Most of what I had intended to say about CIE has already been said by other Senators. The main theme expressed is one of dissatisfaction. It is the duty of public representatives to express the views of the people with regard to public services. If an opinion poll was undertaken to ascertain what the public in general think of the services provided by CIE I think there would be a high vote of disapproval and dissatisfaction.
One of the major causes of dissatisfaction with CIE is the frequency of strikes within the company. I am not going to apportion the blame to management or the unions, I do not know enough about it to be in a position to do that. It is time that somebody got down to finding out what is the cause of the lack of harmony, of the friction, what is the cause of the massive loss of work days. We were told yesterday that 50,000 days were lost since 1982 due to strike action. That works out at an average of three days for every worker in the service. We must take into account the huge amount of inconvenience these strikes cause to the fare-paying public and the amount of dissatisfaction they generate among taxpayers who see themselves contributing enormous sums of money year after year to maintain a service only to see it break down, very often at a time when services are most needed. Strikes are very common during the Christmas and the holiday seasons. In addition to causing dissatisfaction among the fare-paying public strikes militate against the development of tourism.
There are responsible leaders in the trade union movement. Some of them speak irresponsibly at times, the few rather than the many. It is the duty of management and unions to come together and work out a formula that will ensure the maximum continuity of services.
After disputes wage increases, when granted, are made retrospective. That should be borne in mind by workers before they go on strike. We have a mechanism set up to see that justice is done. People should be under an obligation to go to the tribunals or courts and to abide by their findings. If they are not satisfied with the way things are done at this level an attempt should be made by the Oireachtas to amend the constitutions of these tribunals, to add to their functions, or whatever is necessary in order to ensure continuity of a dependable service so that a person can wake up every morning knowing that public transport will be there to take him or her to work and home again that evening. It should also assist people who come to visit the country and who need to travel to the provinces for accommodation. Too often that has not happened and this has given us a bad image abroad. It has militated against the development of tourism in Ireland.
This matter has assumed such proportions that it is the bounden duty of the top people on both sides to say this cannot continue, that the public will not tolerate it much longer. It is their duty to come together and by a process of reasonable argument and discussion work out a formula that would ensure that these strikes will not recur so regularly. Sometimes they occur for the flimsiest of reasons.
Some years ago we had a strike that arose from a dispute about who should change a bus wheel. That had a great effect on the minds of taxpayers who are contributing up to £100 million a year to keep the services on the road. It has an effect on the fare-paying public who believe that the fares are excessive but who would probably be more content to pay these high fares if they could have a reasonable expectation of continuity of service. There is an obligation on the people at the top on both sides to come together in the realisation that this will not be accepted much longer, that they have that duty to the public, they owe it to those who pay the massive subvention to keep them on the road. If that is not done, if it can be seen clearly that it will not be done, then I believe it is time that more scope for development was given to private enterprise.
There are countless examples of private enterprise providing a good service to the people in areas where CIE do not provide a service. That in itself is a condemnation of how the CIE services work: these private enterprises are providing a great service and they are making a reasonable profit as well as giving employment and earning a living for themselves. When private enterprise services were developed these opportunities were there for CIE but they did not take them — CIE apparently did not care whether people wanted to go home for weekends or not.
Senator Lanigan spoke about the service provided by private enterprise who bring buses to Dublin at weekends, to take people home and leave them back on time for work on Monday morning. That service was there for CIE to take up and develop but they did not do it. If people could not get off from work an hour or two before finishing time to catch a bus at Store Street, or wherever, and if they could not make arrangements to be back on time for work on Monday morning by using the ordinary public transport, then they did not go home at all. Private enterprise saw that young people from provincial Ireland working in Dublin want to get home regularly, they saw there was a market there and they provided it and are providing it, to my knowledge at much less than half the fare CIE would charge if they attempted to provide the same service.
That is a condemnation of CIE. It probably arose from a refusal of workers to work late hours and so on. Private enterprise came in and now collect young people in Parnell Square and other areas at roughly 6 o'clock on Friday evenings and bring them home, and the young people are using this service. An operator I know personally collects a bus load of people in Parnell Square, takes them home to east Cavan and provides cars or smaller buses to take them from his Cavan terminal to their homes three or four miles away, and this is done at a very very reasonable fare. It operates on Friday evenings and on Sunday evenings or Monday mornings.
That opportunity was there for years but was not taken up by CIE. If it had been taken up and developed at the same level as private enterprise can develop it, it would not be necessary for the taxpayer to contribute as much to keep CIE operating. But because of CIE's lack of initiative and will to go out and look for work, the contribution by the taxpayer increases year after year.
Senator Lanigan drew attention to the fact that these private bus owners provide services for GAA and other clubs on Sundays to take supporters to venues which are some distance from the clubs' home towns. They do this at very reasonable fares and CIE could not compete because their charges would be too high. This is another example of the value of private enterprise and lack of initiative or determination on the part of people to look for business. A company may be secure and subsidised by the Government. If they go into the red the debts will be written off or they will be paid for by the State at the end of the year, and the company can continue to operate the following year as if they had been in the black. While that tendency is there there is not the desire or dynamism to go out to get more work and make an honest effort to give a good service to justify the company's existence and, above all, to be worthy of the continuing support of the taxpayer.
CIE's timetables very often do not suit passengers. I know of cases where CIE buses come into the main centre of a county from rural areas. Very often people come in to visit patients in a hospital which is a mile or so outside the town. They cannot spend even the briefest time shopping if they want to catch the bus home. Some consideration should be given, especially on recognised shopping days and on hospital visiting days, to provide a service which would enable people from outlying areas to come into the town, visit the hospital, have a reasonable time for shopping and still be able to catch the bus home. Slight adjustments in the timetable would enable that to be done and give the sort of satisfaction to the people that they are entitled to and are paying for but which they are not getting at the moment, directly or indirectly.
Another aspect which has drawn attention to the failure of CIE to measure up to expectations is the development of firms of private carriers. I refer to a rather recent development in provincial Ireland where they have parcel collections by private people. They take these parcels to Dublin and collect parcels for the return trip. I know a number of people who are operating a thriving business in this way. This was there for CIE if they wished to take it and were anxious to look for work. If they had the conviction that if they were not getting work they could not survive they would be more prepared to look for work. CIE cannot, ad infinitum, count on the taxpayer to pay through the nose for their lack of enterprise or efficiency. These points should be placed before the people most closely associated with the development of CIE and taken in the context that what is being said in this House today is, in my honest opinion, a sincere reflection of what the public outside think. If the public outside are thinking this, then it is time the bosses got down to some thinking about the public and see in what way CIE can give a better service to them and fulfil the role they were intended to fill the day the board were established, and in what way they can meet the changing circumstances of life in the country. It should have occurred to CIE that with a growing migration of young people to Dublin for work they should have been providing a new service for them. They should do whatever possible to take them back on Sunday evenings or Monday mornings and take them to their homes on Friday evenings. That trend of mass movement from the provinces to Dublin for work has been going on for some time but as far as I can see CIE have done nothing to meet it but private enterprise has.
The common argument being put forward by protagonists in the Córas Iompair Éireann system is that in addition to providing the transport needs of the community they provide a social service, that they put on transport to sparsely populated, remote areas where there is no hope of a profit making service being operated. That is their stock-in-trade argument, and it is true to a degree. Because it is true to a degree it has been recognised by successive Governments and that has been the reason prevailing at the Cabinet table for the State subvention to CIE — to provide a social service by running buses into sparsely populated areas that are not likely to yield profits. I admit that this is very necessary, but the fact that CIE did not seek development in the other areas that I have drawn attention to proves conclusively that they are too inclined to sit back and say, "We are all right; we are assured of State subventions if things do not go well during the year. We are all assured of our jobs; we do not have to be successful; all we have to do is to maintain it as it is and we will all get our wage packets and our increments when they are due, and if increases are not up to schedule we will go on strike." That is the approach, and the people are fed up with it. The country cannot afford it and somebody has a responsibility to do something effective about it.
I wish to draw attention to one or two points which could be described as local issues. I am not happy with the tours organised by CIE for tourists because they concentrate too much on certain parts of the country to the neglect of others. In the lakeland district of Cavan, Monaghan, Leitrim and Fermanagh, we believe that we do not get a fair deal in tourist promotion. We have something to offer. Anglers and people who enjoy pursuits of that kind feel that we have an unrivalled attraction. That applies to Monaghan, Cavan, Leitrim, parts of Roscommon, Westmeath and Meath. There are not many trips, if any, organised by CIE to cater for people who would like to visit those parts of the country. Many people who would visit there do not because there is no reasonable transport system to take them there. Instead they visit the parts of the country that get about 90 per cent of our tourists, that is, the south-west and up the west coast. The rest of the country, with its own attractions that appeal to many people, does not get the support it should get. To a degree, CIE are responsible for that.
My last point is purely local, the CIE bus depot in Cavan town. It is an old building in an advanced state of decay. If it were not for the dedicated attention by the CIE employees in that town it would have become completely dilapidated before now. We have been hoping for a number of years that CIE would build a new bus station there, as they undertook to do some years ago. There is no immediate sign of that happening. If you were to judge from the correspondence from Dundalk, which is the central area, it was more likely to happen three or four years ago than it is now. The recession has been blamed for all our ills — it is responsible for some of them, but not all — is of course being blamed for the fact that we cannot get the bus station we are entitled to. The bus station in Cavan pays its way. It does a great deal of business and in my opinion we should have the new station built. I ask the Minister, if he has some influence with the people of Dundalk, to see that this urgent matter will be attended to in the near future rather than the distant future.
