I, too, wish to support the motion in the names of Deputy Barrett and his colleagues. I am very disappointed that there has not been any protest from the Government benches about the closure of the passenger service of the Limerick-Claremorris line. The Minister reminded us last night of a Dáil Deputy, now deceased, who, as Shakespeare said, protested too much at a particular CIE closure and later went on to lose his seat. This message must have got home to Government Deputies.
I do not see why this closure should become a political football. It has not been in any of the meetings we had so far. The deputation from the west represented all shades of political opinion. It was led by the Galway County Manager who pointed out that we in the west feared that this was the thin end of the wedge so far as railways were concerned. The commitment of the people in the west to the continuance of a rail passenger service on this line must have been obvious to the Minister at that meeting. We fear that this line will be eventually closed and other lines serving the west will suffer the same fate.
The deputation which met the Minister on 3rd March could not travel by rail that morning to keep their appointment with the Minister. That in itself is an example of the service which is available in the west at the moment. The county manager and the county development officer are to be congratulated on the excellent work they did in preparing their case. I believe the Minister was grossly unfair to the Western Action Group in his reply last night when he said they would be better off to organise trade for CIE and freight for the line rather than organising protests and pickets. Surely it is the function of CIE to make their service more attractive. If they do this, they will get the support of the local people.
One of the main reasons for the picket was that the Taoiseach refused to meet them. Perhaps the Minister expected the deputation to arrive in sackcloth and ashes. He met them on Ash Wednesday. He must have been impressed by the fine case they put up. As was pointed out, this is the biggest ever CIE closure. The bare two months' notice, which the company are statutorily compelled to give, were all that were given in this case. We believe the Government should have shown more resistance and we are asking that a reprieve be given for a further period and the quality of the service improved. This would encourage more people to use the service. The line serves a vast area. It is the only line connecting Munster directly with Connacht, stretching from Limerick to Mayo and running through four counties. It serves the important towns of Ennis, Tuam, Gort and Athenry. Its closure was not included in CIE's Rail Plan, 80. There is the question, too, of redundancies. The people of Athenry were the first to show their concern in this regard when they organised a meeting to discuss the situation. In all there will be a loss of 21 jobs with resulting hardship for the workers and their families. The decision is particularly reprehensible at a time of high unemployment because it will affect both the farming community and the business people of the areas. Both existing and potential industries will be affected because industrialists will fear a total closure.
Among the reasons given for the closure is that the service is losing money but it should be pointed out that nowhere in the EEC are railways a paying proposition. Therefore, we must ask why the west of Ireland is being chosen on this occasion. We are told that the annual loss on the service is £250,000. That is a nice even figure but CIE do not give us a breakdown of the receipts and expenses. It might be more convincing for them to give us figures either of £249,000 or £251,000. If the total loss is £250,000 on the passenger trains alone, this means a loss of £1,400 per day, a figure which seems impossible. Therefore, the figure given would seem to be totally exaggerated.
Another reason given for the closure is the cost of maintaining the line but it will still have to be maintained at goods standard. In addition, CIE's wage bill will be reduced considerably by reason of the 21 redundancies. In other words, it would appear that the total loss must be less than £100,000 or less than a quarter of 1 per cent of the company's projected total loss for 1976. This amount is very small when one considers that the subvention for CIE last year was in the region of £28 million. For the small amount involved by way of loss, a real service is being removed.
The Minister referred last evening to the Transport Act, 1958. Section 19, subsection (2), of that Act states that the board shall not terminate a service unless they are satisfied that its operation is uneconomic and that there is no prospect of its continued operation being economic within a reasonable period. We are not told by CIE why they consider this line to be uneconomic. They are not giving us any figures but if my figures are correct, the line is not uneconomic when compared with other lines both in Ireland and in other countries. Another aspect of the matter is that CIE have a social as well as a commercial role. They tell us that there is a limit to their social function but if the annual loss on this line is less than £100,000 they must fulfil their social role in regard to it.
The other reason given for the closure is poor passenger support. On the face of it, this may be correct but we must ask what the quality of the service is like and what attempts have the company made to sell the line. Should they not have been able to take advantage of their position vis-á-vis the private motorist during the past few years when there have been massive increases in petrol prices, 12 increases in all which have brought the cost of a gallon of petrol from 36p in March, 1973, to almost 90p today or an increase of 52p? There have been increases, too, in motor taxation and insurance has increased by more than 70 per cent in that time. Despite this situation, CIE do not appear to have made any attempt to go after that market and there must be such a market in the west of Ireland. The service is needed, for instance, to bring students to colleges in addition to bringing workers to their places of employment. In the west we want a service that is as good as any in the southern, the eastern or the northern parts of the country.
I would refer briefly to the proposed substitute bus service. Past experience has shown only too forcibly that CIE do not honour their promises. One example in this regard is the proposed luxury service which they said would replace the Kiltymon-Loughrea passenger train. The service they have inaugurated to replace the train service is such that while it brings workers to Loughrea in the mornings it will not serve the purpose of returning them to their homes in the evening. This creates much difficulty for the people of the area, many of whom I have witnessed hitching lifts home.
In addition, the roads in the west are not suited to the purpose of these proposed luxury buses. They are taxed almost to their maximum in catering for existing traffic. Apart from this, they do not serve the towns of Craughwell, Athenry and Ballyglunin. Instead, they continue on the main road to Galway city. Travellers from Limerick to Tuam and Claremorris do not wish to go via Galway where they may be held up for long periods in traffic jams. Similarly, travellers from Ennis and Gort to Dublin who now travel via Athenry will in the future have to go to Galway by bus in order to connect with the Dublin train.
Another factor in this is that the allocation for roads to Galway County Council has been reduced by more than £100,000 this year compared with last year. The Limerick-Claremorris train for all its faults, some of which we have mentioned, has walk-around space, dining facilities and sanitary and washing facilities. CIE's regulations compel them to provide sanitary facilities on all train journeys exceeding one-and-a-half hours. Elderly people and children need frequent access to these facilities. There are no sanitary or washing facilities on the proposed luxury buses where any journeys exceed the one-and-a-half hours prescribed by CIE's health regulations.
I should like to point out that the train journey from Ballina to Limerick takes 3 hours 55 minutes whereas the bus journey over the same route takes 4 hours 45 minutes. In other words, the bus journey takes three-quarters of an hour longer. I should like to refer to the reply the Minister gave to Deputy Loughnane on 11th March, Official Report, Volume 288, No. 12, column 1859, when he said:
I am very keen to see that every traveller on CIE is carried as comfortably and as quickly as possible to his chosen point of destination.
The Minister said those words to night also. I should like to ask him how he can reconcile that statement with the fact that those buses will take three-quarters of an hour longer to do the same journey the train does. We should be concerned, as the Minister says, that CIE carry people as comfortably and as quickly as possible to their chosen point of destination.
There is excursion traffic on this line, as has already been pointed out, apart from the weekday passenger trains. Mention has been made of the GAA specials and of the seaside trains which cover this route. Indeed, of great importance, are the Knock pilgrimage trains. All such trains from Munster use this route every Sunday from May to October. Each train carries roughly 400 to 500 passengers. The Minister told us that those trains will function this year. What guarantee have we that those trains will continue to function every year? Buses could not cope with such huge numbers of pilgrims nor could one rail route into Claremorris via Athlone handle this traffic. A huge increase in this traffic is expected as we approach the centenary year. The archbishop of Tuam has expressed concern about those trains as well.
The board of CIE informed the deputation that they were pursuing their policy of developing their services in the west. This may be so but one gets the feeling that they are developing the road services at the expense of the rail services. There is duplication of passenger train and bus services on the Claremorris-Limerick line with the bus departing 20 minutes ahead of the train. In other words, the bus service runs in direct competition with the Claremorris-Limerick line. It is most unfair competition.
A further example I can give is that a weekend return Ballina to Claremorris rail ticket costs £1.40. The upward journey is made by rail and the downward one is made by bus as there is no Sunday service to Ballina yet. Out of that £1.40 a sum of £1.35 goes to the bus service and 5p is credited to the rail service. It is about time the bus service began to pay for itself.
CIE services in the west can be measured by the fact that it takes eight days for a small parcel to travel from Dublin to Gort. This has already been pointed out. A further example I can give is that a parcel sent from Claremorris to Tuam travels first to Dublin, then down to Galway and eventually arrives at Tuam. Similar delays are experienced at all stations along the line.
We hear a lot nowadays about developing the west. Prior to the west Mayo by-election the Minister for the Gaeltacht announced the setting up of the Western Development Board. I would like to refer to a reply I received to a parliamentary question I put to the Minister for the Public Service. He said:
The organisation and structure of the Western Development Board is being examined at present by the Departments concerned before beginning consultation with interested bodies. It is not possible to say at this stage what the implications for various agencies, authorities and local bodies will be when the board is set up. This will depend on the powers and functions ultimately assigned to the board.
It seems ironic to me at times when various Departments are examining the organisation and structure of the proposed western board that the Government are allowing the Limerick-Claremorris line to be discontinued. Indeed, from what we have heard the Government are approving the decision of CIE. We must ask if the Government are genuinely interested in developing the west.
The Minister for Transport and Power, the man who is accountable for the decisions of CIE, should not allow this to happen particularly as the proposed Western Development Board is to be set up. I understand it will co-ordinate the services which already exist in the west of Ireland. Certainly, no decision should be taken concerning the removal of the passenger service on this line until the Western Development Board is set up. Surveys have been carried out by various bodies in the west. For example, in the towns of Tuam, Athenry and Loughrea, the various bodies there have met and have put forward proposals and alternative timetables to CIE. Every year when the Estimates are discussed Members of the Oireachtas put forward proposals but, unfortunately, these seem to fall on deaf ears.
We are all concerned that a reprieve should be given to this line for a further period so that negotiations can take place among the interested parties. We are also asking that the quality of the service be improved. We feel in that way that the Claremorris-Limerick line may be made more attractive and that the local people will use it. The last thing I want to refer to is the development that is taking place at the moment in north-west Connacht. A railway line would be of immense benefit to the industrialists who might come into the area and to the people in the area. It is very important, with all this development and the proposed board that is to be set up, that this line be given a reprieve and that the quality of the service is improved.
