Yesterday evening when I was speaking the Minister interjected to make the triumphal announcement that 65 per cent of CIE revenue goes in wages and he said it in such a way as to indicate an anti-labour bias in Government mentality with regard to the workers of CIE.
Transport (No. 2) Bill, 1974: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Absolute rubbish.
I want to speak on behalf of the workers of CIE because it is obvious that the Minister's Labour Party partners in Government are not prepared to come in and speak on behalf of the workers of CIE. The Minister will not get away with blaming this massive £11.3 million which will be £14 million in a full year on the workers. Any worker is only as good as the direction he is getting from management. The point we have been making is that not enough direction is being given to the workers and the direction they are getting is incorrect. We are calling for a complete, radical re-appraisal of the whole operation of CIE from management level. We are calling for a new dynamic approach, a new drive, a new innovation in the management approach of CIE. There is no use in the Minister blaming the workers for this situation. That does not wash with the Fianna Fáil Party and it will not wash with the people.
I am surprised that some of the Labour backbenchers have not been on their feet to protect and speak out on behalf of the CIE workers. What is needed is a joint committee of both Houses of the Oireachtas to examine the operation not only of CIE but of all semi-State bodies, a committee which would be in a position to examine in detail the management decisions made. I am not talking about the day-to-day operations, I am talking about the general management guidelines set down for the operation of semi-State bodies. If we had this committee we would be in a far different position from what we are facing today. The taxpayers are facing a bill of £11.3 million and rising. At 4.05 today we estimate a bill of £14 million for a full year. Only the Lord and the Minister and his colleagues know what the bill will be at 7.35 this evening when the Minister for Finance has made his announcement. We do not know what the fuel bills will be by the time the Minister for Finance has finished. Of course we will be told that it is the workers of CIE and not the Minister who is responsible and then we will hear about the oil sheiks and we will hear that because of our connections with British Petroleum and our "domestic" arrangements with British oil companies it was necessary to follow Britain and increase the oil costs.
I want to say now, before the Minister for Finance comes in and makes this announcement, that we will not accept any increase in taxation on fuel bills. Because it was raised in England we do not have to follow suit like sheep. We are an independent nation and independent we must stand. We will not be led by the Government like sheep to follow the British taxpayers. I do not see why this should be put on the taxpayers and I want to warn the Government that we on this side will not accept those increases. We are an independent nation. Let us remain independent. As an independent nation we are in a position to make a clear decision as to whether transport is a social service or must be run on an economic basis. It is time we sat down and contemplated this question. This is the type of question which could be dealt with by a sub-committee of both Houses of the Oireachtas. I call on the Minister to adopt this suggestion of a committee of both Houses.
I would like to mention the six-year modernisation programme which envisages a cut-back in CIE's rail haulage service. Some guarantees must be given in regard to this programme, one being that there will be no cut-back in employment on the railways at any stations where goods facilities are being removed. A guarantee must also be given to the customers who use CIE's facilities that there will be no cut-back in the service or facilities provided. The Minister must answer these two questions.
In conclusion, let us not blame the workers in CIE for the imposition of this £11.3 million burden on the taxpayers. Rather, let us blame the lack of direction at top management level and the Government. It is on the Government the blame really lies in the first place.
Railways in almost all European countries are losing money and we must decide whether we want railways in particular and CIE in general as a social service or as an economic unit. The present situation is nothing new, but it seems to be getting gradually worse. CIE have been losing money for many, many years. I believe it was decided here years ago that we would have to keep the railways and CIE in operation. This is something we must face. The interjection by the Minister that 66 per cent of CIE expenditure goes on wages and salaries was not intended in the way in which the last speaker seems to have interpreted it. I think the Minister meant to imply that this was a social service providing a great deal of necessary employment. I do not believe the Minister was blaming the workers for the present position of CIE.
The workers in CIE are as good as management and supervision are. If there is to be a pruning of expenditure on salaries and wages, then CIE must start at the top. In one particular instance CIE personnel came down to my town to investigate a serious complaint by an industrialist about the service he was getting. These people arrived at the same time as the train arrived from Dublin, but they arrived in a huge car, chauffeur driven. That is the kind of unnecessary expenditure that should be cut out. That kind of operation by the top brass should be eliminated. I believe there is a substantial amount of that kind of thing in CIE. It was part and parcel of CIE long before the present Minister took office. CIE management operates in a fashion that would lead one to expect the kind of results the normal firm would harvest from that kind of management. Again, if they intend to engage seriously in commercial haulage, then they should get out and sell their services.
We are told that CIE will close down certain railways here, there and everywhere under their new rationalisation scheme and, at the same time, develop other railways. The public are entitled to know how they arrive at these decisions. We, in Kildare, are very aggrieved because not one station in that county is scheduled for any kind of improvement under the new scheme of rationalisation. It can be argued that we are very close to Dublin but those of us who have experience of the roads know that the roads from Naas down the country are choked with heavy lorries. Indeed, the town of Naas itself is practically impossible from the point of view of traffic flow. Outside of Dublin, Kildare has the greatest industrial growth of any county. It is very short-sighted policy that the first station to be developed on the line to Cork is just outside the county. I would expect development to take place where industrial growth is greatest.
CIE may argue that the industries in towns like Newbridge are not using CIE. That is so, but there are reasons for that. First of all, CIE are not providing the service for container traffic and industrialists naturally move their goods by container because it is cheap and easy. I would ask the Minister to communicate with those responsible in CIE and ask them to take a long look at their rationalisation scheme before they finally decide not to develop any situation within County Kildare. The most suitable one would be Newbridge. I know the decision is not final but it certainly was not one of the stations mentioned for development in the first plans sent out. There was no mention of any station for development in County Kildare. The top brass in CIE should be made to produce concrete evidence of what they have done to improve trade in these stations and what the position would be if they provided a service for container traffic, and so on, essential if one is to maintain a modern railway system.
In conjunction with the Department of Local Government CIE should have a look at the road problem within that area. Apart from the social service and employment element there would be the advantage of providing an alternative means of transport which would remove a great deal of heavy traffic from our roads.
The time has come when we will have to spend colossal sums of money either on the railways or on the roads. We should seriously consider providing a service by CIE which would be able to substitute for what is presently being provided in increasing volume by road.
Enough is not done by CIE to sell early morning services or commuter services between Dublin and areas within 30 to 40 miles. On a number of occasions I asked CIE to provide early morning transport for people living in Kildare and working in Dublin, and people living in the Robertstown and Allenwood area working in Newbridge and Naas. Buses could be filled in those areas and bring people to work in Droichead Nua and Naas, and they could continue on their way to Dublin and be refilled in Naas or Newbridge. CIE are not doing enough research into that kind of operation. If, as it now seems, we must keep CIE going whether it is economic or not, surely the people in these areas are entitled to a transport service. This would relieve even the small roads of traffic congestion.
The same thing applies in many other areas. CIE have made no effort to sell their goods traffic services to business people in the various towns. They have very few, if any, salesmen visiting traders and so on. I know people in my own town of Athy who organised a lorry service to and from Dublin for various industries. This business was taken from CIE because they lacked the necessary drive to hold on to it. If we are to devote large sums of money to keep CIE going—and I think we should—CIE should be forced to recognise that they have a duty to sell their services to every town and every village as well as to provide those services.
I know of places all over the country where buses and trains are arriving half empty from the same place at the same time. I do not think that is practical. I do not think an ordinary businessman would do that. We were told some years ago that CIE need no longer provide any service they did not consider economic. In my own area, a CIE delivery service was withdrawn. I accept that. It probably was not economic to provide it and it would not under any circumstances be economic to provide it in the small way I am talking about.
If CIE seriously tackled the question of sales they would find many areas where their services could be provided reasonably economically, provided they had the proper salesmen in the field. I understand that dining facilities on some of the long distance trains have been withdrawn. This is a mistake. It would help to encourage people travelling long distances not to use their cars if they had that service on the train.
In rural areas the bus services seem to be totally centred on transporting shoppers and sightseers and take no account at all of workers and of people needing transport from Athy or Kildare or Newbridge to Dublin. This is very necessary. Very often the first bus leaves a town at 10 o'clock or 11 o'clock in the morning. That is no use to the large number of persons coming from the area I speak of to work in the greater city area. Because of that they have to put their cars on the roads. This is very expensive. CIE could cash in on the actual expense of driving a car from those centres to the city, and they could run a highly successful early morning and late evening service for these workers.
CIE will have to be kept in operation to provide employment and as a social service. We could not operate without the service being continued in some fashion by CIE. We should aim at ensuring that the service is available to the greatest possible number of people and the greatest possible number of areas. In all walks of life there is a tendency towards centralisation. Many of the smaller stations have already been closed. Now good-sized towns will be without a road freight service. We are told it will be supplied from other areas and that everything will be hunky-dory with regard to deliveries to shops, and so on. I have my doubts about that. When the small stations were being closed we were told that a better service would be provided but, to my knowledge, that did not happen.
In County Kildare there will be no station development. Outside Kildare, on the southern line towards Waterford, the first station is Carlow. This station is in line for improvement. On the other southern line, to Cork, Portlaoise is the nearest station to Kildare. I cannot see why the stations in Kildare are not developed. There are large industries in that county and they are in need of a rail service. There is plenty of business available for CIE. The Minister should treat the question of improving the facilities at Newbridge as a matter of urgency. The people of that area will support CIE if the company are prepared to talk to those involved in business and industry.
There is a great feeling of uncertainty among the workers in the smaller stations and this results in inefficiency. These workers feel that the stations where they are employed will close and that they will be either transferred or made redundant. I urge the Minister to ensure that the people who make the final decisions about whether these services will be retained and improved or whether they will be withdrawn consult with the business people and industrialists concerned. I am aware that the CIE officials will be able to produce facts and figures to justify their decisions.
If this substantial sum of money is necessary to keep CIE going in its present form this House should provide it. In return we should be given a guarantee by the Minister, and CIE, that every effort will be made to introduce efficiency and salesmanship to improve the position within the company and the company's balance sheet.
(Dublin Central): I welcome this opportunity of reviewing, briefly, the workings of CIE, in particular the bus service in Dublin city. It is important that Deputies should consider seriously how the money we are being asked to give to CIE will be spent. It is only fair to the taxpayer, who has to shoulder this in the form of taxation, that Deputies should ask if we are getting a good return for the money. If there are failures in the company, it is the duty of Members to point them out. Is CIE to be run as a social service or is it to be made an economic business? To look upon CIE solely as a social service would be dangerous because it would completely lack enterprise. We must avoid this and we must ensure that management and workers work towards a certain target. It is not good enough that at the end of every year the company loses money they approach the Dáil for a subvention. We should outline to CIE what we expect from them.
A number of years ago the late Seán Lemass, when asking this House for a subvention of £2 million, announced that he expected the company would be able to pay their way within a short time. I accept that the company is playing an important part in the economic life of this country. It is serving two purposes, keeping a public transport system going and providing worthwhile employment for our people. These factors must be taken into consideration when we are asked to grant money to the company. CIE, and the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, are the biggest employers in the State. This huge labour force must be kept working at all costs.
Some people would say that it is not possible to rationalise and effect economies in the company unless there are redundancies or early retirements. I am against such a move. It is possible to expand the business carried on by CIE. The company could expand the freight service and an expansion of this service would mean that some of the heavy traffic would be taken off our roads. It is important, particularly in view of the advent of a regional policy, that CIE improve their freight service. For a regional policy to be properly implemented CIE will have to co-operate. For a regional policy to be effective the majority of the industries will have to be placed in the west but they will export through ports on the east coast and the products of these industries will have to be conveyed to these ports.
In conjunction with the IDA, CIE should devise a scheme for the development of ports on the east coast, excluding Dublin. It is not possible to expand Dublin because it is completely blocked and not capable of taking any more heavy traffic.
A number of Deputies praised the rail service. We can all be proud of the rail service to the south and west. The new supertrain on which I have travelled on several occasions is something which should encourage any traveller to use rail transport. With that type of service there is every possibility of encouraging more people to travel.
But when we come back to Dublin city, the picture is reversed completely. The image which CIE has in the country certainly does not stand up to the same examination in Dublin. No section of the community has been abused more than that using public transport in this city over the past ten years. We are all aware of the number of strikes that have taken place and which have caused these people great hardship. It is no wonder so many people are using private cars. I think we should try to discourage the use of private cars in the city centre but what choice has one when one observes the services offered over the past ten years? The management and unions involved in CIE will have to examine this matter very closely. If my memory serves me right, there are something in the region of 27 unions involved in CIE.
Thirty-three.
(Dublin Central): Deputy Dowling informs me now that it is 33. Imagine trying to negotiate terms with 33 unions. The management and unions for the sake of the company and for the sake of the services they offer the public will have to do something to resolve this matter and reduce the number of unions involved. No personnel manager could possibly work out the day-to-day problems with that number of unions. Until such time as this has been done, there will be problems in CIE.
Certainly, the last phase of the last strike which lasted four days should have been avoided. Before that we had a strike lasting a number of weeks. Then two different proposals were put to the workers which they said they would consider. During that time of nearly 12 weeks the management and unions should have got together because it was quite obvious things would break down unless some practical approach was made. Of course that would not have been allowed in a private business. Certainly, I could not foresee the manager of a private company letting such a matter drift until the eleventh hour, resulting in a four-day strike. There incompetence on the part of both sides was displayed, that in the intervening period they could not iron out these difficulties which occur in every industry. A more practical approach will have to be made in future if we are to encourage people in Dublin to use public transport.
If this is not done, some system will have to be evolved in Dublin to relieve city centre congestion. We are all aware of the chaotic conditions obtaining at present. If one were to go out now to Dame Street or O'Connell Street one would find about 30 buses unable to move one way or the other. CIE management in conjunction with local authorities and Dublin Corporation will have to get together and work out a solution to this problem. There is nothing more frustrating to a person who finishes work at 5 o'clock than finding that he does not arrive in, say, Tallaght or some such place until 6.30 p.m. God knows, these people are paying sufficiently high bus fares not to be subjected to that type of punishment after work in the evenings.
It is quite obvious that there are a few options only open with regard to the utilisation of public transport in Dublin. One solution might be the building of motorways throughout the city but this can involve difficulties also. At present where there are plans afoot for road widening and the building of motorways, there is a lot of agitation from and resentment on the part of people who may be displaced from their places of residence. Could there not be a trial plan for the debarring of motorists from the city centre? One can see any morning or evening hundreds of cars leaving the city with a driver only. This is something that should be discouraged if at all possible because as long as that continues things will become progressively worse. Anybody observing the traffic situation in Dublin in recent years will have seen its deterioration. It would seem that there are two options open only: first. to try to improve the movement of public transport within the city or. secondly, consider the possibility of an underground transport system but, under present conditions road traffic is grinding to a halt.
I notice from the Minister's brief that more people travelled by public transport in Dublin last year than in any other year. The number of persons carried in Dublin city buses last year was 220 million. I agree that that is a sizeable number of people to be carried. But that could be considerably improved by an efficient service making it possible for one to reach one's destination in the shortest possible time. Certainly that is not happening at present. People are totally dissatisfied with the service, even though they say: "We have to use it; we have no other choice." There are many people who cannot afford the luxury of a private car. There are people incapable of driving and who could not be granted licences. However, if they were in a position to do so, I think they would drive their own cars. But attitudes will not be changed until one can provide a good alternative service. There should be an experiment carried out in some part of the city to keep private transport out. Perhaps we could run small trolley buses. There are some parts of the Continent where people are content to stand in these trolley buses for short distances.
There are so many districts around Dublin where private transport could stop, districts like, say, Fairview, Glasnevin, Christ Church, Rathmines, Terenure and so on and have established an efficient public service into the city centre. Those are some points which I regard as being important so far as Dublin city is concerned. Bearing in mind that last year 220 million people were carried by public transport in Dublin city, which is far more than were carried in the rest of the country, it is only fair that they should be entitled to an efficient service. I am quite convinced that very little of the subvention we pay goes towards Dublin transport services. The largest part of the losses incurred is on the railways. Some additional attention should be paid to the people who utilise public transport in Dublin and who, I am sure, contribute substantially to the resulting revenue.
I wonder would the Minister or the board carry out an experiment in regard to staggered working hours. For example, so many people employed in the public service at this hour will be leaving their places of employment which coincides exactly with the time other people leave factories and shops. This creates further congestion with long queues for buses. Perhaps people could come in an hour earlier in the morning and leave an hour earlier in the evening. It would lessen the number of people seeking public transport at the same time. It might also stagger the hours of use of private transport and leave the buses more room to manoeuvre within the city. This would be an idea for the board, the unions and the FUE, but especially for the Minister within his own public services. Perhaps he might implement a policy under which civil servants would finish work at, say, 3.30 or 4 o'clock and come in at 8 o'clock in the morning, which is done in several parts of the Continent. These are some suggestions which might alleviate the chaotic conditions obtaining at the moment.
Big improvements have been made in the railway stations and I am speaking of Heuston station in particular. This has been improved considerably and many facilities have been introduced for people travelling, but I am not very sure whether it was right to divert all traffic, especially to the west, to Pearse and Connolly stations. I can see that in the case of people travelling to the west it was more convenient to travel to Pearse and Connolly stations than to have to go to Heuston station. I have heard a few Deputies from the country complaining about this and there is a certain amount of substance in what they said. Evidently, there must be some particular reason for it— whether economies were being effected, I am not sure—but centralising all that traffic in Heuston station led to a certain amount of congestion there.
We should try to encourage more people to use the railway freight services. It is certainly something which would increase the revenues of the Board of CIE. If we are to have a good regional policy, we will have to have a good transport policy. These go hand in hand and we cannot expect industrialists to come here unless we can offer such a policy, even if it has to be subsidised at some stage. It is important therefore that consultation takes place with the IDA in regard to their plans and where they propose to site factories in the west. The Board of CIE might be able to formulate plans for the utilisation of their services to help these industrialists. It is important that we have an overall plan so that we may know where we are going in regard to the functioning of the transport company, and of transport in Dublin for the future. What public transport will be like in ten years' time if no firm decision is taken now one cannot imagine. I should imagine that we will have an absolutely chaotic situation and therefore we need a comprehensive plan in this regard. Let CIE draw it up themselves if they can get no co-operation from the local authorities or from Dublin Corporation, but at least let us have a plan on how best they can use public transport in the city and, in regard to regional policy, how best they can put their services at the disposal of industrialists.
I appreciate that this money is necessary but I hope that this staggeringly huge increase can be checked in some way. If this increase of £3 million on a subvention which is reaching £14 million is to continue, I would not like to think what it will be like in ten years' time. Some effort will have to be made to check it to some extent and the best way to do so is to improve the business. If you extend in any business, you cut down your overheads, and CIE should concentrate on extending their business and by doing so contain the subvention and keep full employment.
Like other speakers, I wish to support this Bill. I would like to start my remarks by referring to the passage in the Minister's brief in which he states that:
CIE are fully conscious of the need for adequate communication with all parties concerned in relation to proposed changes and an extensive programme of consultation with staff, trade unions and customers has taken place and it is the board's intention to keep interested parties advised of progress.
I would say that it is a great pity that CIE in the past did not have the same attitude to this matter of communication because if the management of CIE had been more interested in communication in the past, we would have avoided some of the unpleasant situations which we had in this city in the not-too-distant past. I refer to the Dublin bus strike.
We are looking for finance now, but a considerable amount has been lost to CIE by that strike. CIE management were not blameless in the matter because after a prolonged period of examination of the claims of the unions concerned, we saw on the day before the five-day week was to come into operation, CIE indicated what the rota to be provided was. We saw that after almost 12 months of inactivity, there suddenly appeared on the notice boards in the garages this document which caused the Dublin bus strike. It is because of the lack of communication between management, trade unions and workers that we had this desperate situation in which so many people in the city were driven away from CIE because of the recurring stoppages which had taken place in the past, a situation in which workers' jobs were put at risk because of their inability to get to their jobs in time because of lack of transport. The bulk of the workers in the city rely on public transport and what we want is an effective and efficient transport system which we know will be permanent and in which if a breakdown occurs, it will occur only because every method of avoiding it has been exhausted by both management and workers.
On the occasion of the strike, that was not so and I am glad to learn now that an effort is being made by CIE to communicate, and to recognise the need to communicate, not alone with the unions but with other interested parties. There are many interested parties and the people who use the transport system are people whose views should not be overlooked. Recently in the city I was stopped by a person doing a survey, I imagine, on behalf of CIE—the questions were in relation to CIE—and I welcome this type of survey in which people are asked for their views about CIE. I hope that as a result we will not have a repetition of the disastrous situation which struck this city and deprived some workers of employment and some works of a substantial part of their take-home wage packets because they were put on short time. While the management would endeavour to place the blame elsewhere, blame placing is no solution of problems. The solution is communication.
I was a CIE worker so I know something about CIE and I would ask the Minister in order to ensure that there will be no breakdown in communication in future to put into operation some type of worker participation plan by which the workers in CIE can participate in decision-making. I am quite certain that the workers who have given long and loyal service, in the workshops, on the buses and elsewhere, will be only too happy to enlighten some of the management, and we have defects in management, just as there are defects in the workers' system.
However, I am positive that, with worker participation, there would be this desirable and essential communication between management and workers. I appeal to the Minister to ensure that there is some form of worker participation so that the worker can be given the opportunity of participating in decision making. This would make for a better service. Every area of the country is serviced by CIE, whether by the train or passenger bus service, by the school transport service or by the road freight service. The field covered is very wide. Unfortunately, however, the people at the top in CIE are very often not aware of the problems of out-of-the-way areas. Some of these problems never come to the attention of those at management level. We must ensure that if an individual has a complaint to make, that complaint is brought to the attention of the appropriate persons. This is a problem that would be solved by worker participation in management. I trust that all these areas of communication will be made available as a result of this change in the system.
On the previous occasions I have been critical of many aspects of CIE management but, as Deputy Fitzpatrick indicated, many desirable changes have taken place and to that extent the management deserve to be congratulated. However, there is this vital aspect of communication between workers and management. I am very much aware of this problem not only as an ex-CIE employee but also as one who interviewed CIE workers in the not too distant past and who has spoken with them throughout the provinces, particularly during the Cork by-election. Many of their problems have been taken up with the Department or with the company.
I know that there are many forms of worker participation but it should be possible to find one that suits the circumstances of CIE. Prior to the general election we heard a lot from the socialist side of the Government as to the necessity and desirability of worker participation. They told us that workers should have a say in the day-to-day decisions of industry. In the case of a semi-State organisation such as CIE the Minister has it within his power to ensure that some of the promises regarding the participation of workers which were made by his colleagues will be implemented fully. I would be the first to give the Minister credit for any steps he may take in this direction.
As well as the obvious areas, CIE are engaged in the tourist industry by way of the self-drive business and river boats. Since their field of activity is so broad, they need all the expertise and advice possible from a wide section of the community.
Deputy Fitzpatrick referred to there being 33 unions within CIE catering for 21,000 workers. This is a substantial number of unions but there is a substantial number of workers involved, too. We know that the recent bus strike resulted from inter-union problems within the company but these problems would have been avoided if CIE management had been more courageous and if there had been more communication with the workers in the prolonged period prior to the strike. I hope there will be a change in the system and that there will no longer be a situation whereby workers might be dictated to by some of those inefficient individuals who were in their positions merely because they were useless elsewhere. There has been an improvement in the personnel department of CIE during the past number of years and I hope that there will continue to be improvements so that the problems experienced in the past can be eliminated. I suspect that if there had not been a bus strike this year the money required now by CIE would be a good deal less than we are being asked to vote here.
I would agree with some of the points made in relation to the affairs of CIE because I, too, am of the opinion that their affairs should be subject to the Houses of the Oireachtas. I say this because we are making available to them substantial sums of money. Therefore, it is only reasonable that we should be in a position to discuss their expenditure and to see whether, in a broad way, we might make any contribution in that regard. I have been told, though not by the present Minister, that the Minister has no function in this matter. However, since it is the Minister's function to come here and ask the House to vote these moneys, we should have some say as to the accounts of the company. At least, we should be able to satisfy ourselves that there is a real need for the moneys being asked for. The Minister may say that CIE were established by a previous administration. While that may be so, it is for the present administration to remedy any defects there may be in regard to the company. When the people on the other side of the House were in opposition they called on many occasions for changes in relation to the administration of CIE. I trust that their views and the views of Deputies on this side of the House will be implemented by the Minister.
The Minister referred to rationalisation. This is a fairly fashionable word to use nowadays but generally rationalisation means the laying off of workers. It is amazing, though, that people at the top in management are not affected by redundancy. The ordinary worker is the one who is made redundant. One might well ask what jobs are being made available for people who have been working in a supervisory capacity but who should not be required any longer when those whom they have been supervising become redundant. They seem to be retained in very superior positions from the pay point of view. I hope that in the rationalisation which takes place there will not be large-scale redundancy, that there will be a phasing out of employment over a period rather than people being cast aside.
Over a number of years CIE often cast people on the scrap-heap. Men who built up CIE, who worked three days a week, who took a pay cut in order that the Great Southern Railway would survive ended their days on miserable pensions after 40 years' service. They got approximately 25 shillings a week. While under the new system there is a substantial pension fund, those who built up the system and who worked hard in the dark and difficult days of the 1930s and late 1920s, who had a genuine concern for the survival of the railway system were cast aside by CIE. Notwithstanding the large amount of funds available, many of these men had pensions of 25 shillings a week or less. I hope that something will be done for the aged CIE pensioners. Their case cannot be ignored. If they are ignored there is little chance of there being sympathy for the general public.
Workers in CIE, especially those in the workshop with whom I was acquainted have proved themselves to be superior to others elsewhere. Because of their experience in the CIE service, in the vast workshops at Inchicore, it was reasonably easy for them to obtain employment elsewhere when they left the service. Workers must be respected. When they are unable for health or other reasons to continue working they must be looked after in a reasonable fashion.
The question of alternatives to the present system has been raised. Are we willing to pay for alternatives? Some solutions that are suggested need not mean additional expenditure. They may involve a change of priorities or a change in funding.
I would hope that there will be a policy of taking guidance from the people. Far too often the public have been overlooked. The need for a public response to transport issues cannot be exaggerated. Most people use one or other CIE service. There have been surveys and questionnaires have been issued to the public. It is desirable that there should be more communication between CIE and the public. It is the public who will meet the bill on this occasion.
Suggestions have been made about providing an underground transport system and the need for re-examination of the systems in Dublin and the large cities. The transport systems in large cities were built on the horse and car as distinct from the new areas where they were built on the automobile. The change from the horse and car to the automobile has been a change from a mare to a nightmare. The roads system was never designed to take the type and volume of traffic of modern days. CIE is responsible for a substantial volume of city traffic. It is necessary to look well into the future. While the immediate problem must be solved, attention must be paid to the far greater problems that are likely to develop in future.
Having discussed the matter in Brussels recently, I understand that funds could be available from the EEC regional fund for the development of transport systems such as an underground system here. I would hope that the Government and CIE would consider this aspect. In the EEC context this country is regarded as undeveloped. The question of funds being made available for an underground transport system should be fully investigated. At least we should have a plan. Sections of the city could be linked by an underground system to the railheads or to bus termini. This would relieve some of the congestion that takes place. I would hope that the Minister would consider this matter.
Deputy Tom Fitzpatrick referred to the matter of flexibility of working hours. Flexed time has become part and parcel of the work force in other countries. While this kind of flexibility is not feasible on production lines it certainly could be employed for office staffs and for some store workers. The matter should be examined. This would ease the problem created by the sudden rush of traffic at 7.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m.
In outlying areas and in particular in the perimeter areas of Dublin where there are vast housing estates, for instance, Ballyfermot and Ballymun, we find on wet days that people at intermediate stops have to wait a long time for a bus. If flexed time were introduced in CIE and other organisations in connection with which the Minister has some power, some of the traffic problems would be relieved.
The question must be asked as to whether the existing transport system meets our needs. A person who has a car can commute reasonably easily but the person who has to rely on the public transport service finds that the service is infrequent at times. This difficulty could be eliminated and we could have a more effective system. I realise that every effort has been made in the past to eliminate problems. There are problems that take too long to percolate through to authority. Sometimes problems are covered up on the way. It has happened that a problem is buried on the way up to management level because there might be a reflection on someone along the line. This has frequently happened. I hope we shall have some system providing a straightforward approach to management.
Provision of freeways for the buses in the city was tried on one occasion with some success, we were told, but suddenly these disappeared. We should like to know if there is any intention, in order to secure a freer traffic flow, to re-examine freeways for the bus services. While freeways in the city for buses and more and better dual carriageways may assist in relieving the situation at present CIE should be looking far beyond present problems. The Minister would be wise to have some other body examine in greater depth problems that may arise in future in relation to the free movement of traffic as a result of the congestion due mainly to the large number of buses in the city. I know the Dublin traffic study group of the Garda, Dublin Corporation and county council have made, and continue to make surveys of the situation but however good surveys are and however effective they are believed to be in perfecting the system, they are doing it against the odds of a city developed against a background, not of the motor car or mechanically propelled vehicle but of another vehicle. For that reason any solution offered is only a short-term one and a more radical solution is required to meet the long-term problems of the future.
Pollution from CIE buses and trucks causes grave irritation in the city. In built-up areas this black smoke is emitted from time to time— some people call it "black death". It causes great distress in built-up areas and I hope some type of filter will be fitted to these vehicles to reduce the health hazard.
I do not propose to delay the House beyond saying that I am glad to see in the Minister's brief that a reconstruction job is to take place at 22 railheads and that 27 more will undergo major reconstruction. This is generally welcomed but while we congratulate the management on the effective measures they have taken, there are some matters, some of which have been mentioned today, that still need more effective attention on a long-term basis.
Deputies voting such large amounts as the amount now required by the Minister, £11.3 million, should be able to ask for and receive the information they require regarding CIE affairs. That is a reasonable request and I hope in the near future we shall no longer get the stock reply that the Minister has no function in the matter and that the day-to-day affairs of the company are a matter for CIE. Nobody wants to interfere in CIE's day-to-day affairs but Deputies require information from time to time. They are required to vote and every matter concerning CIE concerns Members of the House because the public are critical of Deputies if they do not play their part particularly when bills such as this arise. If Deputies are found wanting their constituents let them know very quickly that their views are important. The Minister has indicated that CIE are now fully conscious of the need for adequate communication and that their intention is to ensure consultation between the trade unions and all interested parties. Deputies are interested parties and I hope that when they require information in future it will be forthcoming.
I also am deeply concerned with the Transport Bill of 1974 as an ex-CIE employee. This bill is a sizeable one but when one considers its contribution to employment, to industry and to the tourist trade it is a worthwhile investment. With some pruning perhaps at certain levels, this is an industry that could bear fruit in the years ahead.
When the Minister referred to the 65 per cent bill for wages I am quite satisfied that no reflection was meant on the staff of CIE. He was simply impressing on the House the employment factor involved in the running of CIE. I would not accept any reflection on the CIE staff and in fact would like to compliment all sections of it, from the porter to the goods checker, to the linesmen on the permanent way. Over the years, because of the unfortunate situation in CIE, the railwayman was the butt of many jokes and when one is involved, it can be a depressing employment. They do not know where they are going and are seeking guidance.
Reference has been made to the need for consultation at top level. I can bear witness to consultation at the lower level when in fact what is done is to prepare a list for submission to the Minister at the end of the year to show that management is consulting with staff. My honest belief is that much of this is insincere and merely a farce. I was never satisfied with it but one could read the Official Report of the Dáil debates afterwards and I could understand the public saying that there was really consultation at both upper and lower levels. On my own experience, I never accepted this.
In 1961, when area management was introduced, I was employed in CIE and at that time the great miracle-worker was brought in to run the company and we in CIE anticipated a great new era. In a short space of time we found the miracles being performed were the closing down of branch lines—much regretted now in many areas—and the creation of a monster called "area management" which has grown each year. If there is to be pruning and rationalisation I believe that it should start at the top rather than at the bottom as Deputy Dowling said. In my experience if there was any economy in the old days it was in regard to the half-hour a plate-layer worked on a Saturday or the hour the porter worked in the goods' store but there was no question whatever about the staff car or the petrol for the executive travelling around the country.
Having handed out the brickbats I should like to deal with certain aspects of CIE and compliment the commercial staff on the development of passenger traffic and the good results achieved. The advertising and the clean trains have made the public realise that this is a very safe, clean and happy way of travelling to and from the metropolis. Perhaps some areas such as dining facilities have been overlooked and this is a matter the Minister might look into. In the winter when one is travelling a cup of tea is very welcome but I suppose the question of economics comes in.
In the past, I have referred to the complete phasing out of the carriage of livestock by CIE. About 15 years ago it was accepted that this sector was a considerable part of the freight traffic but now on mart days in provincial towns while one can see trains in the stations, wagons for the carriage of livestock are not loaded. When I raised this matter at another level, I was told it was uneconomic to handle livestock traffic. Nowadays it is quite common to see 40 or 50 giant vehicles leaving the marts and travelling to Dublin by road. One would like to relate the economics of this kind of haulage to the former traffic on CIE. I realise that there is a departure with regard to the mode of traffic but CIE, in their own way, have contributed by their discouragement of the carriage of livestock.
The road passenger and road freight sections are doing a good job. In particular, I should like to refer to the school transport section. In my area, the buses have to travel many miles. It is a social service and one worthy of CIE.
We will always need the railways. As I pointed out previously, an unfortunate situation obtains with regard to the marts. Road traffic is continually increasing and it is up to us to encourage the larger firms to use the railways. If we do this, we will cut down our road maintenance costs which have increased to a tremendous degree.
Deputy Dowling referred to pensioners and I should like to comment on their plight also. There are not many of the older generation left. The day should be long gone when a man is offered a pension of £3 or £4 per week after 40 years' service. I appreciate that the situation has improved but much remains to be done. Having regard to the cost of living, £10 per week would be too little. We read in the papers of a further golden handshake to a young man after leaving the service of the board, but we also have to consider what the man who joined the company in 1917 and who now draws a pension of £3 per week thinks of the situation. It is poor consolation for 40 years' service.
I should like to compliment the hotel section of CIE. Since tourism became a vital part of our economy, CIE hotels have provided a first-class service and I should like to compliment the hotel managers on the good work they are doing.
Deputy Dowling mentioned the need for sub-committees to investigate the work of semi-State bodies and referred to the fact that Ministers invariably said it was not the function of the Minister. There is one plan about to be considered involving approximately a £27 million investment in the railway system. A subcommittee should be established to ensure that this vast amount of money is invested properly and for the good of the people.
My town is not on the list for major development and this has caused considerable worry to the people in the area. We are looking for industries but there has not been any consultation, through our urban council or the county development officer, to try to get industries into the district. After all our efforts it was sad to discover there was some interference with regard to the railway system that was needed for the transportation of goods. I am not at all happy at the way the proposed plan is being considered and I would ask the Minister to ensure that a committee will be formed to investigate the spending of the £27 million. This means a lot to rural Ireland and I hope the Minister will consider my plea for more consultation.
I welcome the Bill as other Deputies have done. We realise the Minister will have an even tougher battle in the future to ensure that CIE as we know it remains in existence. It is my feeling that not alone should CIE be economically viable but it should be regarded as a socially desirable State body performing a most important function.
We are voting £11 million to CIE. As other Members have pointed out, our questions are disallowed when we inquire about the company. In fact, it happened this week to Deputy Cronin and myself. We were concerned that CIE have reduced the number of cattle wagons from Cork from 470 to 76. This is occurring at a time in the development of our country when we should be striving and straining to ensure that every source is explored to get cattle out of the country. Yet, we have one of the major organisations adopting an attitude that can only be described as that of an ostrich with its head in the sand. I cannot understand why CIE have taken that decision. I know it has happened in England but that is another country. England is highly industrialised, with very few people depending on agriculture for their livelihood but despite our development as an industrial country, agriculture is still one of our primary industries. If we have a State body that will consciously and in a cold-blooded way make such a decision, we must take a serious look at it.
Deputy Cronin and I felt strongly about the matter and we wanted it discussed this week. However, we were not allowed to do so. The Ceann Comhairle can claim a precedent, and he would be right, that this has been the norm up to now but we have gone beyond that stage with semi-State bodies, especially CIE. We must be accountable to the public for the expenditure and, accordingly, CIE must be accountable to this House. I would support very strongly any suggestion of a committee that would investigate all semi-State bodies. As we are talking about CIE, may I say I would specially welcome it with regard to that organisation.
I would go even further. Rather than have CIE reducing the number of cattle wagons from Cork and other areas, they should be getting involved to a greater degree in the transport of cattle. I do not just mean within the country but also out of the country. CIE should consider the possibility of buying boats to take the cargo from this country through to England and the Continent. Deputy Gerry Cronin and myself have been informed that there are thousands of cattle in the docks in Dublin that cannot be exported because we have no boats in which to take them out of the country. That at a time when we have a fodder crisis. We have cattle that will inevitably die from lack of feeding and yet we have markets available to us that we cannot supply because we have not got transport out of the country. CIE must investigate very carefully and the Minister, whose colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries is already aware of the situation because he has received a deputation on it, would be performing a very good function for the country if he would investigate the possibility of the purchase of a boat or boats. How can we tolerate a situation at present in which 5,000 or 6,000 cattle are hemmed in at the Dublin docks costing those who own them 30p a night to keep them there? We have our prorities all wrong when we spend vast sums in this House and neglect the basics and the basic of any industry is the transport service that can be given to that industry.
We must be very careful. It is too easy to criticise management. It is too easy to pick a fall guy when things go wrong. It is my opinion that the management of CIE is as good as the management of any industry in the country. They have proved it. They have brought CIE into the twentieth century. They have shown a very good sense of what people need. I may not agree with every decision that has been taken. I may not agree, for instance, with the purchase of the supertrains or that they are as comfortable as CIE claim they are. Nevertheless, they had the right motives in the purchasing of those trains.
We are primarily an agricultural country. We also derive a good proportion of our money from the tourist industry. CIE generally are doing a fairly good job in relation to the promotion of tourism and the servicing of the tourists when they come here. My only criticism of CIE in this respect is the price of common items of food on the trains. The whole food price structure in CIE calls for investigation because I believe a train is the dearest place in Ireland to eat. Perhaps the argument will be put up that this is the minimum price that has to be charged to make it a viable proposition but if other people in the same industry can give meals at cheaper prices CIE should look into their affairs and make sure that people are getting the best possible value.
CIE will play a very important part in our development in the EEC. Our whole transport structure will revolve mainly around CIE. CIE will play a very important social function as well as an economic one in the sense that if we can give proper services to industry in rural Ireland, in other words, make CIE transport available to those rural areas we will have people establishing industries in rural Ireland thereby ensuring that we do not have the sort of mess that Deputy Dowling and others have been talking about—traffic jams that last for hours, a public that is not getting the service it is entitled to and employees in CIE who are absolutely frustrated working in the conditions in which they must work in Dublin. It is important that all rural areas be served as frequently as possible by CIE. In that way we will attract industry to rural areas thereby keeping the people there instead of clogging up the cities. This is where CIE can perform their most important function. It is very difficult to attract an industrialist to a remote rural area if there is not a transport service available. CIE may say that when the industrialists come they will consider providing the service but I believe CIE should provide the services first. The rural bus service is a paying proposition and is subsidising, indeed, the losses incurred in the Dublin city bus service.
Not any longer, I am sorry to say. It is losing money now. It was about £250,000 this year.
On the rural bus services?
On everything outside Dublin city.
At what date was that?
The nine-month period from 1st April to 31st December this year.
Anyway it subsidised it up to now. The Minister must give careful consideration to the functions of CIE. I am not all that happy that everything is being done that should be done. We need the Minister's backing in this House and the backing of the Cabinet to have a committee established to investigate the affairs of CIE and to ensure that their accountability is adequate and to ensure that the money we pass here on their behalf is spent in the best interests of the tax-payers. Ultimately we must account for our stewardship to the taxpayer. While CIE are endeavouring to give a good service and, indeed, on the whole have been giving a very good service, so many things have combined to take away from that good service that the goodwill originally generated by these schemes has been eroded.
The Minister must be as concerned as we are about the apparent complete breakdown in communications between management and the trade unions. It is very hard for an outsider to understand why solutions are not arrived at either before or immediately on the threat of a strike, solutions which will ultimately be arrived at anyway whether it takes a week, two weeks, ten weeks or ten months. The people who suffer most as a result of strikes are the poorer sections of the community. They are the real sufferers because, in the fixing of a strike, one can be sure that in the increased payments granted account is taken of the earnings lost by CIE workers during the strike. If we could instil a sense of public spirit into both workers and management, if we could convince them that a strike must be the very last weapon and not the first, as would seem to be the case in some of the strikes that have occurred, the position might be very different. I do not know how the Minister could ensure this evolution but the officials of his Department should set their minds to working out an adequate scheme whereby, in the event of an impending strike, some sort of stay could be put on and some sort of emergency measures brought into operation for a period of two or three weeks during which to have full discussions. In the event of the discussions not being fruitful then, of course, one is faced with the inevitability of a strike.
I believe that overall CIE are doing a reasonably good job. Their management is very adequate, as I said. Certainly, the personnel whom I know in Cork—the Minister knows them too —are doing a professional job, endeavouring all the time to acquire up-to-date knowledge and training in order to carry out their jobs more efficiently.
There is one significant passage in the Minister's speech which was, perhaps, overlooked in the other generalities. The Minister stated:
The latest estimate of CIE's net deficit for the current nine-month financial period ending 31st December, 1974, is £13.95 million. Of this amount, £9.25 million has already been met by way of subvention payments to CIE, the necessary provision having been made in the Estimates for my Department. The main reason for the excess of £4.7 million in the board's deficit over the Estimates provision was the decision of the Government to ameliorate the impact of the July, 1974, increases in CIE rates and fares by limiting the increases in Dublin city bus and suburban rail fares and provincial city and town bus fares to 20 per cent, instead of the 33 per cent increase proposed by CIE and approved by the National Prices Commission. This, combined with a delay of three months in the implementation of the increases, resulted in a reduction of an estimated £3.3 million in the anticipated yield from the increased charges.
Another significant factor is also mentioned, namely, the nine-week bus strike. Now here is an example of one-sided remedies applied to meet an inflationary situation. There is a lesson for us here. One can find other examples in the record of the Prices Commission. They had approved the proposal made by CIE. The lesson is that, provided the scheme is found to be justifiable, provided the body making the claim is justified in making it, and that can be ascertained on the case made—it is usually based on the inflation in the cost of labour or materials—then it is worse than futile to reduce the award below what is necessary and it only compounds the difficulty by delaying the granting of it. In this case you have a typical example of what may be occurring in other areas where certain action is taken, possibly through an anxiety to control prices, possibly because of political necessity and possibly from political motives; in the end one is faced with a more difficult position, with a complete inability to cope and with having to find the money eventually. CIE asked for an increase, which appeared to have been justified. It was passed by the Prices Commission. It was then deliberately reduced and delayed. What was the net result? The net result is the inflating of what was £9 million up to £13 million, less whatever was affected by the strike.
This is a very good example of the need for co-ordinating everything. The Minister for Industry and Commerce has appropriately joined his colleague, but I am afraid I shall not be able to repeat for his benefit what I have just been arguing.
I will do that.
I refer him to the relevant passage in the Minister's speech and to the dangers and difficulties inevitably consequent upon evasive action, because that is really what it is when an essential price increase is cut down and delayed. That does not solve the problem. That kind of action can only solve the problem if the increase was in itself unjustified and the Prices Commission are concreases are justified that the Minister and the prices commission are concerned. I take this opportunity of pointing out the trap involved in that particular kind of approach in the case of a public body. That is the first point.
I should like to make a point in reference to what Deputy Crowley said and another in regard to semi-State bodies as a whole. But they must be deferred. I should like to join in asking for the understanding of this House for the difficulties of the Minister, the House and the management of CIE. Over a large number of years there have been very difficult problems indeed.
Debate adjourned.