I had made a great part of my contribution on the last day here and my contribution today will not be a long one because it is not an area in which I have any expertise or great knowledge. Nevertheless it is a very important area. The explanatory memorandum which accompanies this Bill tells us that it provides for the establishment of the Dublin Transport Authority for the purpose of improving the planning and operation of road and rail transport and the management of traffic in the Dublin area and it goes on to list the main functions and deal with them in some detail: transport planning, transport funding, public transport services and traffic management. These have already been gone into in some detail in the Green Paper. Clearly it is a Bill of great importance. I welcome it and I hope it will be as successful as the Minister in his introductory remarks led us to believe it will. As I mentioned very briefly on the last occasion the car and motorised transport has had a much greater impact on society than we realise, to such an extent that, unfortunately, much of our planning is centred around the motor car rather than people, as it should be. People have suffered; the environment has suffered; the aesthetics of building and planning have suffered. While the car has been a great influence for the better it has like many other similar influences this unsatisfactory side also. The motor car has been to a large extent responsible for unsatisfactory side also. The motor car has been because without the motor car transport from the rural areas to the urban areas would not have been possible. In consequence there is the high cost of the infrastructure necessary in those situations, the roads, telephone services, water services and sewerage facilities. To a large extent we could blame this on the motor car. In other areas not immediately associated with planning such as the risk factors involved, the accident rate and so on are all related to the motor car.
One of the consequences of living in a rural area and commuting to the urban or city areas is that in some family situations two cars are necessary. This in itself brings on other pressures such as wage increases and so on. The motor car has this major impact which has not yet been fully comprehended or assessed. It is reasonable to believe that in future this influence will intensify rather than otherwise.
We have a major problem in the Dublin area and it is necessary to deal with it. It is of the utmost importance that it would be dealt with comprehensively and as quickly as possible.
In the Confederation of Irish Industry Information Sheet No. 3, May 1986, there is comprehensive coverage of the Green Paper and the views of the Confederation with regard to aspects of the Green Paper. It mentions on page 6 under "Urban Transport":
Transport infrastructure in the Dublin region, must provide an adequate infrastructure and traffic management system, to increase the efficiency of transport services and reduce costs. It should also be borne in mind that the road system in the Dublin region is part of the overall national transport infrastructure. It must not therefore be regarded in isolation or related solely to the provision of public or private passenger urban transport services. The Confederation fully supports the road development programme now under way. Improvements in the infrastructure would clearly benefit public and private transport operators.
I would try to emphasise that point, that while we are dealing primarily with the situation in the Dublin area it is most important to remember that this is only part of the larger national system and it is only in that context that we can deal adequately with this Bill and this problem. In so far as the Bill comes to terms with this requirement and the necessity to remember that at all times we are dealing with the capital city of this country but nevertheless that it should be part of the overall strategy and plan to deal with transport — only in that context will the problem be solved.
On my very few visits to London I noticed that the traffic seemed to move more smoothly. Delays seemed to be very short. The traffic lights seemed to hold up the traffic for shorter periods. Everything seemed to be more in line with clockwork than in this city. I wondered why and I still wonder at the great difference. One of the reasons must be the network of roads and the infrastructure and consequently investment to improve the situation is most important. I am not too clear as to what plans will result from this Bill regarding the actual investment. I know that there is provision to make recommendations to planning authorities and to the local authorities to take part in that area. I am not too clear as to what is the actual investment. There can be no satisfactory solution to this major problem without substantial investment.
We have a road structure which is very much behind the times. Apart from the road surface which in many instances because of potholes is in a bad state of repair, the base for the roadwork was not adequate to cope with the present day traffic. Our major problem seems to be that there was not enough investment in our roads. As one, who for many years was involved in road design, road operations, and seeing the problems that were involved, I know the great difficulties regarding improvement, but the major problem is finance. With our accession to the EC this was one area which I felt should have got greater support. This year a major campaign for road improvement is supposed to start. I hope it will.
We are all particularly concerned about our own areas. I came in from Navan to Dublin and while the road from Donegal to Dublin is a first class road and by and large is designed for traffic flows of 60 m.p.h. — and even parts of the road are still be improved — when one comes to Clonee, for about three miles of the road there is a bottleneck. The road is narrow: there is no grass margin on one side. It is impossible to overtake slow-moving traffic. It seems strange to me how roads well away from the city were improved and this bottleneck was left unattended. It would seem to me logical to start with the city and to improve the roads leading into it. In fact, this was done generally but for some unknown reason this particular road got no attention and the result is that if one is behind a JCB in the morning or is behind slow-moving traffic one must move at a snail's pace at about 5 m.p.h. into the city. No improvement would be possible I think with that situation. While I pinpoint this case which is known to me personally I am sure that many other Members of the House would be able to pick out similar situations in their own areas. So, if you take that on a national level there is a major problem with regard to the infrastructure and design of roads, the foundations, with widths of roads, the alignment and so on. It is necessary to deal with all of this before any great improvement would be possible. This demands investment and without nit picking it seems wrong that no provision is being made for this. However, that may well be otherwise provided for and I would welcome a comment on this from the Minister when he is replying.
I found the Green Paper on Transport Policy very helpful. It was very comprehensive. The problems were dealt with and the solutions listed in an easily-understood manner. There is reference to the Transport Consultative Commission's report which was published in 1980. We are told that the commission saw the first priority in Dublin as a reduction in traffic congestion, particularly at peak hours and proposed a series of traffic management measures to bring about improvements in the short and medium term. Over the years I have noticed, particularly recently, a great improvement with regard to traffic flow. This morning I came in from Ashbourne and there was no delay. This must be due in large measure to the proposals of the Dublin Transport Task Force. The Minister has paid tribute to that task force and I would like to do likewise. It is obvious that in some instances, particularly in the outskirts of the city, the problem has been dealt with to a large extent by the provision of traffic lights, and while traffic lights may have an important role to play, in many instances the provision of traffic lights has resulted in slowing up the traffic. I realise that gardaí cannot be on point duty in all these places and some consideration will have to be given to that aspect of it. While I would be critical of it to some extent, I must pay tribute to the work of the task force. My experience is that a great improvement has been effected over the last few years.
The Green Paper stated that progress in achieving the objectives of the commission has been slower than expected and it lists a number of reasons for this. No. 1 was industrial relations problems and that is one I do not want to go into. I do hope that some improvement will be made in this area and I am sure it will. In a situation where workmen are not satisfied and find it impossible to carry out their work properly and well, there will be discontent. If this Bill is a success it will bring about a situation where there will be an improvement with regard to traffic flow and other areas and I am sure the industrial relations problems will also be reduced.
Progress in the introduction of parking controls has not been as fast as recommended by the commission. The Green Paper has stated that the levels of parking charges and on-the-spot fines to date has not been sufficiently high to discourage long-term parking. It is hard to understand why this has not been a success. With the increase in the numbers of traffic wardens to 109 full time and 15 part time, it is difficult to understand this problem. I know the traffic wardens have a difficult role to play. I would like to see part of their role being to help motorists rather than appearing to be ready to pounce on the motorist who is parked illegally. While saying that I do not have any sympathy for the motorist — and I know there are many of them who want to drive right up to their shops or places of destination and have no regard for anyone else. Constantly we see white or yellow lines ignored and we see traffic lights being ignored. Notwithstanding the substantial increase in the traffic warden service and increases in the penalties for illegal parking enforcement measures have not succeeded in effectively controlling illegal parking.
Finally, we are told that the statutory body with responsibility and necessary powers for overall transport management which the commission envisage as essential will only come into being following the enactment of this Bill which is before us. So, for that reason it is most important.
The duties of the Dublin Transport Authority are set out in section 8 (4). It states that in the performance of its functions the Authority may (a) promote, engage in and participate in programmes of public education relating to road and rail transport in the authority's functional area; (b) promote, engage in and participate in research relating to road and rail transport in the Authority's functional area and (c) promote the greater use of public transport in the Authority's functional area. These are all very important rules.
Education is most important and this is an area where the traffic wardens could also co-operate. Regarding the flow of traffic, to promote the greater use of public transport within the Authority's functional area is perhaps the most important objective of all. To discourage private motorists from overplaying their role it is important to provide a good public transport service and anything of that kind that follows from this Bill can only help in that regard.
Section 15 is the longest section in this Bill and deals with traffic wardens, so I am quite sure the Minister would agree with me about the importance of the traffic warden's role.
Part 3 of the Bill deals with town planning and this incorporates section 24 to section 28. Section 23 empowers the Authority to make recommendations to the Minister for Communications as to public transport facilities which the Authority consider should be provided in their functional area. Section 24, as we are told by the Explanatory Memorandum, empowers the Authority to make recommendations to the relevant planning authorities in their functional area as to the content of their development plans prepared under the Local Government Planning and Development Act. These two sections empower the authority to make recommendations but what is the value of making recommendations? I am sure these recommendations do not have to be accepted, that it is possible to make recommendations at present. For example, under the five year plan prepared by the planning authority it is possible to make recommendations. Indeed I believe that it is the practice at present to make submissions and these must be taken into consideration. As I understand it, the Bill does not have much further bite in that regard. Recommendations would be considered, I am sure, but could be rejected for various reasons, mostly from the point of view of finance. I cannot see any great advance from the present situation where submissions have to be taken into consideration by the planning authority under the provision of the five year plan. This Bill does not envisage any further developments.
The Minister, in his comprehensive introduction, told us that the strategy of the Bill was aimed at keeping Dublin's traffic moving swiftly but safely. It is important that we consider the safety element and at the same time consider the provision of adequate short term car-parking facilities for persons coming to the city to do business. It is also envisaged that it will secure better physical planning and as I have already said, there is adequate provision at present for proper planning if the finance is available. In implementing the five year plan it is important to consider the finance available. Of course the five year plan is not mandatory in that what is proposed in it does not have to be carried out: it simply means that proposals would have to be accordance with the provisions of the plan. There is no compulsion to see the plan through. In fact at the end of the five year term I am sure many of the provisions will not have been accomplished. In that respect we have at present adequate provision to secure better physical planning.
In this country, as in Sweden and other advanced countries, it should be a provision of any plan that the local people would have an input. For example, in Sweden when envisaging the design of a housing scheme the local people make their input at an early stage and indeed throughout the entire scheme. We should encourage this type of input here and in that way we would make people more responsible and more concerned about their own environment. The Bill should encourage that type of participation of liaison which would be very important. As I have said, in other advanced countries where something as small as a variation in a streetscape is envisaged, the local people are involved and what ultimately transpires is, they feel, part of their plan. In this way the people become more responsible and this extends even to litter and concern for their environment generally.
The Minister, quite rightly, emphasised the importance of transport and he listed the three Bills concerning transport that have gone through this House in a very short time. Three further transport Bills are now before the Dáil and he mentioned that it is his intention to initiate further Bills in this House. I would take this opportunity to thank him because this House can play an important part in any Bill. In my short time here many important Bills have been initiated in this House and I welcome the Minister's promise to introduce more Bills here.
The Minister in his introductory speech stated that the Authority would have the right to make recommendations to the local authorities and I would be critical of this. Something more definite is needed there. They will also have the right of consultation with the local authorities and An Bord Pleanála. They have this right at present. In the case of any appeal that goes before An Bord Pleanála it is open to any interested party to make submissions. In the whole area of transport I cannot see a situation in which bodies such as CIE involved in that area would be ignored if they made submissions to An Bord Pleanála or to the planning authority. They would have to be taken into consideration. The Bill does not make any great advance in that regard.
With regard to giving power to local authorities to provide ramps, I know of a number of situations in the recent past where elected representatives suggested that ramps be used in certain locations. The situation at present is that a local authority do not have the power to provide ramps. While this only refers to the Dublin area, I realise it is a start. I see ramps used on private property to slow down traffic and they seem to be a success. I am quite sure that in built up housing areas they could be equally successful, if they were discretely used. It will be interesting to see what improvement this change will make.
It would be interesting to know if there is any back up in the way of engineering advice with regard to the provision of ramps. Ramps to me, seem rather horizontal on the surface. Traffic would be slowed up equally well by bends for example. I have mentioned before that in road design the emphasis is on removing bends and in some cases replacing them with curves. Nevertheless the whole emphasis is on increasing speed. It seems, with regard to ramps and bollards, the emphasis is on the other direction, slowing it up. I would make the point that while ramps have the effect of slowing down traffic — simple bends I suppose from the environmental point of view, are far more attractive than straight roads and curves always look more attractive — bends and cul-de-sac roads would be a more acceptable way of dealing with this problem.
The Minister paid tribute to the task force and I have also paid tribute to them. There is no doubt in my mind that their achievement, all the more so since they are a non-statutory body, is measurable and they have achieved much. The Minister told us that the Authority's planning functions exclude a substantial element recommended by the commission, namely that the Authority would draw up a comprehensive Dublin transport plan. The Minister told us that such a plan, when approved by the Government, would be binding on all concerned. This recommendation was not accepted because of the risk of duplicating the ongoing planning work of the local authorities and CIE. I am slightly confused in this area. It seems that the proper course would be to draw up a comprehensive Dublin transport plan. Nevertheless, the local authority have the expertise and the engineers to do that. I suppose, if the requirements are laid down by the Dublin Transport Authority it would be a relatively simple matter to have the actual plans prepared. The implementation of the plans of course, is another matter. I hope, in implementing these plans, whatever they may be, that conservation, the buildings and all the aspects with regard to the environment would be taken into consideration. I have no doubt that this will be done. I suppose, to a large extent, we could say that the problems regarding what has been called the destruction of Dublin have not been related to roadworks or to improvement in the infrastructure. I simply make the point in passing that whatever is done should take congnisance of the onus that is on us to preserve what is worth preserving. In this city we have much to preserve.
With regard to the power which this Authority will have to make recommendations with regard to roadworks, I agree that it seems necesasary to impose some constraint in this regard. I hope that the tourist season will be taken into account, the impact on tourism which is most important. It seems that in many ways our policies have not been integrated over the years. The Confederation of Irish Industry leaflet makes that point on page 3. It states:
In many cases investment decisions have been in response to issues which are not related to transport. This would include decisions to stimulate employment in such sectors as construction or as a result of political pressures.
Some employment schemes involving roadworks might not necessarily be as a result of political pressures. They could very well be related to social pressures, and reducing the stresses regarding unemployment in certain areas. I feel that transport cannot be taken in isolation. All these things must be taken into consideration. It is like seeing roadworks done in certain areas where land reclamation might be carried on a few years later and where the top soil could very well have been properly used and the two schemes could be integrated. This does not seem to take place. It is unfortunate. From that point of view, whatever kind of co-operation results because of this Bill, everybody will welcome it.
We have those problems which should be integrated. I am not too sure what impact the Transport Authority will have regarding the actual times when roadworks are carried out, because they will be disruptive no matter when they take place. At some times they will be more disruptive. This must be the important consideration.
Towards the end of his contribution, the Minister then referred to the heavy penalties, £1,000 and up to one year's imprisonment on summary conviction or £50,000 and or five years imprisonment on conviction on indictment. It seems that these are very heavy fines. They are related to unauthorised disclosures of information by a member of employee of the authority. I cannot understand how divulging this information could be of such importance. Perhaps the Minister would elaborate on this in replying to the debate. The fines seem particularly high. They are also related to unauthorised roadworks. I am not too sure in what situation unauthorised roadworks are carried out. Even for a simple connection to a water main it is necessary to get permission from the local authority. It is necessary to pay a fee and to restore the road properly. I am not aware in what situation unauthorised roadworks could be carried out except in a situation where somebody, deliberately, for some reason, would attempt to interfere with roads.
I welcome the Bill, which is a comprehensive one. I do not underestimate the difficulty with regard to developments in this area. We have seen this development over the last 30 years and I am sure it will continue. It is very difficult to envisage the further developments that will take place.
There is provision in this Bill, by way of order, to deal with other problems which may arise and to make provision for problems which could not be envisaged. I welcome that aspect of the Bill. Motorised transport, particularly the motor car, has made a major impact. While I welcome progress, in many areas it is unfortunate that all of our planning now seems to hinge on the car rather than the person. Perhaps this Bill, is acheiving its objectives, will bring back the individual as the focal point in our planning laws and regulations.
