I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The purpose of this Bill is to provide the necessary statutory powers to construct, maintain and operate a light rail system in the greater Dublin area.
The Bill proposes a single comprehensive statutory procedure authorising the provision of a light rail system, the main features of which are as follows: it proposes that CIÉ will be the statutory agency responsible for the development of the light rail system; CIÉ will procure the powers to develop the system through a light railway order made by the Minister; CIÉ will have to apply to the Minister for the necessary light railway order. Its application will have to include a draft of the light railway order together with detailed plans and an environmental impact statement. The statutory approval process will be a one-stop-shop dealing with all aspects of the project, including transportation and physical planning issues, environmental impact assessment and the compulsory acquisition of land; there will be a manadatory public inquiry into all aspects of the light rail proposal, including the planning and environmental issues. Any person will be able to make a written submission to the Minister in relation to the proposal and to appear and make his or her case at the public inquiry and the light rail network can only be built when the Minister has made a light railway order, having fully considered any submissions made on the matter, the report of the public inquiry and the environmental impact assessment.
Because of this single comprehensive procedure, the Bill proposes that the development of light rail will be treated as exempted development under the planning Acts and will not, therefore, require planning permission. This avoids an unnecessary duplication of effort and treats light rail in a similar way to road projects, which are also exempt from planning permission.
I would now like to briefly outline the wider context in which this Bill has been developed. It has its origins in proposals to facilitate the development of a viable public transport system for Dublin. Transportation is one of the most important factors influencing the growth, shape, size and environment of our cities. By contrast, traffic congestion is one of the most serious threats to the efficient running of our cities. It imposes heavy social costs on the community through pollution, wasted time and energy, road accidents and so on.
Clearly, measures to relieve urban traffic congestion must include provision for improved road access and better traffic management. However, it is equally clear that good quality public transport services are a vital ingredient of the overall strategy to keep our cities alive and thriving. Since the 1960s traffic and car ownership have grown relentlessly. We have a vicious circle which sees increased road traffic levels matched by a deterioration in public transport services which, in turn, has encouraged greater use of cars. The seriousness of this situation for the future development of transport in the Dublin region is clearly brought home when one realises that, congested though the city is, we still have some way to go before we reach the levels of car ownership prevalent in other European Union countries. Our rates are only about half those in Germany, for example.
If we look back over the recent history of Dublin's traffic and transport problems, it is evident that too often they have been a source of discussion, debate and argument and too infrequently about productive results. As far back as 1971 the Dublin transportation study, carried out by An Foras Forbartha, recommended the implementation of an integrated transportation system to accommodate anticipated increases in travel in the period up to 1991. However, most of its recommendations were either never implemented or long delayed due to lack of resources.
In 1978 the Transport Consultative Commission was set up to address the transport problems of the Dublin area. The principal recommendation of the commission was the establishment on a statutory basis of a Dublin transportation authority with overall responsibility for ensuring the integrated planning and operation of transportation in the Dublin area. The Authority was established in November 1986 but dissolved little more than 12 months later. Once again a major opportunity to do something about Dublin's transport and traffic problems had been missed. However, it must be acknowledged that most of the bus lanes around the city today, which are of great benefit in keeping buses on the move at peak traffic hours, were implemented on foot of the commission's report.
The Dublin Transportation Initiative is our last real opportunity to come to grips with the problem. The transport system is often called the lifeblood of a city and the analogy is an accurate one. A city will decay if its traffic circulation system fails to operate effectively. A primary aim of the Dublin Transportation Initiative is to maintain and reinforce the vitality of the city centre of Dublin and to promote a transfer of commuters from private cars to public transport. The DTI also places a particular emphasis on improved traffic management and enforcement, arguing that we can only justify increased investment when we have made better use of our existing transport infrastructure and facilities.
The DTI, however, differs from previous attempts at improving transport and traffic in the Dublin region in a number of important aspects. The first of these is financial. While previous studies and reports cannot be faulted for their thoroughness and the soundness of their recommendations, they have all too often been prepared in a financial vacuum. The DTI, however, was carried out with the active encouragement and financial support of the European Commission. As a result, the major elements of the DTI transport strategy have been included in the Operational Programme for Transport up to 1999. This includes the most comprehensive package of urban public transport improvements ever proposed in this country, costing almost £300 million over the period 1994-99.
The second is that the DTI was designed as an ongoing planning process with permanent institutional structures rather than a once off ad hoc study. This provides a momentum for real change. The Government has established the Dublin Transportation Office to oversee the implementation of the DTI transport strategy as a whole and ensure an ongoing transportation planning process in the greater Dublin area.
Finally, and of key importance to the success of the initiative, the DTI has followed the wisdom of previous reports by highlighting the need for greater compliance with road traffic law. The 1980 report of the Transport Consultative Commission made the point in very stark terms. It stated that "it would be pointless to attempt to implement the measures recommended in that report without a parallel commitment to provide the resources necessary to ensure enforcement of road traffic regulations." That is as true today as it was 16 years ago and the DTI final report put it in equally stark terms when it said that a failure to address the traffic management and enforcement issue adequately could undermine its overall strategy and lead to a waste of scarce resources. The Government has decided to address this issue head on through the appointment of a director of traffic for Dublin who will assume overall responsibility for traffic management and enforcement in Dublin city.
For the reasons I have just outlined, I am confident that the DTI will succeed where other efforts have fallen short of their objective. The DTI represents both an opportunity and a challenge to agencies involved in land use and transportation in Dublin — perhaps the last real opportunity. Everyone with responsibility in this area must work together to ensure that the DTI strategy is implemented.
One of the basic tenets of the DTI is that there must be a transfer from private to public transport in order to improve transport accessibility throughout the greater Dublin area. Catering for future demand by increased arterial road building alone is is no longer seen as a sustainable strategy, especially within the motorway C-Ring and the city centre. To meet the growing demand for travel by ever increasing car use, especially for commuting purposes, would be simply too costly in financial and environmental terms. A workable and sustainable solution must involve a better deal for public transport.
In order to achieve that objective it is necessary to improve the attractiveness of public transport to a level at which it can compete with the private car. This needs to be done in a variety of ways such as increasing the speed, frequency and reliability of services, enhancing the quality of vehicles and providing better quality of information for users. The greatest obstacles to encouraging more people to use public transport in Dublin are the delays and unreliability caused by traffic congestion and illegal or inconsiderate parking. There is surely no more persuasive argument in favour of a more equitable share-out of scarce road space in our city between private and public transport. Traffic priority is only part, albeit a vital part, of the overall package which must be implemented. Quality of service also needs to be emphasised. The only way for public transport to compete with the private car is to offer quality services that are geared precisely to what the public wants and to do so in a professional manner.
A modern capital city of the size of Dublin requires a public transport system which is capable of transporting large numbers of people along main transport corridors in comfort, with the assurance of fast and reliable journey times. The public transport aspects of the transport strategy recommended by the DTI comprise a number of complementary elements. The most exciting and innovative of these is the proposed light rail system. The light rail network recommended by the Dublin Transportation Initiative comprises a core network of lines to Tallaght, Cabinteely and Ballymun. An expanded network of lines to Finglas and Dublin Airport via Swords has also been recommended for future implementation once the core network is complete.
The DTI recommended an on-street light rail system as part of its overall transport strategy for the greater Dublin area. It recommended against an underground system on economic, financial and accessibility grounds. The DTI report supported light rail because it represented a sound investment, because it would achieve a significant transfer of people from cars to public transport, because it had a proven capacity to support urban regeneration and because it was environmentally friendly and accessible to mobility impaired people.
Light rail in no way represents a return to an old-fashioned outmoded transport system, as some critics have suggested. Light rail has evolved considerably in the decades since trams disappeared from the streets of Dublin. The modern equivalent is a quiet, attractive, streamlined, single deck vehicle which fits well into a modern city centre environment. Unlike conventional heavy rail systems, light rail is flexible. It can run through most city streets sharing road space with general traffic and even pedestrians. It combines the reliability speed and comfort of the traditional railway with the flexibility and efficiency of the bus.
The evidence from around the world shows that light rail has many positive impacts on urban areas. It is helping to reverse the decline in public transport in urban areas and this has been responsible for the rapid growth of light rail systems in the past ten to 15 years.
Light rail is now the most common way to upgrade public transport in cities around the world. Throughout Europe there are many examples of light rail systems such as Amsterdam and Strasbourg. In many instances the LRT system has helped in the development of the urban fabric. In the UK, light rail systems have been implemented in Manchester and Sheffield since 1992 and plans for further light rail lines in Birmingham-Wolverhampton and Croydon in London are at an advanced stage of development. There is evidence to show that car drivers transfer to trams, considering them to be an attractive and practical alternative to the rigours of city centre traffic congestion.
Government policy on light rail is clear and unambiguous. It is in effect the centre piece of a public transport investment programme, recommended by the DTI, included in the National Development Plan and endorsed by the European Union by virtue of its inclusion in the Operational Programme for Transport. It has the support of public institutions and the people of the region, coupled with favourable financial circumstances. These carry with them a great onus of responsibility to follow through on the project and get things done on time and within budget. The purpose of this legislation is to ensure that we achieve that objective.
I now propose briefly to outline the main provisions of the Bill. The Bill can be divided in two main parts. Sections 2 to 14 provide for the statutory approval procedures for light rail. Sections 15 to 26 deal with matters relating to the implementation and operation of a light railway. The remaining sections contain standard provisions which are common to most Bills.
Section 2 empowers persons authorised by the Minister or the CIÉ board to enter on any land and carry out inspections, examinations and tests for the purposes of the construction of a light rail system. Given the tight time-scale for implementing the light rail project, it is essential that relevant staff be permitted access to land in connection with the proper planning of the project. In the event that entry is refused, the Minister or the CIÉ board may apply to the District Court for a warrant authorising entry. Where any damage or loss is caused as a result of an authorised officer carrying out functions under this section, there is a proposed procedure whereby compensation can be claimed from the Minister or the board as appropriate.
Statutory authority to construct, operate and maintain a light railway will be granted to CIÉ by the Minister by means of a light railway order. CIÉ is the only organisation that may apply for a light railway order. Section 3 sets out the documentation which must accompany an application. These include a draft of the order, a plan of the proposed light railway works, a book of reference to the plan indicating the identity of owners and occupiers of the lands described in the plan, and a statement on the likely effects on the environment of the proposed light railway works.
Section 4 proposes that light rail developments will be exempted development for the purposes of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963. This avoids an unnecessary duplication of efforts and treats light rail in a similar way to road projects, which are also exempt from planning permission. The interests of planning authorities and the public are protected by other provisions in the Bill which require statutory consultation with the planning authorities and any persons directly affected by the proposed light rail scheme.
One of the most important documents which must accompany an application for a light railway order is the environmental impact statement. Section 5 sets out the information to be contained in an environmental impact statement based on the relevant EC Directive. Among the items required in the statement are a description of the proposed works, the data required to assess the effects on the environment, a description of the likely effects, both direct and indirect, of the proposed works impacting on humans, flora and fauna, landscape, structures, culture and heritage, and a description of measures to remedy likely adverse environmental effects and an outline of any alternative courses of action assessed. Most importantly, there is a requirement that a summary of the statement in non-technical language is included to ensure that it is clear and accessible to as wide a range of people as possible.
Section 6 requires CIÉ to give public notice that an application has been made to the Minister for a light railway order. It also allows interested persons the right to inspect copies of the documentation accompanying the application for a light railway order and to purchase copies or extracts.
Section 6 further provides that copies of the documentation lodged with the application for a light railway order must be sent to every local planning authority affected by the proposed light railway system and to any other persons as the Minister may direct. Relevant extracts of this documentation will be served on every owner or occupier of land referred to in the draft light railway order accompanying CIÉ's application.
A minimum period of four weeks is specified for the inspection of the documentation and a further minimum two-week period is allowed for the making of submissions in writing to the Minister in relation to the proposed light railway order or the likely effects on the environment of the proposed light railway.
Where the Minister considers that further information on the likely effects of light rail on the environment is necessary to ensure the adequacy of the consultation process, section 7 allows him to require CIÉ to furnish that additional information. Where the information provided contains significant data in relation to the likely effects on the environment of the light railway, notice must be given that this further information is available for inspection by the public. Supplementary written submissions may be made to the Minister in relation to this further information. A minimum period of three weeks is set out for the making of these additional submissions.
The key element of the statutory approval process is provided for in section 8 of the Bill. This section stipulates that there must be a full public inquiry into the application for a light railway order at which all aspects of the application can be discussed. It provides for the appointment of an inspector to hold the inquiry. The inspector may be assisted by one or more assessors. It will be the inspector's sole responsibility to prepare and submit to the Minister a written report of the inquiry findings and to make any recommendations he or she thinks appropriate. Any person will be entitled to appear and be heard at the public inquiry.
Before making a decision, section 9 obliges the Minister to consider the documentation submitted by CIÉ, the inspector's report on the public inquiry, the written submissions made by any person, and any additional environmental information provided under section 7. Where the Minister is of the opinion that the application for an order should be granted, the Minister will make an order authorising the construction, maintenance and improvement of the light railway, attaching such conditions, restrictions and other terms as he or she thinks proper and specifies in the order. Notice of the making of an order must be published.
Should a light railway order need to be amended, the Minister may by order amend it. However, the statutory approval procedures provided for in sections 3 to 9 will have to be repeated where a significant amendment is involved. The Minister may revoke a light railway order where CIÉ fails or refuses to comply with any condition, restriction or requirement specified in the order. CIÉ may appeal this decision to the High Court.
Section 10 provides that a light railway order will contain such provisions as the Minister considers necessary. That can include specifying land and rights on land to be acquired, the manner in which works are to be carried out, or a time limit within which they must be completed.
Section 11 is a technical provision requiring CIÉ to retain and make available for inspection or purchase by the public the light railway order and related documentation for a period of five years after the order comes into operation. In the absence of such a provision, the documents would have to be retained by CIÉ in perpetuity. Provision is also made for the service of relevant extracts from the order on every planning authority for the area to which the order relates and on every occupier and every owner of land referred to in that order.
Section 12, which is based on provisions of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1992, provides for judicial review by the High Court of a light railway order made by the Minister. Application for leave for judicial review must be made within a period of two months from the date on which the order was made unless the court considers that there is sufficient reason for extending the period. The section further provides that leave will not be granted for a judicial review unless the High Court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for such a review. The decision of the High Court will be final except where that court certifies that its decision involves a point of law of exceptional public importance and that an appeal to the Supreme Court is desirable.
Section 13 authorises the compulsory acquisition of land by CIÉ following the making of a light rail order by the Minister. In practice, this will have the same effect as if the light rail order were a compulsory purchase order and the board were a local authority exercising its compulsory purchase powers. The board is also given the option, under subsection (2), to acquire additional land adjoining that to be compulsorily acquired under the order. This requires the consent of the Minister and of the owner of that adjoining land and is allowed only where it would be efficient and economical to do so for the purpose of the light rail project. This allows a sensible approach to land acquisition and provides a necessary degree of flexibility.
Section 14 gives CIÉ power to enter land to carry out works authorised by a light railway order. Provision is made for the serving of a notice on the owner or occupier of the land, who may apply to the District Court for an order prohibiting entry. A judge of the District Court may prohibit entry or impose conditions on CIÉ. Where any loss or damage results from the exercise of CIÉ's powers to enter on land to carry out works, there is provision for the payment of compensation to the owner or occupier and for arbitration where agreement on the amount of compensation cannot be agreed.
Where any tree, shrub, or hedge obstructs or interferes with the construction, maintenance, improvement, safety or operation of a light railway, section 15 provides that CIÉ may lop any such tree, shrub or hedge. Notice of the proposed works must be served on the owner who may, if he or she wishes, carry out the necessary works and recover the cost from CIÉ.
Section 16 proposes that CIÉ will be authorised to carry out works on any existing public road or to construct a new road provided this is specified in the light railway order. The prior consent in writing of the road authority in whose area the road is situated will be required before work starts and the road authority may impose conditions, restrictions or requirements in its consent.
Section 17 provides that no part of the light railway may be open for traffic until it has been inspected and certified by an inspector appointed by the Minister. This is a technical provision relating to safety certification and is similar to existing procedures applied to new sections of mainline railway.
Section 18 provides that the Minister may make regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the Act or for resolving any difficulty in bringing the Act into operation.
Sections 19 to 22 create offences of trespass, unauthorised use of a light railway, obstruction or interference with the performance of functions under the Bill. Section 24 gives CIÉ the power to make by-laws for the regulation of a light railway and specifies a number of particular matters in respect of which CIÉ may make by-laws. A person who contravenes sections 19 to 22 or a by-law will be guilty of an offence and liable to a maximum fine of £1,500 or a prison term of up to six months or both.
Standard provisions for the service of notice under the Act are made under section 23.
Section 25 provides that CIÉ may, with the consent of the Minister and of the Minister for Finance, acquire or form and register one or more subsidiary companies pursuant to the Companies Act, 1963. This gives the option of forming a subsidiary company to operate the light rail system. While CIÉ will obtain the statutory powers to construct and operate light rail, no final decision has been taken on the precise arrangements which will be made within the CIE Group for the operation of light rail.
Section 26 applies the Railways Acts, 1840 to 1889 and any other Act relating to railways, except where such Acts are inconsistent with the provisions of this Bill and a light railway will be deemed to be a railway within the meaning of those Acts. These Acts cover matters such as construction, operation and maintenance of a railway system and associated infrastructural works. The right to carry passengers, supervision and safety inspection arrangements, including the powers of the railway inspecting officer to hold inquiries and make recommendations, as provided for in the Railways Acts, would also have relevance for the light rail system.
Sections 27 to 30 are standard provisions common to most Acts and cover procedures for the laying of orders and by-laws before the Oireachtas, administration expenses, fees and commencement of the Act.
On 12 December last I launched the comprehensive public consultation programme currently under way. The programme involves an extensive series of public meetings, exhibitions, surveys and bilateral discussions with all interested parties. Its purpose is to explain the concept of light rail, to outline specific light rail proposals and most importantly, to listen carefully to any concerns expressed in relation to those proposals. The consultative process will continue until a statutory public inquiry into all aspects of the light rail project is held towards the end of the year.
It is interesting to note that since the public consultation process got under way, the public profile and popular awareness of the project has greatly increased. I believe that people are finally beginning to realise and accept that this Government is serious about implementing the recommendations of the Dublin Transportation Initiative and that we are not content to let the DTI report remain on a shelf.
It is not surprising therefore that many are starting to sit up and take notice of this implementation process as it gathers momentum, evidenced on an almost daily basis by developments such as the quality bus corridors, the establishment of the Dublin Transportation Office and, of course, the progress on the planning of the light rail system itself.
This increased public awareness raises many questions and concerns in relation to the project. Not least of these is the question of disruption during construction. The construction of a light rail system in Dublin will inevitably mean a certain level of disruption due to the necessity to divert essential services away from the path of the vehicles and the laying of track along the routes.
However, the light rail construction plans for Dublin have been formulated by a team of experts with wide international experience who are working in conjunction with the civic authorities and supported by conservation bodies. The planning team formed by CIÉ have drawn on the experience of several cities in Europe, the United States and Canada to develop a plan which will entail a minimum of disruption to trade and access to affected streets. CIÉ has engaged French consultants, Semaly, who have proven and extensive international expertise on light rail systems and are involved in all aspects of the Dublin project.
