Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 11 October 2017
8. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport his views on the decision of the NTA to award a company (details supplied) 10% of existing Dublin Bus routes; and the way in which this will improve the services for persons that use these routes. [42136/17]
View answerI would love to hear the Minister's views on the decision by the National Transport Authority, NTA, to award Go-Ahead, a British based global bus company, 10% of Dublin bus routes and not Dublin Bus. The Minister's views are probably limited because in response to anything to do with the NTA, he usually says that it is the authority's business and not his, but I would love to hear his own views and not some reply that has been written for him by an official on the awarding of this contract to Go-Ahead.
Could I correct the Deputy? The views that are scripted are not pre-written by officials. They are written after consultation between me and officials. They are written and re-written, particularly with the Deputy in mind, and it is the same in this case.
Lucky you, Bríd.
Lucky me.
I ask the Deputy to take that in the spirit in which it is meant. The first reply is pre-written. The subsequent ones will not be, but they are written as a result of a discussion between me and the officials.
If I was not lenient, there would be no time to reply.
Under the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 it is a statutory function of the National Transport Authority, NTA, to determine the appropriate mix of directly awarded and competitively tendered bus services. Arising from this, it is the NTA's role to conduct the public procurement process relating to its decision to tender out of 10% of the PSO bus network. In this regard, the NTA has been undertaking a number of competitive procurement processes and, in August, announced its decision that it had selected Go-Ahead as the preferred bidder in the competition to operate 24 routes - 23 existing plus one new route - in the Dublin metropolitan area.
The NTA intends to ensure that customers will experience improved service levels across all of the routes in question, and it will achieve this through a variety of means. The quality of service is measurable and therefore the NTA is setting out in the contract with the new operator the customer service levels that are expected. It will use the contract terms to drive up levels of customer service. All services operated under the contract will continue to be regulated by the NTA as they are today. This means that Leap, the free travel pass, real time information, and the national journey planner, etc., will all continue to operate on these services. The contracts will provide for enhanced frequencies and strengthened punctuality targets and result in improved bus services for the travelling public. There will also be the introduction of one new additional route from Citywest to UCD. The NTA has the statutory powers to determine fare levels, and the NTA will continue using its fares determination process to rationalise and improve the fare structure across all the different operators in the regulated bus market, including the new operator.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Public transport passenger journeys are growing, with Dublin Bus experiencing strong growth which is forecast to continue. That growth will allow Dublin Bus continue to expand its services in tandem with the roll-out of Go-Ahead's routes. It is well recognised that good public transport is a key enabler of both social inclusion and economic progress and this announcement forms part of this Government's commitment to improving our public transport system and services.
We are always looking for ways to improve our public transport services and the NTA's selection of a preferred bidder in the Dublin metropolitan competition forms part of that process.
That is a more substantial reply than the one I thought I would get. However, the main point is that the level of investment put into this service will not make the service more competitive. What makes the service more competitive is from the point of view of Go-Ahead, not from the point of view of the Minister, this State or the passengers who use the buses. Go-Ahead will make it more competitive because it will drive down the labour costs, wages and conditions of its workers.
I put 11 questions about this contract to the NTA and I have the replies here. With the exception of two, they all state that it cannot give me the information because it is commercially sensitive. The cost element, the labour costs, the differences in cost between the two, and the logistical difficulties are all commercially sensitive issues. I asked if it could give me a detailed analysis of how the agency decided that Go-Ahead was better than Dublin Bus but it said that was commercially sensitive. As a parliamentarian, it is very difficult to get an answer, on behalf of the public and those who work for Dublin Bus, about what is going on. I contend, as do many people, that what is really happening is an attempt to privatise the bus service, drive down wages and conditions, and drive a wedge into a very well unionised workplace. There is no evidence that privatisation drives down costs or improves efficiency. We only have to look at the bin service and the way the cost of electricity has soared.
I believe I am right in saying that the international experience indicates that introducing competitive tension into our public service obligation, PSO, bus market, that is a mixture of direct award and competitively tendered contracts, should allow us to capture potential benefits as regards value for money and in terms of the use of taxpayers' money in securing the provision of PSO services. The Government, as apart from the NTA, must look at how we spend taxpayers' money and get value for money. I hope we can agree, at least in principle, that the introduction of the 10% bus market opening provides such an opportunity.
I have to repeat, because it is repeated in the House so often, that there is no sinister underhand privatisation agenda here.
It is not underhand. It is blatant. There is nothing underhand about it.
What is happening is an attempt to improve efficiencies, improve frequencies on the routes compared to what is happening now, and the introduction of one new additional route, Citywest to UCD, in addition to the ones already listed. It must be to the advantage to the passenger public if we respond to the demand by increasing the numbers of operators of bus services.
I will drive a coach and horses through everything the Minister said because the Dublin Bus tender came in at a lower price than the Go-Ahead tender. What competition can Go-Ahead engage in? Can it reduce the cost of fuel, hiring, servicing or maintaining a fleet? It cannot. The only costs it can reduce are labour costs and conditions within the company.
In case the NTA did not tell the Minister, the tender from Dublin Bus indicated that it reached 98% of the targets on all routes. The NTA's determination level is 90%, so it went way above that. It reached 98% above the NTA's own targets. There is no reason whatsoever to award this contract to another company other than Dublin Bus other than there is an agenda of privatisation. The Minister is right. There is no underhanded attempt at privatisation. It is blatant, and the Minister is pursuing it. The NTA is driving the Minister to pursue it. Somebody is answering the Minister's questions wrongly because he does not have the right facts. Dublin Bus came in cheaper and can provide a better service, and it has done for years.
I can assure the Deputy that there are no plans whatsoever to tender for more than 10% of the services in the future. The current plans are to do this, and God knows this has taken an extremely long time already. We are only talking about a few routes when we are doing this, and we will review it to see how it works. If it does not work, I am happy to come back to this House when it is operating and say it is not working. That is exactly what we will do, but it is an experiment which is well worth taking. There will be no redundancies as a result of this particular project. Employees are free to transfer to the new operator if they wish.
They are not mad.
However, they are not obliged to transfer and can remain with their current employer. They have that option.
