Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 5 October 2023
2. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Transport if he supports the proposal by a group (details supplied) to abolish the M50 and East Link tolls so as to incentivise motorists not to pass through the city centre, thereby reducing congestion and air pollution and facilitating public transport and active travel in the city centre; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43386/23]
View answerI want to ask if the Minister supports the proposal from the Dublin Commuter Coalition to abolish the M50 and East Link tolls to incentivise motorists to not to pass through the city centre. This would reduce congestion and air pollution, speed up public transport and make it more reliable. It would facilitate active travel and would make the city centre a safer, healthier and more pleasant place to be.
I very much support the vision for Dublin’s city centre to be a better place to live, work and visit as set out by the advocacy group referred to in the Deputy's question.
That is why I fully support the vision set out by Dublin City Council in their recently published draft Dublin city centre transport plan which was developed in co-operation with the National Transport Authority, NTA.
I believe this new plan can maximise the opportunities presented to the city through the steady reduction in the use of private cars to travelling through, or into, the core city centre. Statistics show that since the first canal cordon count in 2006, the use of the private car in the morning peak had declined by 31% by last year. Some might say Covid was a factor, but in the period between 2006 and 2019, the use of the private car had already declined by 21%.
I firmly believe that we need to reorientate our city's urban streetscape to prioritise people. That means reallocating space so people can walk, shop, cycle, socialise and enjoy the city centre. That does not mean banning all cars or vans from the city centre because we have to provide access. It just means we need to manage traffic better, including reducing through-traffic in the city centre.
The traffic management proposals put forward by the city council strike the right balance between removing through-traffic from the city centre while retaining access for traffic that must access it. We can then seize the opportunity to enhance the public realm in key areas.
I do not believe there is a direct link between abolishing tolls on either the M50 or the East Link and achieving that improved city centre environment. That improved environment requires us to change how we use our streets and how we allocate space on the streets. That will be the better way to deliver an improved city centre.
There is not a contradiction between improving how we use our streets, providing better public transport and abolishing the tolls. The Minister said he agrees with the vision but the vision argues that the tolls encourage vehicles crossing the city to go straight through the centre rather than taking routes around it. We know from Dublin City Council's draft Dublin city centre transport plan 2023 that six out of every ten cars are simply using the city centre roads as the most convenient routes to reach destinations outside the city centre and that these vehicles could use different routes to these destinations. We need to incentivise and encourage people to not bring their cars into the city centre. It would have a big impact. A daily commuter who drives across the city will have to pay €76 per month for the East Link Bridge or €92 per month on the M50. If we get rid of those charges, that will have an impact, to some degree, in reducing car traffic in the city centre and go towards achieving the 40% reduction targeted by Dublin city centre transport plan.
There are a number of reasons I do not think it is the right strategy. We had the example of Deputy Kenny who was delayed this morning by an accident on the approaches to the M50. This road is already at full capacity. If we look at any of the statistical analysis, it is almost jammed at various sections now 24-7. In fact, we have had to introduce traffic management measures to try to cope with the excess capacity most of the time and particularly during the morning and evening rush hours. I do not believe, therefore, that there is spare capacity for people to make the switch. I also believe that is far more effective, quicker, fairer and better for us to actually change the geography of the city centre by reallocating the space for pedestrians, cyclists and the public realm rather than trying to relocate everyone elsewhere. We are engaged in a major demand management study both in Dublin and nationally. The fruits of that work will start to be seen before the end of the year or early next year. That is asking the question as to how we manage all this traffic. Included in that is the need to reduce the volume of traffic by 25% right across the country. I do not believe that the proposals set out would be the best means of achieving our aims.
The Minister is also opposed to making public transport free. He is against doing those measures which make it easier for people to engage in better ways of being in Dublin city and not adding to congestion in our city centre by taking public transport and engaging in active travel. He opposed abolishing public transport fares because it would lead to "unnecessary journeys". What we need to target are unnecessary car journeys and the way to do that is not by charging people which seems to be what the Minister is getting at when he talks about keeping the tolls, but by massively increasing investment, expanding public transport and active travel, and making it free for everybody.
I hope that it is not the €172 million in total income from the M50 and the €4 million in income from the Eastlink Bridge that is determining policy on this. The Government has the capacity to amend the Roads Act, abolish these tolls to direct car journeys out of the city centre thereby improving the city centre along with the other measures. I agree it is not of itself a silver bullet, but it is one part of the solution.
I am proud to be the Minister who introduced the first major cut in public transport fares - 20% for everyone and 60% for those under 25 which has seen a massive increase in the number of people using public transport.
The Minister should go further.
However, we need some money to come from somewhere to pay for the massive expansion in public transport services we need.
Agreed.
To my mind that is the best way to change this whole paradigm. Rather than trying to facilitate more car traffic, we should try to reduce that and increase the alternative so that the system works for everyone, including those in cars. I am not anti the people who have to drive. In fact, the problem we have is the Deputy's solution would promote car traffic and would actually make it worse for everyone.
No, it would not.
We need the money to pay for public transport and to keep reducing the costs but the Deputy wants everything free for everyone including for motorists. Having no one pay anything for anything would not work. We need to raise some revenue to provide the public services----
The Government is against raising corporation tax.
-----that a socialist solution would say is the right way to go.
The Government could raise corporation tax. We are a tax haven.
Investing in public transport provides a social gain.
