It may allow more time for other speakers because I do not believe I will take up the full 15 minutes, although I always feel that and then I find that my vapid thoughts expand, like all gases, to occupy the relevant space.
I welcome the Minister to the House. This is a very useful place in which to have such a debate, particularly with the Minister present. There are a number of distinguished authorities here, in particular the Leader of the House who is a quite excellent former Minister for transport precisely because she listened to all the arguments but did not allow herself to get overwhelmed by the departmental view. She took the political risk of taking her own decision and in that she showed considerably greater courage than most of her male predecessors, especially in regard to the Dublin underground system to which I may return.
I am pleased to be a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport which, as I am sure the Minister will be aware, has had its first meeting. Although unfortunately he is not here to hear the praise, I was exceptionally impressed by the contribution from the Fianna Fáil side of Senator Dooley, who had an extraordinary knowledge, not only of the Irish transport system but also of the impact of European directives on it. It is good and useful to have this kind of all-party expertise brought together in a committee of the Oireachtas which can help to advise and present a viewpoint to the Minister. That is very much to be welcomed.
I took this to be a comparatively focused debate on the question of the proposed closure of rail freight and so forth, and I want to spend a little time on that. It is sad to hear that half the overall losses of the rail transport system come from rail freight. That is not inevitable.
We should learn from the mistakes of the past. Mention was made of Dr. Todd Andrews, who in his day thought he was acting absolutely correctly, which was following the British example as we tended to do. We were actually following what Dr. Beeching was doing in England, with the massive closure of rail systems and the putting of everything modern on the roads. The motorways were being constructed. Road traffic seemed more efficient – and of course in some ways it was at that point because it was more flexible. One of the difficulties with a rail network is that it provides an inflexible method of transport. It joins cities and large urban populations, but the distribution is only along that corridor. In the 1950s and 1960s shifting freight on to the roads appeared to give much greater flexibility for economic advantage, but the roads rapidly became clogged. Roads are much less efficient now. They are a source of danger and pollution.
On that issue, I want to ask the Minister a question to which I have never got an answer. Do lorries and public transport vehicles such as buses have to undergo a national test of any kind? As I see the Minister is nodding, it must be a very peculiar one as anybody who has travelled behind a CIE bus recently would confirm. It is astonishing to see the clouds of black smoke they emit. The same is true of lorries. I do not believe they are properly or efficiently tested.
Since I have allowed myself to go down this by-way, I want to take up the issue of the penalty points system which was raised in the debate. I also welcome the introduction of penalty points, but could we have a little rationale in that regard? Surely we should rationalise the varying speed limits, particularly along access roads to Dublin where they are completely illogical, dropping suddenly from 50 mph to 40 mph to 30 mph, although the physical infrastructure is apparently exactly the same. It is just a collection agency for fines for the Garda. We must have a fair system before we implement the penalty points system. I ask the Minister to look at that as a matter of urgency.
It seems to me that, particularly nowadays, rail freight is a very efficient method of transport in the sense that it can take up a lot of goods transport that would be on the motorways and other roads, to the great disadvantage of the majority of road users. The former Minister, Senator O'Rourke, made a point which I had intended making. It seems there has been a real failure of marketing freight. CIE ought to go out with fire in its belly and market what exists. If necessary, the Government should subsidise this to make it more attractive as a kind of start-up programme.
I understand that a review established by the former Minister is in progress. That is why to a large extent the Minister's speech was a kind of holding speech. He did not actually confirm closures. He did not say line A is going, line B is going and we are to keep line C. I welcome his stance. He is right not to make precipitate decisions in advance of this report.
I would appeal to him to take one lesson from the 1950s and 1960s, that is, to do nothing that is irreversible. We have heard from this side of the House about the permanent way being taken up in certain areas of the country and houses built upon it, foreclosing the possibility of reopening those lines. It is important that if there is a necessity, for financial reasons, to close, alter or suspend service, in all cases where it is possible it should be ensured that this is a reversible process.
This takes me to the question of the western corridor and the rail connection at Athenry. There is concern that removing this link, which is like a points system between the lines to Galway and Mayo, will end any prospect of reopening that line. That would be a great pity indeed. Concern has been expressed that the removal of the cross-over at Athenry would end the possibility of a series of other inter-city routes, such as the services between Sligo, Limerick, Cork and Waterford. I hope nothing irreversible will be done here.
However, I must bear in mind the position of CIE on this matter. I have read with great interest the company's statement:
It is being removed as it is currently not being used. To keep it would involve unnecessary maintenance costs as well as extra spending to include it in the mini-CTC signalling project currently being installed on the Dublin to Galway line. To include it in the new mini-CTC signalling system now would cost between €500,000 and €750,000. To add it in later if there is demand, would cost no more and would save the maintenance costs in the meantime.
I understand that it may be necessary to remove this little element of point rail. If it is not removed and the mini-CTC not provided there might be a degree of criminal liability in the event of an accident. In this matter CIE is, perhaps, being wise.
The Dublin port tunnel also affects freight by lorry. I hope the House will have a full and expanded debate on this matter so I do not intend to spend too much time on it. I wrote about this question in a newspaper and raised some questions. I got – I can only describe it in unparliamentary language – an extremely snotty letter from an engineer in CIE who said, among other things:
Through the dissemination of misinformation in your column you have brought the Dublin port tunnel project into disrepute and ridiculed Dublin City Council. A simple ‘phone call to me would have served to furnish you with the facts as set out in the attached response to the city council.
Perhaps you would be good enough to set the record straight in your press column?
I would if I got all the facts, but I have not. I received a series of totally conflicting pieces of briefing material from the city council, the port tunnel people, the road hauliers association, from one company who said 35% of its lorries will not be able to use the tunnel and from Tesco, who are whiter than white, as usual, although one wonders what they have in the pipeline. I know Tesco have talked of buying much bigger lorries. Perhaps they will merely be longer. The situation is very confused.
Is it not possible to alter the height of the tunnel retrospectively in order to accommodate higher lorries, which may well become a feature of transport? Reference has been made to the fact that the alpine tunnels and many of the tunnel networks in Britain and on the continent are at the same level, but these were built a long time ago.
If there was not a market for these taller lorries they would not be built. They are not being built simply because the manufacturers want to have higher lorries but because they are, from their point of view, more efficient. I believe more of them will be built and will come into this country. I understand that An Post has ordered some of these lorries. It seems illogical for our own State services to buy lorries which cannot use the port tunnel, but perhaps I have been misinformed.
The question of traffic in Dublin requires another more complete debate, so I will be brief. When I raised the question of the metro at the meeting of the joint committee on transport I was heartened to find universal support for this, from the chairman down. The Minister will encounter difficulties and there will be turbulence regarding the metro. However, it is absolutely essential in the interest of the citizens. Without it we are wasting our time.
I regret having to say that the Luas is a white elephant, as I always knew it was going to be. From the beginning it was incapable of moving the number of passengers required to have an appreciable impact. We have discussed this project in debate after debate and have put the facts and figures clearly on the record of the House in intense detail. Unfortunately, we were not listened to but we did succeed in amending the Transport (Railway Infrastrucuture) Bill in order to provide for the possible development of an underground railway.
In the Minister's plan there is an embryonic underground running from Harcourt Street under St. Stephen's Green and O'Connell Street and coming up at Broadstone. It is essential to get that. Can the Minister tell us the state of play regarding public private partnership? A number of companies, including Japanese and Russian companies, were interested in tendering for this. It would be useful to know what the situation is.
It would be ludicrous to have an incompletely integrated urban transport system. I know it is one of the Minister's targets to integrate the public transport system in Dublin with a direct connection to the airport. We are one of the very few capital cities in Europe that does not have this and it is very important that we do.
Senator O'Rourke referred to the railway service, and particularly to rail freight, as the Cinderella of the transport industry. Perhaps that is true but I love travelling by train and I do it all the time. However, there are great variations between the different rail lines. I will go to Cork this weekend to talk at a charity auction and I shall take the Inter-city Gold service, which is absolutely delightful. I will have a pleasant meal, enjoy a view of the rolling countryside passing by and arrive refreshed and delighted in the second city of the Republic. However, if I were going to Limerick I would travel in luxury as far as Limerick Junction and then I would get on to a cattle train. The condition of this train is unbelievable. The windows are not even washed. Even if the company cannot afford to upgrade the infrastructure or buy new carriages it could at least keep the trains clean. They are heated in the summer but one cannot open the windows so one is boiled alive. In the winter one is frozen because the heating system which has worked all summer suddenly collapses and there seems to be no lavatory accommodation on the train. This does not encourage passengers. Irish Rail must provide good efficient passenger and freight services and must go out and market those services. Marketing is the key to the rail question.
I congratulate whoever is responsible for the upgrading of the Dublin railway stations. Some of them are remarkably beautiful. What used to be called Kingsbridge and is now Heuston Station is like a Viennese palace that has landed accidentally in Dublin. It is a joy, particularly since the surrounding area has been opened up and one has a view of the facade. The station is also more efficient and passenger friendly. Can we have more of the same and more respect for the consumer?
I know the Minister will follow the tradition of the former Minister, Senator O'Rourke, and attempt to give this kind of consumer friendly service to passengers and freight customers. I look forward to working with him, the other members of the transport committee and the Members of this House to strengthen his hand in persuading the Government to make investment where it is neccesary in the long term. This will be an awkward task in these financially difficult times.