and links Limerick and Galway is a very different kettle of fish. Limerick and Galway are significant centres of population and on the new link services will be provided to cater for their populations and to towns in between, including Ennis and Gort. Unfortunately, there is not the same population along the Waterford-Rosslare line, the service which serves a small number of villages in south County Wexford with very small populations. It is one of the rail lines that could have been closed two generations ago when many other rural railways were closed. The reason it was not closed at the time was the volume of sugar beet transported on it. Wellingtonbridge was the key terminal on the network. Until 2006, for five months of the year, during the beet campaign which started in late summer and continued until the winter, we carried large volumes of sugar beet. We did this very successfully and it was a very good business for us. The line remained open for that reason. We ran a commuter train from the villages along the line to Waterford in the morning and back again in the evening. However, when Greencore closed down its operations in 2006, that business was no longer available to us and that changed the economics, but we have kept the line open for four years and tried a number of options. For example, we tried to provide an appropriate service to link Waterford and Wexford, but the trouble is the railway between them is far more circuitous than the road connecting them. There is a slow section on the line out of Wexford, across Wexford quays all the way to Rosslare Strand before joining the line to Waterford. The journey time is much longer than if one were to take the much more direct route on the modern road between Wexford and Waterford.
The revenue generated on the line covers 2% of running costs and there is not the population to sustain the service. What we will do, however, is provide a very good replacement service with our sister company, Bus Éireann, for the passengers who currently use the train service. We have surveyed all of them. We have met them on the train in the morning and in the evening, know where they live and their destinations. A large number of them travel to Waterford Institute of Technology. They board the train to Waterford and travel by bus to the institute. We will provide a direct bus service. We will provide a very good replacement service at no additional cost. We believe this is an appropriate way to look after customers, while at the same time saving significant——
Has Iarnród Éireann surveyed the broader population to ascertain the circumstances in which they might use the railway? I presume there will be hundreds of people in Wellingtonbridge tonight saying they want the service to be retained.
Mr. Dick Fearn
A local meeting is to take place in Wellingtonbridge and Iarnród Éireann will be represented. I met two of the local Deputies on Good Friday to discuss the issues involved with them. The position is that the area has a very small population. People from it use our intercity services but they travel to Wexford or Waterford to use the services to Dublin. This is a rural branch line which was retained for the transportation of beet. Given the cost of retaining the service and the extremely low level of usage, existing and potential, we cannot sustain the service.
I am aware a report was prepared in 2003. Deputy Cuffe, now Minister of State with responsibility for sustainable transport, referred to the socio-economic impact of the south Wexford railway. Has the chief executive and his management team read this report? What does the company propose to do? Why did the company not meet the local community first before effectively coming to this forum and announcing a closure?
Mr. Dick Fearn
We met the most important people, namely, the people currently using the service who must be provided with an alternative service. We have had management representatives on the trains. We have met the people. We have identified to and from where they travel. They are the most important people. They are our existing customers.
Iarnród Éireann is very keen to expand the railway. We have just opened the western rail corridor. In his presentation at the beginning of the meeting Dr. Lynch explained the other work with which we are currently proceeding, for example, the new line out to Dunboyne from Clonsilla. Railways are very good at lifting large numbers of people at peak periods and so on. That is what we do well.
In terms of the rural areas bus operations, which can be much more flexible to pick up people where they live and drop them off exactly where they want to go, they can be run more efficiently, effectively and——
Mr. Fearn is arguing against——
Mr. Fearn mentioned that 2% of the total costs of operating this railway is all that Iarnród Éireann recovers. Can he give us an idea of the figures involved? That appears to be a very small——
Mr. Dick Fearn
I believe Mr. Kenny has those figures.
Mr. Barry Kenny
The operation costs are in the region of €1.9 million, therefore, the extrapolation would be from that figure. That is regarding the operating costs. Obviously, the staff levels are analogous to the number of passengers on board because of the need to man level crossings along the route and also the Barrow bridge. In terms of the network there would also be a need, certainly in the coming years, to put in further funding to maintain services and there would be a capital requirement in that regard also. It would be just under the €2 million mark in terms of the current expenditure——
Running costs.
Mr. Barry Kenny
In terms of the detail and the populations living in the areas along the route, in Campile there are 347 people. Ballykillane has 219——
What would the company have taken in fares as against that——
Mr. Barry Kenny
I do not have the figure to hand but the cost is just under €2 million. We have increased Dublin to Wexford services. We have increased the Dublin to Waterford service in the most recent schedule revision in November. That demonstrates that we try to change——
(Interruptions).
Do I understand correctly that the figure for running costs is €1.9 million and €40,000 in fares?
Mr. Dick Fearn
That is the right order of magnitude generally.
There is not much argument about the reason to close the line.
Nobody is disputing that but they are disputing what the company has done to try to develop the line. Given that it is now linked to Galway it offers other potential. People are saying that Iarnród Éireann has not sold this line or tried to do the best job on the line. The point I was making was that it could have been done at a very cheap rate or for nothing.
Mr. Barry Kenny
Looking over a longer period of time, we have had more frequent services at various times than operate currently. We have had two or three services a day. The phenomenon the Deputy mentioned, low cost airlines, has had an impact on the route as well. Another historic role it had was acting as the link from the port entry for foot passengers and as an onward link. If we examine the historic timetables we will see that is the way the schedule was designed. Foot passenger business has reduced to a very low number at this stage and those numbers do not enable us to sustain the service further.
The Deputy mentioned the Minister for sustainable travel but to be fair, when we are dealing with numbers like 25 people on a train, sustainability and emissions-wise the bus performs better in that regard. The train benefit comes from the numbers on board getting the emission figures to be more sustainable. That is the reason we have got things like DART commuter——
I am sure Mr. O'Leary takes a hit on some of the routes because he has other profitable routes which he needs to operate out of a particular area.
Mr. Barry Kenny
We have operated for four years without doing anything and, without being flippant, he would also charge people for bags and perhaps to use the toilets.
Why not give them one more extension to see what can be done further?
Mr. Dick Fearn
If we use Mr. O'Leary as an example, Mr. O'Leary chooses his markets. He goes for where there is business and then he competes very hard to get that business. That is what we want to do. We are now competing very hard for business on our intercity routes. Members have probably seen some of the advertisements on prime time television recently where we are offering fares as low as €10 to and from Dublin to cities across the State. That is very good value.
If we take Waterford as an example, as Mr. Kenny mentioned, on our Waterford-Dublin line we have revised our timetable recently and there is now a train that leaves Waterford in the morning and only stops at Carlow. It runs fast. It does not go into Kilkenny. It stops at Carlow and then comes through to Dublin. It has become very popular. Trains are good at lifting people in that way. There is not the potential market in south County Wexford, whatever we charged.
With due respect, Deputy, nobody could justify expenditure of €2 million to——
The documents in front of me indicate that people who love railways and who want to have an option believe that other options could have been explored to try to make this service more utilised. They believe, in the context of expanding railways, that to close a line such as this is utter madness.
I want to ask two questions on the company's investment programme for railway infrastructure. Iarnród Éireann has more or less abandoned freight traffic or, if not, has reduced considerably its freight business. Could the representatives give us the company's policy now for freight business in the future? Does it have an investment plan for freight? If so, could the representatives give us an outline of that, particularly with regard to the decision of An Bord Pleanála to refuse planning permission in respect of the Cork port extension because it did not have a rail head?
We very much welcome the opening of the western rail link and the company is to be congratulated on the initiative. I was present when the last train went through the station in Gort 34 years ago and I never thought I would see another train going through Gort. However, when we examine the comparative costs and see that it now costs €10 million per kilometre to build a motorway and the railway from Ennis to Athenry was completely reconstructed with a number of new stations for €106 million, it is a very cost effective investment.
We welcome the company's announcement that Oranmore will go ahead but there is some disquiet in Oranmore that the station cannot be located adjacent to the existing station because of the presence of the railway crossing. It has been moved down to Gowran and over a mile outside Oranmore. Is there any possibility that the company could consider providing a commuter stop in Oranmore adjacent to the existing level crossing at the site of the old railway station?
Dr. John Lynch
In regard to freight, we have not abandoned freight. The policy, which is no different from what is the case in most countries, is that freight is from point to point. The old theory was that freight would be collected in one area. We would do all the handling and bring it to East Wall Road or somewhere like that. We would have to look after it in East Wall Road before we delivered it into the dock. We will not do that now. We will do it point to point. We have quite a deal of freight coming in from Ballina to Waterford. Some freight business has declined in recent years, namely, cement but Coca Cola and Coillte are good supporters and recently we captured another piece of business. It would be wrong to say we are out of freight business. We are not in the business of doing all the handling for freight. We will take it point to point.
The most successful freight operators for railways tend to have heavy product like coal or whatever and travel long distances. Warren Buffett bought out the famous railway but it is to drag Peabody coal from one place down to Jacksonville. Ireland does not have long distances, with the exception of Ballina Cross. We are not in the business of closing any freight operation but we are in the business of providing freight point to point.
Am I to understand that the company would not be engaged in dealing with, for instance, the transport of freight from Dublin Port to various parts of the country?
Dr. John Lynch
No, the way this business was dealt with previously was that all the costs involved were borne by the railway. For example, if there were two or three containers in Galway, they could be either shipped by the businesses involved or one or two containers could be picked up along the way. Then the port authority said that it could not take the containers and that we had better store them. We cannot do that now because there is a cost involved. If there are container-loads of freight in a factory that the business involved wants transported directly from, say, Galway to Dublin Port, we will do that, or if there are container-loads of freight in Dublin Port to be transported to Galway, we do that, but we will not transport loads on uneconomic routes.
Dr. Lynch is effectively saying that the company will not carry freight other than in the case of, say, Coca-Cola which has a contract with it and hires trains to carry a full load of its concentrate from Ballina to Waterford on a regular basis. The company will deal with such freight business or, as Dr. Lynch mentioned, with business from Coillte, which has substantial amounts of heavy freight to be transported from point A to point B. That effectively rules out the transport of all other types of freight by rail. The suggestion by An Bord Pleánala that Cork Port should have a rail link is misguided.
Dr. John Lynch
No. We would be delighted if Cork Port put in a rail link, similar to the discussion that took place on having a rail link from Braemore to Balbriggan. We would be delighted to put in a rail head. However, we will take freight from A to B and, in that context, the business concerned effectively rents a train.
Yes, but we should be straight about this, the reality is that it is not cost effective to move freight from Dublin Port, the biggest port serving the country. Therefore, Dr. Lynch is telling us that the company will provide a freight service in order not to be accused of not doing so but it has abandoned that service.
Dr. John Lynch
Chairman, that is a bit unfair. We have substantial business in terms of rail freight and new business has come on stream recently. We cannot do anything about the cement freight business. We have cement silos around the place but the cement business has collapsed. If one wants to rent a train and to have X number of boxes delivered, we would be delighted to do that.
I am aware Dr. Lynch's staff used to refer to the multiples, with which we have become familiar, such as Tesco, Marks & Spencer, or the German companies as boxes. Does the company compete for the business of transporting the boxes of those multiples? They all have major distribution points in the midlands, the south and north Dublin. Would the company be in the market of trying to grab such business in the case of say Tesco and transport its boxes to its distribution centre or as close to it as it could do so?
Dr. John Lynch
I approached the top executives of Tesco, Penneys and two other multiplies three years ago and asked them if we could do anything for them in this respect. That would be predicated on having centres around the country to which we would deliver supplies, but the multiples did not want their competitors to know what they were doing. I had proposed Athenry as a centre as there is a good road network around it from which the product could be delivered to other areas. I proposed we would buy a piece of land and build a distribution centre, for which the multiples would pay part of the cost, but they were not interested as they did not want their competitors to know what they were doing or what product they were bringing in. They say "no" to that proposal.
A planning issue in regard to the multiples was that it was suggested that they should be located close to a railway from which they could bring their final truckloads of supplies to the various stores.
Dr. John Lynch
The Deputy is right. The ideal solution would be to have a substantial depot to which we would deliver supplies, where they could be divided and from which trucks could deliver the supplies to outlets. I got no response to that proposal.
I can hardly accept Dr. Lynch's argument. If Tesco was to ensure it got value for money and was able to have its product delivered by rail even to centres which it would own, I do not understand why there would be a question of anybody else knowing its business. Can Dr. Lynch respond to the question about the station in Oranmore?
Dr. John Lynch
The only person interested in my proposal was Mr. Arthur Ryan of Penneys. The other multiplies were not interested in it and Mr. Ryan was unwilling to be involved in setting up a series of depots for only his business, but if the others were willing to be involved, he would have been interested. I was quite keen to proceed with that. It would have been a good source of revenue.
The story is that unless one wants to hire a train and transport one's product from A to B, the transport of freight by rail is not a runner.
Dr. John Lynch
Rail freight is a runner. The most profitable rail freight service operates from Murmansk to southern China and the freight transported is timber. For such a service to be profitable, one requires product to be transported over long distances and the product to be a heavy material. Most of the product manufactured in Ireland is light material and it is transported via DHL or by aeroplane. We do not have those heavy volume products. We get our share of the business where such heavy product is available. We have chased and pursued the business of transporting of such heavy product, but there is a limited amount of such product.
Mr. Barry Kenny
Our busiest freight load is Tara Mines, which is the type of high volume businesses we are talking about.
What is the company doing in that respect?
Mr. Barry Kenny
We have four trains a day carrying product from Tara Mines directly to Dublin Port.
What is the position regarding the station at Oranmore?
Mr. Dick Fearn
We initially examined a site adjacent to the old station. That was the obvious place to consider and it was where the station was to be originally located but two difficulties arose. The local authority had great difficulty with that location. One difficulty was lack of space for carparking and the other was direct access to the station from the main road, particularly as it is close to the level crossing and there were road traffic issues associated with that. We and the local authority then considered other locations. One of the perceived popular aspects of Oranmore station when it opens will be a park and ride facility, where passengers can travel to the station by road and then take a train either a short distance to Limerick or a longer distance to Dublin. The site identified by the local authority, for which we have applied for planning permission, is, as the Chairman said, a little further down the line nearer to Gowran. That site will very much achieve the park and ride aspirations the local authority has set. That is the reason that site has been chosen. We did not ignore the village centre site but it did not work out.
I thank the representatives for coming in. I had hoped not to see them again for a while but——
Dr. John Lynch
We would be delighted not to come in as well.
——we will see them again shortly because we were not really ready for them. I have a few questions and I address my first question to Dr. Lynch. When does his term of office run out?
Dr. John Lynch
My term ran out on 27 March.
Therefore, it is a bit of a bonus for us to see him here today.
Dr. John Lynch
I do not know whether the committee would regard it as a bonus but I regard it as a bit of a bonus.
What has happened? Why is Dr. Lynch still in office or what is the deal?
Dr. John Lynch
As to what is the deal, that question should be addressed to the Minister. I cannot tell the Senator what the deal is, I can only tell him that my term of office is to run for another year.
Dr. Lynch has agreed with the Minister to stay on for another year.
Dr. John Lynch
Yes.
What are the terms of the deal?
Dr. John Lynch
The same as before.
The same salary and conditions?
Dr. John Lynch
I assume so. I have seen the terms and conditions. The note I got stated that the terms and conditions would be forwarded.
Therefore, Dr. Lynch has another year in office. How does that gel with his statement to the Committee of Public Accounts some time ago that ten years was enough in any job?
Dr. John Lynch
Yes. The Senator is dead right. I believe this applies to Senators as well — no less than five or more than ten.
To be replaced by a horse.
Dr. John Lynch
There are just a few things that need to be put in place and then 11 years in office would be more than enough.
Dr. Lynch would then have been in office ten years. Did he become chairman in 2000?
Dr. John Lynch
That would be 11 years.
Dr. Lynch has served for more than ten years. Does he think he is past his sell-by date?
Dr. John Lynch
That is for people to judge; I cannot really say whether I am past my sell-by date.
So we have you for another year.
Dr. John Lynch
I do not know. I do not like that "We've got you for another year" comment.
If we are still here.
Dr. John Lynch
I am here for another year.
Can Dr. Lynch clarify something for me because I have seen two versions of this? Who appoints the board of CIE?
Dr. John Lynch
At the present moment and in recent times it is the Minister.
It has been changed; it used to be the chairman.
Dr. John Lynch
No, the Minister always appointed the board. The chairman had the right to appoint the subsidiary boards, but that has been changed now and the Minister appoints all boards.
The Minister appoints all the boards now.
Dr. John Lynch
Yes.
Since when?
Dr. John Lynch
I think it is very recently. I would say about six months.
When Dr. Lynch appointed the boards, did he consult the Minister?
Dr. John Lynch
Yes.
So it was done between the two of them really?
Dr. John Lynch
No chairman of any State body would take it upon themselves to decide they are going to appoint someone to a State board.
Dr. John Lynch
One would have to go to a Minister and say one was thinking of appointing this person. The relevant Minister would ask his or her background, one would tell him and he would say whether he was happy enough with that. There have been cases where Ministers were perhaps not happy with one or two people.
It is our intention to have the non-executive directors before the committee soon to talk to us about various things. Would Dr. Lynch have any objection to that?
Dr. John Lynch
I would have to think about whether I have an objection to it.
Why could there be any possible reservations about that?
Dr. John Lynch
I did not say there were. I said I would have to think about it.
Why would Dr. Lynch have to think about it? It would seem to me a totally natural thing to have these people in. They are paid by the State.
Dr. John Lynch
It is really up to them. It should be borne in mind that some of these people do not live in this country.
I presume they come to board meetings in this country.
Dr. John Lynch
They fly over for board meetings.
Then they can fly over to meet us or meet us the same day.
Dr. John Lynch
That is okay.
Dr. Lynch would not have any reservations about them appearing before the committee.
Dr. John Lynch
Do I personally have reservations?
Yes.
Dr. John Lynch
No.
Right.
Dr. John Lynch
They may have personal reservations, however. I would have to inform them that the committee wanted to talk to them.
We certainly do. It is very important we talk to them, so we will be looking for them to come in. May I put a question to Mr. Fearn? As he probably knows, we had a private meeting when it was decided by a vote that, for various reasons, Mr. John Keenan, who is the head of human resources, would not be invited in because there was a case coming up. There was a proposal from me, which was voted down by the Fianna Fáil members. I do not want to say anything that would be prejudicial to the case but can Mr. Fearn tell us where that case is now?
Mr. Dick Fearn
Yes. First of all, I should explain that Mr. Keenan was asked to stand aside from his uties as director of HR because of matters which arose to do with his handling of HR matters, specifically with his handling of an issue regarding an equality case. Following our request that he stand aside from his position, he chose to take legal action against us. He chose to take us to the High Court. He chose initially to go for an injunction, for him to be restored immediately to his position. That was not successful, but he is still pursuing his case with his legal advisers and therefore at the present time it would be wrong for me to comment further on any detail.
That is fair. Can I take Mr. Fearn back to the Baker Tilly report? Both Mr. Keenan and Mr. Fearn were on that steering committee, as was the financial officer. There was some area of dispute. I think Deputy O'Dowd was involved at this committee beforehand. We asked whether there was any dissenting voice about a draft report among the three members of that steering committee. I think it was Mr. Fearn's view that there was no dissenting voice among them. I think Mr. Keenan will probably give evidence which contradicts that, but that is neither here nor there. Are there any minutes of that meeting?
Mr. Dick Fearn
I do not have them available to me at the moment.
Are there any minutes of that meeting in existence?
Mr. Dick Fearn
There may not be. This was a meeting. There are certainly notes.
Dr. John Lynch
Hold on a second. This is before the courts, Chairman. We are extremely reluctant to say anything in relation to this. We would be delighted, when it finishes with the courts, to come in and answer all the questions that pertain, but I am extremely reluctant to allow too many. Senator Ross has a particular view and he is right to pursue it, but this is before the courts and I do not think we should be answering any questions.
With respect, and on a point of information, the legal adviser to the committee advised us that, provided we stuck rigidly and solely to the issues we are talking about, there is no reason it could not be discussed. We have that opinion from our legal adviser that, without referring to any of the issues which are before the courts, this would not and could not prejudice a judge sitting in judgment because it is not germane to what they will be deciding — a specific recollection about a meeting and if other people agreed or disagreed with it.
On a point of order, I agree with what Dr. Lynch says. I am not asking about the details of the minutes at all, so he need not fear that. I am not going to say anything about that. All I want to know is whether any minutes of that meeting are in existence, if Mr. Fearn could answer that.
Dr. John Lynch
Mr. Fearn could answer it but, while I do not want to be too pedantic about it, the committee has got legal advice and that is fair enough. We have not seen the legal advice and neither would we necessarily agree with it at this stage.
With respect, it was advice to the members.
Dr. John Lynch
Sure.
I was not saying it was advice to Dr. Lynch.
Dr. John Lynch
The Senator knows the way courts work. If I say any bloody thing, straight away I will have somebody on my tail saying I said this at an Oireachtas committee. If the committee does not mind, I really would prefer——
Let us put it another way. I understand Dr. Lynch's point. Nobody could object to this question to start with. Was it normal to keep minutes of this steering committee's meetings?
Mr. Dick Fearn
It was normal for me to take a note on the decisions we took going forward in our work with Baker Tilly. We did not have a secretary to the meeting and there was not a formal minute process. It was not a sub-committee to the board or anything like that, which would be very routinely minuted. It was not that kind of committee. We had a piece of work being done and the three of us routinely met Baker Tilly representatives. It was just like one would do with any contractual consultant coming into the company. One routinely meets them. It was not a steering committee in the form of a sub-committee to the board. It was a group of us meeting routinely. I made a note of the decisions we took because that was essential for our work going forward, but we did not take formal minutes like committee minutes.
That is fine. So there will have been notes kept of that particular meeting?
Mr. Dick Fearn
Yes, I have a note of that meeting.
Mr. Fearn has a note of that meeting which will be available. Okay, and there are notes kept of all meetings of that, what I call a steering committee. I think Mr. Fearn also called it a steering committee.
Mr. Dick Fearn
It was a steering group. I did not call it a committee; I called it a steering group.
I am sorry. Mr. Fearn is right.
Mr. Dick Fearn
It was a steering group because we were dealing with a consultant or contractor, whatever one calls them, and we were taking decisions as a group. I personally kept a record of the decisions we took, but they were not minutes like committee minutes.
That is fine. Provided there are contemporaneous notes of what happened at those meetings — and obviously, as Mr. Fearn says, there are contemporaneous notes of what happened at that particular crucial meeting — then we are happy we will get them sometime, even if it is after the court case, or they will come into the court.
Dr. John Lynch
That is an assumption that we will give them out.
Presumably.
Dr. John Lynch
We will be called in and I am sure the committee will ask us for them.
We will ask Dr. Lynch to come in and I assume he will make them available because he is very open and helpful on all occasions.
Dr. John Lynch
Maybe too much.
I have noticed.
I would not agree with that.
Enough said about that. That is fine, so it is established that there are contemporaneous notes and we will get hold of them, it is to be hoped, at some stage. The draft Baker Tilly report was a matter of controversy. Was the board of CIE and of Iarnród Éireann told about this draft report and its contents?
Dr. John Lynch
This is not on the agenda that was sent to me to come in and reply to, Chairman. I think we have gone through, at least twice——
I have never asked that question before.
Dr. John Lynch
I am not saying that.
We had a number of issues on the agenda today which did not include the Baker Tilly report.
Correct.
If the Senator wants to ask specific questions or to have the matter placed on the agenda——
We will have them in again. That is fine, if that is what they prefer.
Dr. John Lynch
I want to be as helpful as possible. I am not trying to hide anything nor do I have anything to hide. At my age, I do not really have to do anything. I may be here for another year just so we can joust about this. However, I always want to be as helpful as possible to the committee. As a result, we will prepare information for the Senator or the Deputy. In this case, we prepared information specifically on what we were requested to.
I have no problem with that provided Dr. Lynch comes back and we can ask these questions again. I was just trying to spare Dr. Lynch the trouble of coming back more than once because, I hope, he will be back at least once more. If Dr. Lynch wants to come back and answer those questions, that is fine by me. I am in no hurry.
Dr. John Lynch
I would regret not coming here at least every three months because I have gotten used to the surroundings.
We are getting quite used to Dr. Lynch too.
We are getting as used to the answers as he is the questions.
When the non-executive directors come in — assuming they agree to come in — we can also invite the chairman and the chief executive to deal with the other questions on the Baker Tilly report.
I did not ask anything like the number of questions I asked the last time and, obviously, I had to pull back because there were lots of others. That is my only problem.
I wish to go back to the issue of safety. Will the compliance audit be published or made available?
Mr. Dick Fearn
The compliance audit the Railway Safety Commission has now finalised and issued to me will be very much the subject of a detailed action plan on our behalf, as are all compliance audits with the Railway Safety Commission. This one is about systems, procedures and processes for our civil engineering. There is no difficulty on our part acknowledging what the RSC found and taking action accordingly.
I have not seen the final report in detail. It arrived in my office straight after the holiday this week but I saw the interim report and I know we can deal with all the issues raised.
I accept Mr. Fearn has seen it but will it be made available to us or will he tell us what those issues are?
Mr. Dick Fearn
It is not our report to make available. It is a Railway Safety Commission report. It is requiring me to respond to it. I will respond to it in terms of a detailed action plan which my chief engineer is preparing currently.
In the meantime, thousands of people are travelling over this viaduct every day. Issues have been raised. The point is either there are issues, which should be addressed publicly by Mr. Fearn's organisation, or there are not. I am concerned Mr. Fearn is not telling us what they are.
We need to invite in representatives of the Railway Safety Commission. At the next available opportunity, I would like to talk about compliance and what is going on in regard to monitoring the Iarnród Éireann safety management system. There is also an issue in regard to enforcement of drug testing in the company. What is the story there?
Are there issues which have been brought to the attention of Iarnród Éireann over the past number of years, and which are mentioned in various Railway Safety Commission reports, with which the organisation still must comply?
Mr. Dick Fearn
We deal with all the matters raised with us. Safety is paramount on our agenda. Let me take drug testing, for example. When the Railway Safety Act was enacted in 2005, we started drug testing but since then, in one of its audit reviews, the Railway Safety Commission said it wanted us to do some random completely unannounced drug testing. In other words, an individual turns up at work one morning, is picked out and is tested. As chief executive, I would not know about it nor would the individual. We have now implemented that. On any occasion——
On that issue, the 2008 report states that as part of the review, the Railway Safety Commission asked Iarnród Éireann to consider how provision for unannounced testing might take place. The 2009 report states that in 2009, an improvement notice was issued to Iarnród Éireann in regard to random drug testing and alcohol testing for safety critical workers.
Mr. Dick Fearn
I can explain exactly why that happened. We were doing drug testing right from the enactment of the Act but what we were saying to individuals was that when they were booking off duty, say on a Monday, that the next time they book on duty, say on a Tuesday, they go straight to the medical centre for a drug test. That was typical of what I was used to across the water and we believed that was compliant with the Act. The Railway Safety Commission decided it was random but not totally unannounced, so it decided to issue a notice to us. We complied with that notice and now we do not do this in the way I just described. We are now required to pick out people completely at random. People have no notice. They could be working away in one of depots in Inchicore or somewhere, when they are asked to go for a test.
Why did the Railway Safety Commission have to serve the company with an improvement notice? It has certain powers——
Mr. Dick Fearn
It is part of the process.
Section 7 of the Act provides for a number of enforcement measures, ranging from requesting an improvement to a prohibition notice. In 2008, it asked what Iarnród Éireann was doing about it and then it served it with an enforcement measure. Obviously, Iarnród Éireann did not consent to that.
Mr. Dick Fearn
We have a steering committee, with our trade unions, on the implementation of these proposals. We believed, jointly with the trade unions, that what we were doing was appropriate and met the requirements of the Act. I have 30 years experience across the water and that is routinely how drug testing is and has been done there for more than ten years.
With respect, this is not about——
Mr. Dick Fearn
I took——
This is about people travelling on the railway.
Mr. Dick Fearn
It is about safety on the railway actually. What we then said to the Railway Safety Commission was that if it was not satisfied, it should specify what it required. It did that in an improvement notice. There is no shame about that. It is part of the process. We have complied with that improvement notice. Now unannounced people are randomly tested for drugs. We have a good process and we work well with the Railway Safety Commission. Where there is an issue on which it believes we have not gone far enough, it acts and we go further. That is what we are doing.
If we take the issues outstanding last week — I am not sure about this week — in regard to the incident in Cahir and the viaduct there, a number of recommendations were outstanding for a number of years. I cannot say exactly what they were. Perhaps at our next meeting Mr. Fearn will give us a report on his interaction with the Railway Safety Commission, on the findings of the audits done and on the actions taken as a result. Is Mr. Fearn completely rewriting the safety management system?
Mr. Dick Fearn
We have a regular review process. In the Railway Safety Act 2005, there is a requirement on us to produce a railway safety case. The railway safety case is the process by which we set out our management system and the Railway Safety Commission approves or does not approve it if there are areas it wants changed. This year, as part of the routine, we are due for a review of that railway safety case. We are reviewing progress to date on the railway safety case and we are preparing revisions. A revised safety case will go to the Railway Safety Commission for approval. Some elements will be unchanged if the commission and the company are happy they are working. Other elements will be changed. It is a perfectly normal process for the management of safety in an industry like ours. Periodically, on a two or three year basis, the system is reviewed. We are reviewing the railway safety case this year.
Dr. John Lynch
The first item on the agenda of each of the companies is the minutes, the second item is matters arising and immediately after that is safety.
I accept that but Mr. Fearn is not giving us a copy of the compliance safety audit on the Malahide estuary. That is the problem I have.
We can invite the Railway Safety Commission in and we can request it.
Dr. John Lynch
It is somebody else's document.
It is to do with railway safety. This is the point. With respect, this is a compliance audit. In other words, they have made findings on safety about the Malahide viaduct separate completely from the incident and I want to know what they are. They will not tell me and Dr. Lynch will not tell me, but we still must travel on the train. That is the issue.
We can ask the Railway Safety Commission to come in and we can ask them for that or the document.
They will not tell us either. The matter is a secret until somebody is killed. That is my difficulty.
I do not see why it is not possible to get the document.
Dr. John Lynch
It is not our document.
Dr. Lynch is implementing it. To put the question a different way, can Dr. Lynch identify——
We will request it from the Railway Safety Commission.
It will not give it to you. It refused to give me a copy of it.
We will request it to come in. If it is the case then that we do not get the report, we will have to address the issue.
The issue then arising is that we have questions for the Railway Safety Commission. Given its resourcing and the way it has carried out its function, if one looks at the history of its evolution, there are questions to answer. It was in existence for a number of years and it should have got some inkling of some of the issues to do with the Broadmeadow situation long before it did. There are fundamental issues about the Railway Safety Commission as well, and also about the safety unit in the Department of Transport and the Minister. I agree that all transport is safety critical. It is comforting to know that people are checked and they accept that this goes with the territory.
I and others have been critical of Iarnród Éireann on Rosslare. I want Iarnród Éireann to look one more time at the Rosslare-Waterford route. I would support the Chairman on making rail freight much more central to the economy. Obviously, we still will need other forms of transport, but it seems it is not good for the company that this link could be broken and may not be kept up to the highest standards if it is run in a different way.
However, I commend and congratulate Dr. Lynch on the opening of a new station in my constituency in Clongriffin on Monday week. That will be a happy day for the people of Dublin North-East and for the north fringe. The delegation spoke of volumes. As Mr. Kenny will be aware, the big problem is that for approximately two years nothing has happened in the north fringe. It is frozen in time. I am not sure if it will now become part of NAMA, etc. Obviously, Iarnród Éireann made a commitment. I have seen the gleaming new station. It is impressive and I look forward to its opening. However, it needs that significant development of perhaps 25,000 housing units to go ahead.
The most fundamental public transport project in the country, probably along with and in some ways maybe more than Metro, is the interconnector. Everybody wants to know where it is at and what is happening. For example, I have heard that one of the drawbacks with Adamstown, what one might call the north fringe's twin city on the west side of Dublin, is the feeling that on reaching Heuston one must change mode and one cannot continue on. It seems that over the next five to seven years we, irrespective of who is in power, must expedite the interconnector. Where is the interconnector? CIE was running almost in tandem, or a little behind, Metro north. It is so fundamental because for the first time we can say to foreigners coming to the capital city that we have a transport system that is not bad, etc.
May we have a quick answer to that question?
Dr. John Lynch
Within three months the railway order will be presented to An Bord Pleanála. There has been a great deal of discussion with An Bord Pleanála. It was virtually ready but An Bord Pleanála came back stating it wanted a second entrance into the docklands and that has delayed it a little. Within three months, we will be in for planning permission.
To finish that point, where is that at? The RPA is stating it is building St. Stephen's Green for Iarnród Éireann. They are getting their side of it.
Dr. John Lynch
No. It is building St. Stephen's Green for itself and we are tacking on.
The RPA is stating it is ready to link with Iarnród Éireann in the same box — to use that phrase again — in the St. Stephen's Green station. I understand the RPA is coming out of An Bord Pleanála soon. At what stage is Iarnród Éireann in all of that? When will we get to the stage of doing preliminary works, get the show on the road and build this project?
Dr. John Lynch
Obviously, we must get a railway works order, which is planning permission. We have been testing the market to see what sort of appetite there is for a PPP. We have the main design finished. I can state exactly that it will end in Inchicore and the stations will be in Heuston, Christchurch, St. Stephen's Green, Pearse and docklands. They all have been designed and the entire route has been designed.
What one must do when or if one gets planning permission or a railway works order is test the market. The testing of this will be design — we have it designed and, obviously, we will bring the contractor in — build, maintain and operate. There are negotiations that must take place in that regard. I would say that by year end we would be very far advanced.
Will the railway order be made?
Dr. John Lynch
We will be applying for the railway order in June. We have had a great deal of discussion with An Bord Pleanála because we saw the problems that the metro north——
Could there be a long oral hearing like metro north?
Dr. John Lynch
We would hope not. We have had long discussions with An Bord Pleanála because we saw what happened to metro north.
On Dr. Lynch's return to the committee following on Senator Ross's request, perhaps he might be able to indicate to the clerk to the committee when it would suit him to come back and when it would suit the non-executive directors so that we will deal with it all on the one day.
If the ones from abroad are reluctant to come in, that is fine; we will take the ones from here to start with.
Dr. John Lynch
Railway expertise is fairly vital. We have expertise in signalling.
I want to talk about corporate governance as well to the non-executives. Do not worry about the signalling matter.
Dr. John Lynch
We must have these experts and they are board members.
We will leave it to yourselves to indicate when within a reasonable period of time.
Within a few weeks.
Dr. Lynch can indicate when it is suitable.
On railway issues, there are many matters we could ask Dr. Lynch about, for example, faster trains. Will we get an opportunity at some stage to discuss what we want for the railway in the future? The correspondence I receive——
I would suggest to the Deputy——
These are key issues. All the person travelling home tonight wants is the fastest possible railway.
I accept that. If members want to have discussions of that nature, it would be sensible to sit down with the executives and discuss these matters which can be discussed in private. Certainly, if there are issues then——
It raises issues about investment which are public decisions.
If there are issues, we will certainly deal with them in a public forum but we cannot have these people running in and out of here all of the time. I suggest to the Deputy that if there are specific issues about the detail of rail, he could speak to Mr. Fearn and his staff. By all means, if there are issues then that the Deputy needs to raise publicly at the committee, I am quite happy to deal with them in that context.
I am asking about faster trains and that kind of investment.
If the Deputy sat down with Mr. Fearn, he will have a good discussion on faster trains. There is hardly a need for us to——
It is a public issue — how much money we are prepared to spend on the railways. Unfortunately, the Government was not prepared to spend much. The Government spent it on roads. There are public issues here.
When the Deputy has obtained the information he requires, if he wants to bring up the matter I will be happy to discuss it. We cannot discuss every small detail here.
It is not detail. I want to talk about railway issues.
Fine.
I have two questions. We will be out of here in two minutes. Did Dr. Lynch have any communication with the Minister about the Navan railway?
Dr. John Lynch
In what way?
Did he have any communication at all with him about the Navan railway?
Dr. John Lynch
Is Senator Ross referring to the one due to be finished that is going down to Dunboyne or the Navan railway?
The one due to be finished going down to Dunboyne and going on.
Dr. John Lynch
On Dunboyne, of course before we started we told him the route, etc.
Has he been lobbying Dr. Lynch about it?
Dr. John Lynch
I do not know.
He would be a damn fool if he did not.
Dr. John Lynch
It is in Transport 21.
Has he been lobbying Dr. Lynch about it?
Dr. John Lynch
He has not been lobbying me.
Has he been lobbying anybody?
Dr. John Lynch
I do not know.
He has not been lobbying Dr. Lynch about it.
Dr. John Lynch
Hold on a second, I do not know. Senator Ross is talking about a Minister. He does not share every secret that he has with me. However, it is in Transport 21 and, therefore, I presume he will implement Transport 21.
That is fine. He has not lobbied CIE about it. I must tell the people of Meath that.
Dr. John Lynch
I have given information. He now knows——
It is 7 p.m. and I have to go to Galway.
This will take less than a minute.
The Senator should make sure this is relevant.
Was the board informed about the draft report of May 2008 on the bridge? It is a "Yes" or "No" reply.
Dr. Dirk Fearn
No, it was a draft report.
The joint committee adjourned at 7 p.m. until 3.45 p.m. on Wednesday, 21 April 2010.