Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 13 Feb 1974

Vol. 77 No. 1

Private Business. - Transport Bill, 1974: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Transport and Power (Mr. P. Barry)

The purpose of the Bill is to extend CIE's long-term borrowing powers for capital purposes and also to increase the limit on the board's temporary borrowing powers.

Before dealing with the Bill itself I propose to review briefly the position of CIE in recent years. As Senators are aware there has been a serious deterioration in CIE's financial position since 1969 when the amount of the board's statutory grant was fixed at £2.65 million per annum. The board's losses have increased from over £3 million in 1969-70 to over £8 million in 1972-73 and there will be a further substantial increase in the current financial year. The increased losses have been incurred mainly on the railway but the position has been aggravated by a decline into a loss-making situation of hitherto profitable road services. Increases in rates and fares sought by the board in 1972 were postponed for almost a year pending completion of an investigation by the National Prices Commission and this, of course, has contributed significantly to the losses.

The investigations carried out by McKinsey & Co. in 1971 showed that CIE's increasing losses were due mainly to inflation and to growing competition from private transport. The consultants carried out a broad cost benefit analysis of railway operations and found that, even when given credit for all the social benefits which it could be deemed to render to the community, the railway still incurred substantial losses and, leaving aside transitional costs, could be replaced more economically by an all road system. However, the inclusion of unavoidable transitional costs, mainly costs of redundancy, altered the position and the consultants found that from a community standpoint the best course of action was to retain the railway but to selectively modify and develop it so as to bring social costs and benefits more closely into line.

CIE, on the basis of the general recommendations of the consultants, have been developing specific plans for the rationalisation of mainline railway operations and improvements in operating practices which will involve, inter alia, increased capital investment in modernising terminals, rolling stock, track and signalling. These plans are at present under examination and I hope to secure the early approval of the Government for CIE to proceed on the lines proposed. Because the costs of the railway consist so largely of labour costs any financial improvement will involve some redundancy but it is envisaged that this can largely be met by natural wastage. The whole plan will in any case be discussed by CIE with the trade unions.

By the use of imaginative marketing and promotional campaigns CIE have achieved a considerable increase in the number of passengers travelling by rail. Almost 12 million were carried in 1972-73 which represents an increase of 8 per cent over 1971-72, which itself had shown an increase of 6½ per cent over the previous year. The introduction of the new air-conditioned super trains which brought a new standard of passenger comfort, speed and convenience was also a contributory factor. Dublin suburban commuter rail traffic also continued to expand in 1972-73, showing a growth of 7½ per cent on the previous year. New push/pull train units were introduced to improve these services.

Rail freight tonnage at 3.65 million tons was marginally higher in 1972-73 than in the previous year. The liner train concept was further developed and the remand for unit load/container conveyance and for further extensions of pallets continued to grow.

There was also an expansion in CIE's road services. Dublin city buses carried 210 million passengers in 1972-73, an increase of 9.5 million on the previous year. A total of 62 million passengers were carried on the board's provincial long distance and city bus services, excluding special school services, in 1972-73, an increase of 2 million over the previous year. A major bus passenger survey has recently been carried out by CIE and the information obtained will form the basis of a new overall provincial bus policy plan which is being formulated. In the road freight section the total tonnage carried in 1972-73 was 5.7 million tons which was 2 per cent higher than in the previous year. CIE's shipping and air freight services, which are conducted through Irish Ferry-ways and Aerlód Teoranta, showed larger turnover and increased profitability in spite of the severe competition in sea and air freight.

Unfortunately, as I have already indicated, these improvements have not been sufficient to counteract the prevailing economic forces and the board's deficits still continue to grow. The railway deficit in 1972-73 was £7.695 million, an increase of £980,000 on the deficit in 1971-72. Notwithstanding the increase in the number of passengers carried, a loss of £360,000 was incurred on the Dublin city bus services compared with a profit of £185,000 in 1971-72. The provincial bus services showed a decline in profits from £550,000 in 1971-72 to £319,000 in 1972-73. Road freight services, however, showed a small profit of £22,000 compared with a loss of £134,000 in 1971-72.

The existing blanket type subvention paid to CIE will no longer be appropriate under EEC regulations and proposals for a new subvention structure to meet EEC requirements are at present nearing completion.

The immediate need for the present Bill is to enable CIE to take up a loan of £4m. which has been approved by the European Investment Bank for a term of 20 years at a proposed rate of interest of 8¾ per cent. At present CIE's long-term capital borrowing powers are confined to borrowing from the Minister for Finance and it is necessary therefore to extend these powers so as to enable the board to take up the proposed loan from the EIB and also to avail of any other sources of finance which might be found attractive. It is expected however, that the Exchequer will still remain the main source of loan finance for CIE's capital expenditure. Borrowing from sources other than the Exchequer will be subject to my prior consent and the approval of the Minister for Finance, who will be empowered to guarantee such borrowings.

The EIB loan is related to the board's railway investment programme and will contribute in particular to improvements in passenger train services, wagon load freight services, terminal facilities and the signalling system. These improvements will enable the provision of faster and more frequent passenger trains with modern carriages and the concentration of freight traffic on fully fitted block trains. We would hope that these measures will lead to a significant increase in traffic by rail. By granting the loan of £4 million, the European Investment Bank is helping the railway to remain an essential part of Ireland's transport system and to play its part in the programme of the Irish economy.

The limit on the board's capital borrowing powers and on Exchequer capital advances to CIE was increased from £6 million to £17 million under the Transport Act, 1969. The £17 million provision is now almost exhausted and it is proposed to extend the limit to £55 million, that is an increase of £38 million. This sum, together with the board's depreciation provisions, will be available to meet future capital expenditure by the board. It will enable the board to continue with its policy of modenising its services and improving standards.

In addition to the proposals already mentioned for modernising mainline railway operations, CIE are also preparing plans for the improvement of the Dublin rail commuter services. As Senators are aware, the Government recently approved in principle of the development of these services to play the maximum role possible in helping to relieve the city's present congestion problems.

Provision is also being made in the Bill for an increase from £2 million to £5 million in CIE's temporary borrowing powers. The existing limit of £2 million was fixed in 1958 and is now an inadequate safeguard against possible short-term cash difficulties. This has been evident in recent years when Supplementary Estimates have had to be introduced at short notice to ensure that the board would have sufficient cash to meet its current requirements.

The contract for the European Investment Bank loan cannot be concluded pending the enactment of legislation, as provided for in this Bill, to extend the scope of CIE's borrowing powers. The next meeting of the board of the European Investment Bank will take place on 19th February and to avoid the possibility of the interest rate on the proposed loan being increased the intention is that, provided the Bill has been enacted, the contract will be concluded by that date.

I should, therefore, greatly appreciate it if the House would agree to give a quick passage to the Bill. I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. McGlinchey

We on this side of the House welcome this Bill because we believe that as a result of it CIE may be in a position to provide the necessary improvements in their service to benefit more people than are benefiting at the moment. Coming from a county that knows little about CIE or their operations, I should like to hear from the Minister the future policy of CIE as far as the west of Ireland and the Ulster counties are concerned. I note from his speech that on the basis of the general recommendations of the consultants, CIE have been developing specific plans for the rationalisation of mainline railway operations. Later on in his speech he told us that the EIB loan is related to the board's ran-way investment programme and will contribute in particular to improvements in the passenger train service, wagon load freight services, terminal facilities and the signalling system.

I feel that the people in the west and north-west of Ireland have a right to ask are their interests being taken into consideration in these plans. They have a right to ask will any of this EIB loan be used to give them the service to which they are entitled and which they have never got. When one studies the railway system in the country one admits that apart from this city to the Minister's city and to Galway, the train service in Ireland is practically non-existent.

I come from a county that, as a result of Partition, is virtually cut off from the rest of the Republic, a county that has suffered, not alone politically but economically as a result of the Partition of this country. I have always felt that because of the political situation bodies such as CIE should have given it more consideration. CIE's contribution to the transport services in Donegal amounts to this: a bus leaves Letterkenny at 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. A bus leaves Donegal town once a day and that is the sum total of CIE's transport operations in a country of 100,000 people.

As a result of the regionalisation of the health services and the tourist services it is necessary for many people in my county to travel to the Regional Hospital in Galway and to University College Galway, and this is considered a tremendous hardship because of the failure of CIE to provide proper services. Up to a few years ago, a train service operated from Strabane, County Tyrone, to Dublin but with the eclipse of the Great Northern Railway and as a result of the closure of the Portadown line, this service ceased, thus cutting off 100,000 people from the capital of this country.

Any plans which CIE have to develop the railway system in Ireland must recognise the imbalance in railway services as far as the province of Connacht and County Donegal are concerned. There have been many pleas in recent years calling for a special subsidy on manufactured goods transport. One of the reasons why it is found difficult to encourage industrialists to this part of the country is the heavy and crippling burden of transport costs.

We in our part of the country— from Donegal to Kerry or to Clare— believe that we have as much right to these necessary services as our neighbours on the east and southern coasts. Now that CIE are being given powers to raise so much money, now that they are benefiting from the European loans and now that the whole transport system in this country will be reviewed, the special position of Connacht and Donegal should be given priority consideration.

Mr. Dolan

I, too, am quite happy with this Bill which allows CIE to borrow money at a very attractive rate of interest. I suppose it is only fair to admit that CIE have had a difficult task assigned to them over the years because they have endeavoured to provide systems of communication in all parts of the country. It is fair to say that in the sparsely and thinly populated areas of the country, I am sure from the very beginning, it was more or less assumed that there would be a loss on these services in such areas.

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that, like my colleague beside me, as an Ulster-man we have lost the Great Northern Railway and because of that a great deal of articulated traffic has come on to the roads. While in some cases we have got better grants there, we have not, in any shape or form, benefited to the extent necessary to bring our roads up to a standard which would enable them to carry the articulated type of traffic that they are asked to carry now, especially with juggernauts and various other trucks coming from the EEC and using our roads. It should be possible to allot part of this money to such areas.

Rail services are a tremendous advantage in any particular area. We, unfortunately, in the north-west have not any such services now. It amuses me to see CIE advertising nightly on television about "The Great Train Robbery" and the great facilities that are available to children and adults to travel by CIE, but it is rather frustrating to find that none of the people in my area can avail of these services.

It is true that to attract industry into an area you must have decent communications. The Minister would be well advised, in looking over these railways and where they are situated, to have a look at the main road that leads from my constituency in County Cavan to Dublin city and to notice that, no matter how we strive to get industrialists in—and we have quite a few of them—they either have to get their manufactured products for export out through the ports of Drogheda, Dundalk or Dublin, or up to Greenore. When you try to get into Dublin city from Clonee or Mulhuddart the road there is practically as narrow and as twisty as it is in County Cavan. We may have an excuse for twisty roads because of the number of lakes in our county but there is not any excuse that I know of, and I do not think there should be any financial reason either, why the people living in the north-west of our country should be penalised in that way. Having gained time getting towards the port, especially to Dublin, they spend practically the same length of time on the journey from Clonee into Dublin city as they would from leaving Cavan town to get to Mulhuddart. That certainly should be taken into consideration.

We in our end of the country do not benefit a lot from CIE hotels. We have an abundance of lovely lakes and forests and everything that should attract tourists and that would be pleasing to the eye of those who wished to enjoy the beauties of nature. There is plenty of that in our area and yet CIE never during their existence contemplated putting a decent hotel in that area. If one travels down south you will find hotels all over the place. I do not think it fair that the money has been allotted on such a biased fashion— the whole north-western area has been neglected so far as decent roads and hotels are concerned. Both of these come under the Department of Transport and Power.

There have been some complaints, I do not know how valid they are, regarding bus services. We have no train services in our area. In the Minister's speech today we read of the efforts that will be made to improve trains and make them more luxurious. I wonder if the same standard, or something similar, could be applied to improving the standard of our buses. Perhaps the roads may not be able to take them but there are things that would need to be seen to, in particular this matter of toilets. These are necessary on trains and I do not see why they should not be provided on buses also. Some way should be devised whereby they could provide them on buses.

CIE have done an excellent job in providing school transport services. Here, again, I should say that it should be the responsibility of CIE or the people responsible for the buses to ensure that no damage is done to them by any of the students or the people travelling on them. Some prefect or some responsible individual should be in charge. I do not think any type of bad conduct or any type of vandalism should be tolerated on our buses or trains. It is wrong that people should not be checked and punished when they commit vandalism. It is a type of training that is very necessary.

I wish to compliment CIE on having the Irish words "Bus Scoile" and the names in Irish on their vehicles. Through a Bill here in the Seanad some time ago we legalised this form through the log-ainmneacha legislation. It is good that CIE have continued to do it and I wish them luck in the years ahead. I am glad to see that they are being given this chance in this Bill.

Mr. Russell

I should like to join the other Members in assuring the Minister of a speedy passage of this Bill. It is necessary that it be passed through the House this afternoon. I think the Minister can be assured of our co-operation in that regard.

It is disappointing, and I am sure the Minister takes no pleasure in coming to this House to point it out, that despite the very energetic marketing and promotional efforts of CIE— and I think they are to be very strongly commended for their efforts in recent years—heavy losses continue in all sections of the system, both road and rail. When one contemplates the fact that the loss has increased from £3 million in 1969-70 to £8 million in 1972-73 it is a fair indication of the serious situation that faces the railways not only in this country—let us be fair about it —but in every country in Europe today.

What is encouraging—and I think is an indication of the hard work and drive that has been put into the promotional campaign—is that under all headings, both in road traffic and in passenger traffic there have been substantial increases. Normally in a commercial or industrial concern, one would expect improved results to flow from such successful promotional or marketing efforts. In the case of CIE we must heavily subsidise our national transport system if we wish to retain it. Nobody in this House or outside would wish it otherwise.

In 1956 or 1957 the late Seán Lemass, then Minister for Industry and Commerce, introduced a Bill in the Dáil to provide a subsidy of not more than £500,000 for CIE, and hopefully stated on the occasion that after a few years CIE would become a viable proposition. At the time I did not share his optimism and my views have been proved only too true. The main object of this Bill, as the Minister pointed out, is to take advantage of the European Investment Bank loan, which is very attractive at present-day terms, of £4 million over a 20 year period at 8 per cent. If I could express a wish in that regard it would be that instead of £4 million it would be £40 million. That sort of money is not easily raised today. We should grab this without delay.

Secondly, the proposal to increase the board's capital borrowing powers from £17 million to £55 million is an indication of the sort of capital expenditure that will be needed not only to maintain the system on the rails and on the roads but also to increase its efficiency and its comfort for the passengers and the facilities for the freight carried. Finally, there is the proposal to increase CIE's temporary borrowing powers from £2 million to £5 million. All these are necessary expenditures.

We regret CIE must continue to face losses but we must be realists in the matter. The recent fuel emergency proved how vitally necessary our national transport system is. There was panic in regard to fuel and all of us who had become used to travelling by car to our places of business and so on, suddenly found the only reliable mode of transport was CIE.

We should not forget that, even though there are apparent losses from the point of view of accountancy, there are rewards for the very heavy investment which the country has made in CIE over many years. They are the biggest single employers in the country with more than 20,000 employees drawing a salary and wage bill of some £34 million. All these employees pay rates and taxes, purchase goods and services and give indirect employment to others. If a balance sheet were to be made out on a social rather than on a purely accountancy system we might find that CIE were paying their way nationally through the taxes and other income which the State gets from the employees.

There is no substitute for CIE as a long haul carrier. Even the juggernauts which are becoming a great nuisance on our roads—it is almost impossible to get through country towns and villages if one of these gigantic vehicles happens to be passing through—could not compete with them. We obviously will have to spend vast sums of money on our roads in the near future. We must contemplate providing motorways as they have done in Northern Ireland and Great Britain and other European countries. This will run into millions of pounds.

The time has come when the Minister should seriously consider setting up a national transport system to coordinate all forms of surface transport to ensure that resources of energy-consuming fuels, personnel and all that goes towards making a roadway or a railway are utilised to the best and most efficient degree. When I put this forward some years ago in the Seanad the then Minister did not think it worth his while to consider it. I should like to bring it up again for the benefit of the present Minister. Fuels and all forms of energy will become more and more expensive as time goes on. This was brought before us vividly in recent months and we must ensure that we, who have to import almost all our energy requirements, use our fuel in the best possible economic and most efficient manner. The best way of ensuring that economic use is made of the various forms of energy such as fuels is a co-ordinated national transport system. I should like to put that forward for the Minister's consideration. He can be assured of a quick passage for this Bill and the absolute appreciation of this House that the money is urgently required.

Mr. Moynihan rose.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Brosnahan)

We have had two speakers from the Opposition side and only one from the Government side. To keep the balance I now call on Senator Moynihan.

Mr. Moynihan

I merely want to say that we in the Labour Party congratulate the Minister for bringing forward this financial requirement for the running of CIE. In doing so there are some remarks I should like to make. Over the years the financial losses of CIE have been a worry for the different Departments, for the board and the different Governments, but still the dance goes merrily on. Numerous inquiries and investigations have been set up and quite recently consultants have been brought in. As a trade unionist, I wish to say that one of the worrying aspects of each inquiry was the implications that labour costs must be cut at a particular level, which is the labour wage generally.

We saw in the late fifties and the early sixties substantial segments of the railway lines being closed down. Not only that, but the major blunder was made of tearing up the lines, thus ending for all time any possibility of restoring them as transport channels. We now realise they could be usefully restored for the benefit of the community.

On page 2 of the Minister's document it is stated:

CIE on the basis of the general recommendations of the consultants have been developing specific plans for the rationalisation of main line railway operations.

The word "rationalisation" aggravates the ordinary work force in industry. It usually ends up with another word, "redundancy". This word is used here. It states:

Because the cost of the railway consists so largely of labour costs any financial improvement will involve some redundancy, but it is envisaged that this can be largely met by national wastage.

I am glad the whole plan will be discussed by CIE with the trade unions.

Over all the years in which these investigations have been proceeding in all the different inquiries that have been held, over all the rationalisation and redundancy plans that have been implemented, it is alleged, I think with good authority, that at managerial, at sub-managerial and at supervisory level there has been major expansion by CIE and their employees. I ask the Minister today, when he is seeking this money, to ensure that this expansion at that level will have the desired effect of efficiency and economy for which it was originally intended rather than the creation of posts which have served no useful purpose in the administration of this very important company. Although we have had drastic reductions at the labour level, it is unrealistic to think that a concern that has been losing for so long and so heavily should expand the top level managerial and salaried posts with their extra costs if they do not show clearly that the company are gaining the efficiency and economy intended.

We accept that CIE must remain as an integral part of our transport services. I think that they are giving a reasonable service within their limitations, financial and otherwise.

One aspect of efficiency comes immediately to mind. It is regrettable for any of us—and certainly for the Minister and the board of CIE—to see bus crews refusing to take out defective buses. That is something which should not happen in a company like CIE. Every bus offered to a crew to go into service should be roadworthy. That is something to which the Minister should draw the pansion by CIE and its employees. I CIE are the largest employers in the country. There is a massive State investment in the company. Relations with the trade unions are an integral part of the company's functions. There is another human aspect I did mention in the pre-Christmas debate. It refers to those employees who have served the company well and are now retired. They have been badly treated. No company can hope to survive unless they treat their employees reasonably while in their employment. When such employees leave after having given many long years of service to the company, the company still has a responsibility to them.

Professor Quinlan

We can all welcome the present measure because there is no other option but to keep and modernise CIE as our main public transport system. It cannot be done any other way. Any recommendation of any board of consultants that we could afford to put all that traffic on an all-road system is just so much nonsense. I do not think that could ever be realised.

We have had every three or four years a CIE Bill coming before Seanad Éireann. About eight years ago we legislated CIE into solvency and laid a solemn obligation on them from the Oireachtas that henceforth they were to pay their way. Again, that was an approach that many of us who spoke at that stage pointed out was just nonsense. It has proved to be so. We can be conscious, looking qualitatively at CIE, that great strides have been made. Certainly the train service has improved considerably. The emergency over the last two months must have resulted in a very considerable increase in traffic for CIE. It could very well have altered the profitability position. The emergency, even in its short period, changed airlines quickly from a loss to a profit situation because they were able to cut redundant services.

It is suggested that in the future we might have faster and more frequent services. We have too many services on the main line from Cork to Dublin. There is no call for any increase in that service. Obviously we must have a full public transport system within our cities. Having seen the effect of the drastic cut-down in the number of automobiles going through the cities in the last few months because of the petrol shortage we are delighted to see that cities can be brought to life again. The public have had an experiment and they can see that public transport can be used. It is vital to get down now to a drastic cutdown on the number of cars going into the cities, with a consequent improvement in the usage of public transport. People are conditioned to it now. It is in the interest of everyone that this should be done. I would go so far as to say that we might even have a toll system for cars going into our major cities in the future. Automobile drivers could be charged a toll, with a possibility of a reduction for every passenger carried. The real culpability lies in the use of the car for just one passenger, taking up the very valuable space on the roads and streets of our cities.

Now is the time to tackle that problem. I hope that this modernisation plan of CIE will start by having a critical and constructive look at what has happened during the past two months. Things are possible now that would not have been thought of two months ago. Two months ago the public would not have accepted some of the limitations on the use of private transport that are accepted now. With the increase in petrol prices that have occurred and the prospect of more to come there is an opportunity for a more profitable public transport system. The tide has turned. All factors combine to indicate that now is the time to tackle the job.

In the past those of us listening here protested again and again at the senseless policy of closing down branch lines. Now we can see the folly of that policy. We remember the West Cork railroad from Cork to Bantry that has now been demolished and remember that those engaged on demolition could not get out fast enough to ensure that the railway could not be utilised ever again. That is something we bitterly regret. With the developments that are foreshadowed in the south-west area and other places we may well find that we have got to put back, at tremendous cost, the rail link between Cork and Bantry.

On the other side we see the vandalism that got rid of the West Clare railroad, the Percy French railroad.

Mr. Russell

I could not agree more.

Professor Quinlan

Surely if there was any single railway that was capable of being a tourist attraction it was this railroad. There could have been a halfway policy of at least leaving it and letting it be used when the appropriate time came. It was demolished and every step taken to ensure that it could never be used again. I hear that the single-gauge railroad is puffing its way somewhere in Africa today.

Mr. Russell

Through darkest Africa.

Professor Quinlan

These are some of the mistakes made in the past which should not have been made. If we have faith and confidence in our future we will not make such mistakes again. Therefore, our approach to CIE and their development at this stage is really a barometer of our confidence in the future. While experts can advise. I do not think there is any need to remind a businessman like the Minister that they are fallible. This cost-benefit analysis is the greatest bit of jiggery-pokery that can be engaged in. If one knows what one wants to prove one can always fiddle the cost and the advantages around in such a way that the answer comes up.

I commend the Bill and I look forward to a really exciting time in the development of public transport in the next few years. The time is ripe. Let us face the problems involved.

Mr. A. O'Brien

I should like to join with the other Senators who have congratulated the Minister on the introduction of this Bill. I hope the money that has to be borrowed will be used by CIE to develop a more efficient transport service, not just for one section of the country but for the whole country. It is worthy of note too that the money is borrowed at a reasonably low rate of interest.

It is unfortunate that the operations of CIE result in a loss every year. It would be even more unfortunate if the fact that the loss is met every year by the taxpayer were to result in those who control the fortunes of CIE reaching a frame of mind where they felt that the taxpayer would foot the bill irrespective of how CIE do their business. I do not say that that attitude exists, but it would be unfortunate if a constant succession of payments by the taxpayer were to meet a constant succession of losses by a company. It would be unfortunate if that kind of thinking were to develop among those who administer the CIE service.

The emphasis in the advertising of the new "Supertrain" is on more comfort and greater speed, which is to be welcomed. The bus service also could have more comfort and certainly more speed. However, with the improvements in the main arterial roads this should come. A bus journey from Cavan to Dublin, of 70 miles, takes three hours, which is far too long. I should add that this is not the express bus, but the ordinary service bus and it has several stops on the journey. The delays when the bus stops to pick up passengers or let them off are too long. This journey has taken three hours each time for the last 20 years even though the road has been improved. CIE do not appear to realise that the people's time is valuable and that a person will think twice before spending three hours on a bus for a 70-mile journey. That is one reason why CIE lose patronage.

I travelled on a bus recently and there was a breakdown. That is not the cause of my complaint because breakdowns are not common on CIE buses. There was a delay of three-quarters of an hour while the bus was being repaired. It never ocurred to the driver to explain to the passengers what was wrong, how long they were likely to be delayed, or if they were likely to get out of the place at all. It should be a matter of common courtesy for officials operating these buses to be helpful and courteous to passengers and not to take it for granted that 30 persons on a bus under repair are willing to spend half an hour on the road without an explanation. Thirty people should not be delayed like that without any explanation or apology whatever.

Senator Dolan mentioned earlier the bus tours organised to places of tourist interest, and that they have been very successful. I have been at Busaras several times during the summer season and I saw buses going to different places of well-known scenic attraction. But little or nothing has been done by CIE to develop the desire on the part of visitors to travel to places that are equally beautiful but not as well-known. CIE have that obligation to the part of the country that is not well known overseas. They must try to get people to visit places of scenic attraction in different parts of the country. It is not right to go on the well-worn roads all the time and to give the impression that places of scenic beauty are confined to one area. I should like if more attention were given to this point.

People should not have to spend so much time queueing for tickets in the Busaras during the rush hour. There should be some allocation of staff for the rush hours. Sometimes there is only one person in the ticket office and perhaps 400 or 500 persons waiting to get tickets. It should be possible to have two or three persons in the ticket office during the rush hours and not have people queueing so long to get a ticket.

With regard to the excursion rates to Dublin from different parts of the country served by trains, I believe CIE owe the same concession to the parts of the country not served by trains. If it has been found economic to give cheap fares to areas served by train, such cheap fares should also be available to people who are not served by trains. There should be cheap fares on the buses during the week or at times when these buses are running half-empty. CIE should give some thought to this. With regard to these cheap fares on trains I think the "Great Train Robbery" slogan was a most unhappy choice. I do not think it displayed any great taste to perpetuate in a slogan like that the memory of one of the greatest train robberies that took place in these islands in the last 100 years. Anybody with any proper taste would not have let that slogan through.

I should like to refer to the opening page in the Minister's statement which says that:

Increases in rates and fares sought by the board in 1972 were postponed for almost a year pending completion of an investigation by the National Prices Commission and this, of course, has contributed significantly to the losses.

If CIE were a private company I believe that the trend towards losses would have been foreseen and a case could have been made to the National Prices Commission. It should not have been necessary for the company to operate at a loss for a long period of time pending an investigation of the claim. A private concern could not run its affairs like that. I do not believe it would have been done in CIE were those responsible not aware of the fact that, no matter how things ended up, the taxpayer would eventually foot the bill.

It is most satisfactory to hear that the road freight services showed a profit. The profit was small but in previous years road freight services showed a very significant loss. One of the strongest contributing factors to the decline of the railways was a most unsatisfactory freight service. There were inordinate delays and losses shown and that contributed to a very large degree to the failure of the railroad system. For that reason it is significant that the road freight service has shown a profit following a year when there was quite a sizeable loss.

The provincial bus services have shown a decline in profit. Something might come out of the point I made earlier on about speeding up the buses. The most annoying point in the whole statement is the losses incurred in Dublin city. Notwithstanding the increase in the number of passengers carried a loss of £360,000 was incurred by the Dublin city service compared with a profit of £185,000 in 1971-72. That is the most significant factor in the whole of the Minister's speech. It is something which calls for close and critical examination. In Dublin city a huge number of people wish to travel at fixed times. A large number of people are willing to travel outside of peak hours. It is a certain market. The people are always there. Their journeys are always the same. The distances they travel are very short and the bus fares are very high. A critical examination is necessary to determine why the returns from the Dublin city bus services have fallen as such a degree in one year. If CIE were providing an efficient service, with parking presenting such a problem in most areas in Dublin at the present time, people would leave their cars at home and avail themselves of the bus services. With the present energy crisis it is more than likely that people will find it better and more economical to use the public transport service. If they do, they will expect efficiency and a good service. The returns would indicate that this type of service is not forthcoming in Dublin to the extent we should like to see. I would not wish to be hypercritical. I am quite aware that in many aspects CIE are doing a very good job, but this is something that calls for immediate attention.

Finally, I should like to say that CIE did not give sufficient attention to a new development that has taken place in recent years. Large numbers of people from rural Ireland are anxious to go home for the week-ends. In some instances private companies foresaw this development and provided buses to take people home to the provinces from Dublin city on Friday evening or Saturday evening and to bring them back on Sunday. CIE should have foreseen this trend. This service should have been provided to people from rural areas working in the city who were anxious to maintain their contacts with home.

Mr. Keegan

I welcome the opportunity of making a few remarks on this Bill. All of us have come to realise that CIE are more of a social amenity than a huge business concern. The Irish taxpayers have been conditioned into the belief that in order for CIE to survive they must receive State subsidies. We must also bear in mind that the livelihood of some 14,000 to 16,000 people is at stake. It is probably cheaper to continue to subsidise the activities of CIE than to have those people on the unemployment register. I do not see any alternative to the present system of subsidising the activities of CIE. The duty of CIE is to make their services more attractive and to enable them to operate as competitively as possible. The difficulty is that CIE are such a vast organisation that their activities cannot be geared on the same lines as those of a private transport company. There is no use blaming any particular section of CIE or any particular Minister because they fail to make a profit each year. CIE are bound by law to give a service. They have to comply with regulations and they must give a service despite the fact that this service may not be a paying proposition.

It is a pity that our rail system cannot be organised to cater for the meat trade and the cattle industry. CIE lost the bulk of the cattle transportation service because they did not have suitable trains and because many of the marts were built in locations not suitable for CIE rail haulage. The result was that CIE put on cattle trucks, but these trucks did not secure the business because the private haulier was in a position to give a quicker and more economic service. It was a pity that CIE did not move in and try to maintain that wedge in the haulage business. It would have enabled them to carry more tonnage and to attract a business which was a profitable one.

That situation cannot be altered now because of the changes that took place in recent years. The marts have been located away from the stations. I know of only one or two marts which have been located beside the railway stations. The buyers who come to those marts are not availing of the services which CIE are in a position to provide for them. The cattle trucks go direct to the boats or meat factories. CIE would be well advised to examine the possibility of attracting back some of that business. The fuel crisis which we have all heard so much about may in the long run prove a blessing in disguise in so far as CIE are concerned. The Irish motorist will begin to do some costings to see whether it is more profitable to avail of the rail services or to use his private car. I am convinced that if CIE can make it more attractive for the motorist to use the rail system he will leave his car at home. Of course, we must bear in mind that any increase in fuel costs will also affect CIE, but they should make a special effort to induce more people to use their system. People will use the system if it is more economical to do so. Therefore, the rail service should be in a better position to do it than the bus service, because of the new super trains which have been mentioned and because of the time factor involved in getting from one place to another.

From Mullingar, near where I live, it is possible to get to Dublin by rail in an hour. If one travels by road it may take an hour and a half. The fuel crisis has created a great deal of new thinking and rethinking about the whole CIE network. If petrol prices continue to rise and if the world shortage of oil continues, motorists will be compelled for economic reasons to think of using this network. CIE should therefore do everything possible to exploit the situation.

Another aspect of the activities of CIE which I feel could be exploited further is the school transport service. It is a very controversial service in rural Ireland. In one area you will have a minibus loaded to capacity passing children on the road who are prepared to pay their fare on the bus. But, unfortunately, because of the regulations the bus cannot carry them. In another area, two townlands away, you will have a full-size CIE bus transporting from 12 to 14 children. That is all the children there for that bus to carry. The parents are prepared to pay the fares of their children in order to have them transported to and from school in safety, but they cannot do so because CIE cannot provide a bigger bus. There could be a greater amount of co-ordination so as to make that service a more viable proposition. It could be carried out by the staff of CIE in conjunction with the school authorities and the school managers throughout the country.

You cannot blame people for becoming discontented and disillusioned with the service when they realise that a full-size bus may have only 14 children on it and a minibus in another area may be packed to capacity. That is something worthy of the attention of the administrators in CIE. If this were properly organised they could earn more revenue and also satisfy the parents of children who are at present being denied a transport service, who would be assured that their children were travelling in safety and would return home to the rural area in daylight. I am sure CIE and the Department of Education could come together to work out a more acceptable and equitable solution to that problem.

Another problem that always seems to cause contention is communication between the various staffs of CIE and the management. Because of the fear of redundancy every member of CIE is concerned for the future of that organisation. From time to time they are prepared to make suggestions as to how CIE could operate more economically and be made more attractive to the people. They are always disillusioned because of the fact that their suggestions are never asked for or if they are asked for, they are never considered or acted upon. I know from my own experience and my contacts with the various staffs of CIE, both in Athlone and Mullingar, that their concern is for their own jobs, first of all, and for the future of Córas Iompair Éireann. CIE would be well advised to have greater consultation with the staff because they can put forward opinions and views and make recommendations which would enable CIE to become a more profitable organisation.

At present CIE have a complete monopoly of the transport of lime from the limeworks throughout the country to the farmyards. Whenever CIE have a breakdown or a strike that service comes to a standstill. The farmers become anxious. They fail to have the lime delivered or spread at a given time, and there is only one particular season for it. Many people believe that if CIE are not able to give the service they should allow the use of private trucks to deliver lime to the farmers throughout the country. Again, that is something worthy of consideration. It is something that can be rectified if there is proper cooperation between the management of CIE, the supervisors and the truck drivers. All those people are involved and it will require greater communication and understanding on the part of those people to ensure that a workable service can be provided.

We are all anxious to see CIE becoming a viable proposition. Crisis or no crisis, I am still convinced CIE will never become a viable proposition unless we can condition ourselves to the fact that the Irish taxpayer will have to continue to subsidise the activities of that organisation. There is one problem we should all try and have eliminated with regard to CIE and that is vandalism. Most Senators will recall that when CIE started mystery tours some years ago the hooligan element availed of the opportunity to travel by train and that they wrecked those trains before they reached their home destination. That is something that we all must condemn in the strongest possible words. We cannot blame CIE for discontinuing those tours. It proved a costly exercise for them because of this vandalism. As I said before, CIE can only continue with the support of those capital sums which are granted to them occasionally. Therefore, I hope the fuel crisis may prove a blessing in disguise as far as CIE are concerned.

Mr. Markey

We have for long now been accustomed to hearing the worst of news as regards the CIE rail services, and it is no surprise that the Minister has come once again before us looking for a loan this time of £4 million. But to me the disquieting side of his report is the position of the road services. We should spend a moment or two on them.

It is alarming to find that notwithstanding an increase of 5 per cent in the city road passenger services, there is an actual loss in money terms in the Dublin city services and even a fall in profit on the provincial road services.

We are no longer surprised at continuing loss on the rail services; indeed we expect to put in the money as it is required. But we are now in the position that something even worse than a break-even position is beginning to apply in regard to the road services. That seems very strange to me. To find that in the city of Dublin, where the greatest density of population exists, a natural loss has been incurred is somewhat alarming.

One point in the Minister's statement is encouraging: we are now seeing an end to the existing blanket type subvention given to cover the weaknesses which exist in CIE. This blanket-type of assistance to any organisation can sometimes be merely a camouflage to cover up weaknesses which have been inherent in that organisation for a long time past. It is good to realise that we must now come up with new suggestions to meet EEC regulations in this regard. We hope that, whatever these regulations throw up, they will provide for a far tighter scrutiny of what the subvention will go towards in future.

I suppose hindsight is a wonderful thing. Looking back to the late fifties, when we started closing down the commuter lines around Dublin, we can see the mistake made. I suppose, again with hindsight we can take encouragement from the fact that McKinsey's Report in 1971 has not been adopted. He at that time saw difficulty in the transitional costs involved in closing down the rail services altogether, transitional in the sense of redundancy payments and so on. I am sure if the same people were looking at the situation now other factors would have come to the surface which would have encouraged them to continue with the system we have at the moment.

We are in a situation where we have no option but to hand over the money as it is required. The Minister, in asking for this £4 million to meet modernisation in railways, expresses a hope that this modernisation will lead to a greater increase in traffic by rail. Perhaps it will. But I would ask the Minister to look closely in future at the road situation because no doubt we are heading into serious difficulty when we find ourselves not even at a break-even position at the moment in that respect.

Dr. West

The atmosphere in the House indicates the place CIE hold in the affections of the Irish people, because we are managing to spend an enormous sum of money in a short time and so far there have been no complaints, nobody saying this is too much money. Everybody is reflecting what is a national opinion—that CIE are essential to the country, that they have a very important social role as well as an economic one and that we are now used to Ministers for Transport and Power coming in and asking us for ever larger subventions. On the other hand this is an enormous sum of money the Minister is asking for and he is giving CIE three blank cheques: one of £4 million, £38 million and then a short-term increase of £3 million. From the point of view of the legislator it would be pleasant if we had some more concrete idea of how this money has been spent. From CIE's point of view they just want blank cheques. The Minister has given us some ideas of the possible ways in which the money is being spent but there is very little concrete costing. We have very little to go on.

My basic philosophy is to support CIE because of their essential place in our whole economic and social life. Like the previous speakers I think that the company has an opportunity, now that the price of petrol has been increased so markedly over the last few days. It will undoubtedly increase again. Many people will be turning to public transport—buses, trains, freight and all the forms of public transport. It is up to the company to take the ball on the hop. Things are going for them now. They are obviously going to have to pay increased charges on their fuel, but I think that they are going to have increased passenger numbers. The CIE management has shown imagination in the past. I feel sometimes that the imaginative people in CIE leave the top structure of the company too early. I hope that CIE recognise the opportunity they have at the moment because of the fuel crisis and that they press on with increasing the passenger load, increasing the freight load and generally using the money we are voting for them to modernise in a way which will make CIE more attractive to the shipper and to the passenger.

I wish to make some specific comments. Clearly, as the McKinsey Report says, the actual method of paying money over to CIE is going to have to change. The Minister did mention that this was being reviewed, not so much the sums but the headings under which the money is to be paid. The National Prices Commission's Occasional Paper No. 10 sets this out clearly in section 6 when it talks about transport policy in the EEC. It says on page 118 that:

It would seem very unlikely that the present "block grant" to CIE would be permissible under present EEC regulations. On the other hand, grants could be given to a great many individual services including....

It goes on to mention the commuter railway in Dublin, passenger and freight services on some sections of the main line, unremunerative provincial bus services and unremunerative road freight services. It points out that the EEC directives—regulations 1191/69, 1192/69 and 1107/70—take into account the social benefits of the services involved and therefore make allowances for the very important role CIE plays in the less well-off areas of the country. I hope that the company will continue to maintain services to these areas. I think it is essential that they continue to develop services to the west, south and north, as Senators have asked. There is no question that this is one of the company's most important roles in the whole Irish economic and social situation.

Since CIE were formed in 1944, in spite of considerable modernisation, there have been recurring deficits. As I said, we are now in a position where we are attuned to expect CIE to run it at a deficit because we realise the social advantage. The McKinsey Report has done some cost-benefit analysis on the sort of problem that would occur if the rail system were closed down. In 1971, when the McKinsey Report was published, it said that:

The cost of redundancy compensation under current railway schemes is estimated to be £7 million per annum. A net present value calculation over 20 years estimates the cost of this proposal to be around £70 million.

That gives us some idea of the problem we would be faced with if the purely economic view was taken and CIE were cut down, a purely economic view of dealing with the current costs. Although the McKinsey Report has been criticised severely by economists, who say its cost-benefit analyses were not sufficiently tight and sufficiently accurate, I would say to the Minister much the same as Senator Quinlan has already said: that even the most sophisticated cost benefit analyses do not really give the true picture. Just because somebody now has a more sophisticated approach does not mean it is the right one. The people as a whole support CIE and realised that there are many services which it is essential to run, many services which must be maintained and must be maintained by subsidies from the taxpayer, by loans from the European Bank, by raising finance in the way in which the Minister suggests in his Bill.

I should like to talk a bit about the railways. The railways are really the main loss-making side of CIE. Any railway system has fixed costs— the cost inherent in putting down the permanent way and buying the initial rolling stock—and then, of course, it has operating costs, wages and so on. One of the ways in which the money has been spent recently is in purchasing new rolling stock for long distance trains. Clearly, the new rolling stock is a success and CIE are to be commended on their choice of stock. I should like the Minister to say something in his reply about the modernisation of the permanent way. There are certain trial pieces of continuous rail down—certainly on the Cork-Dublin line, they are so obvious you can feel them—but what is CIE policy on continuous welded rails?

Their policy on coloured light signalling has been made clear. Basically, they intend replacing semaphore signalling with coloured light signalling. However, I should like to know what the policy is on continuous welded rail. There is a great deal of expense involved but ultimately there is no question that the continuous welded rail is the thing.

The company are to be commended on their efforts to get more people to travel on long distances by rail. The operation that went under the hideous name of "The Great Train Robbery," as Senator O'Brien said, with the mad men from the wild west jumping out of your television screen at you, was a success. It increased the numbers of passengers travelling, although I do not think it increased revenue a great deal. But it is essential that a transport company which receive a subsidy should be running full trains. We had the educational tours, the cheap midweek fares, the experiment that was tried a year or two ago of a £2 late night return fare from Dublin to Cork, which was a success. I should like to know what the company policy is about repeating these late nightearly morning operations because they are worth trying. Experiments of that kind should be encouraged. It gives one the idea that the top management of CIE are making an effort to sell their product to the people.

In some ways the Northern Ireland Railways, who looked as if they were going to go through a bad spell under the Unionist administration, have got a great fillup and are ahead of CIE in many ways. They got new rolling stock before we did and they have done a great deal of modernisation on the rail. They are revamping the link between Lisburn and Antrim which is going to cut hours off the Dublin-Derry time. They have already announced their plans for a central station in the Markets area in Belfast. They intend to close down the three existing stations.

One thing that the Northern Ireland Railways can be complimented on is the fact that they never sold their permanent way. We made a terrible mistake when we disposed of the permanent way. I do not know about the Bantry line, but I know the problem on the Harcourt Street line. If you dispose of any part of your permanent way you are in trouble. Whatever you do about pulling up the line, keep the land, because when the suburbs of Dublin develop, as they have done— and it is clear that a Harcourt Street to Bray line would be of tremendous benefit—the land is not there. Do not sell the permanent way.

In speaking about the North—I travel up to the North a good deal— I should like to pay a tribute to the crews, both of Northern Ireland Railways and CIE, who take trains and buses up to the North under very trying conditions. They are working under great difficulties and they deserve every credit. I am happy to pay a tribute to them and get it on the Seanad record. They are often in considerable danger but they stick to their job. They deserve our best thanks for the work they have continued to do under very difficult circumstances.

To move on to the commuter rail services, as McKinsey points out, they are totally uneconomic. In 1971 Dublin commuter rail services showed a £300,000 operating loss, but McKinsey did some calculations. I am not really clear how rigorous the basis of their calculations was, but if you estimated the social cost of closing down these suburban rail services and of trying to put everybody back on to the roads in cars and buses, then the total additional time spent by commuters would be 1:8 million hours. They estimated the cost as £540,000 at 30p per man per hour and £900,000 at 50p per man per hour. There was a net credit balance in favour of retaining commuter services.

The Minister has indicated that some of this money we are voting today is going to be spent on updating commuter services. We are going to get, we hope, completely new rolling stock. Sliding doors are needed, more standing room and less seating so that people can get on and off quickly at the stations and so that you can put more people into the trains for the short haul through the city from Lansdowne Road to say Raheny or Kilbarrack. You also need trains which have a higher acceleration and this will allow greater frequency. The old push-and-pull units with the diesel at one end or at the other have not really got the acceleration required. We need completely new units there.

I hope CIE are studying the problems and the solutions adopted in other cities. In Hamburg for instance, they have commuter tickets which can be got on a giro system through the bank. All the services are interlocked —the underground service, the above ground train service, the bus services. All the timetables are issued together so as to familiarise people with the interchanges. The Hamburg HVV, the company which run the three services, issue puzzles and special card games with the major lines depicted on these. These are puzzles involving train times, bus times, routes and route numbers, so that the kids in Hambourg can learn of the rather complicated system in a pleasant and interesting way. They have eliminated all bus conductors, turnstiles and ticket collections. All ticket collection is done on an honour code system, spot checks with a very stiff fine of £50 if you are caught riding without a ticket. That seems to be worth looking at, too. We should look at the various modern ideas in suburban transportation.

I have one here which was developed by an Irish, in fact a Cork, planning expert who has been working in Motherwell in Lanarkshire. He won second prize in a competition which CIE ran for Cork traffic planning a couple of years ago. His basic plan was to cut down offstreet parking in the cities, meter all the streets in the city centre, put up the parking fee to a realistic figure: say, 50p per hour in the city centre, decreasing as you go out further. Then use the revenue from the parking meters to provide a virtually free bus service. Because the parking meters would be expensive and cut down city centre parking this would allow the bus service to the city centre to flow more easily. The frequency of the service could be increased with a smaller number of buses because of the ease of traffic flow. This plan would be well worth looking at and I should like to see the company's reaction to it.

There have been, as stated by the Minister, considerable developments in the container traffic. The container depots, the idea of bulk trains, liner trains, container services, the mineral ore traffic, the cement traffic, the Guinness trains and the container trains in conjunction with B & I—all these are welcome developments in CIE. It is clear that this is the way freight traffic will go. The wagon load traffic, the small separates and the parcel traffic must be phased out over a time except where it is absolutely essential. These should not be carried by rail. There is the idea of major centres with frequent fast goods trains and road haulage distribution from container depots. There have been many improvements made in the services. The passenger express buses are a considerable improvement. The coach services are very good and serve areas which do not have rail services, particularly from Dublin to the north-west and along the west coast. These should be increased.

Debate adjourned.

Business suspended at 6 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.