Vol. 467 No. 7
7 Ms O'Donnell asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications the current position regarding the proposal to extend the DART service to Greystones, County Wicklow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14165/96]
415 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications whether it is proposed to extend the DART service to Malahide, County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14199/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 415 together.
The DART extensions to Greystones and Malahide are included in a package of public transport investments which is under consideration for Cohesion Fund assistance by the European Commission at present. My Department has been in regular contact with the Commission on this package, including the Greystones and Malahide extensions. I understand that the Commission will shortly finalise its consideration of the package.
I am pleased to hear the Minister's reply because there has been no action to make the public believe the commitment is being fulfilled. We are aware of the high profile commitment made during the recent Wicklow by-election that the DART would be extended to Greystones. However, little has been heard about it since. We will be keeping an eye on progress as long as the Minister is involved. I hope he will get approval soon for funding for the project. Perhaps he could indicate when work will commence, which is what people want to hear.
There has been no avoidable delay in getting this project under way. Our decision to approve the project was a policy one taken in the context of the National Development Plan and the operational programme for transport. That decision was only taken after detailed analysis of the project by CIÉ, which showed positive economic returns, and after discussion with the European Commission. Following that policy decision, the normal European Union approval procedures for Cohesion Fund projects were put in train. A detailed application was submitted to the Commission for Cohesion Fund assistance and, in accordance with normal procedure, the Commission then asked an independent consultant to review the submission. This work has only recently been completed. Each Cohesion Fund project requires an individual Commission decision to approve financial assistance. I understand that an internal Commission consultation process is nearing completion, which I hope will enable this formal decision to be taken before the end of July. CIE is ready to start this project as soon as it gets formal approval from the Commission.
Could the Minister indicate what type of subsidy will be needed for this extension or if it will be self-financing? Perhaps the Minister might comment on the loss reported last week on our railways. The annual accounts for 1995 showed a substantial deterioration despite the fact he appointed new management.
The Deputy is raising a separate and special matter.
I am satisfied that, on the basis of the analysis carried out by CIE, the new service will generate a small operating surplus and it will not require an ongoing operating subsidy.
A number of points should be made concerning the financial position of the DART service. In 1995, the latest year for which published accounts are available from CIE, total expenditure on the DART service was £26.85 million, but that figure included interest charges and infrastructural costs totalling £11.35 million, which are not directly related to the day to day operation of the service. When those charges and costs are excluded the total day to day operating costs of the service for 1995 was £15.5 million, which compares with a total revenue from the service of £13 million in 1995. A total of 16.7 million passenger journeys were made by DART in 1995. The operating deficit on DART services for 1995 was £2.4 million or 1.5 pence per passenger journey. The total deficit, taking account of interest charges and infrastructural costs, was £13.8 million.
They are bottom line accounts.
The Minister said that the DART is losing money and that its operating costs for 1995 were £15.5 million when interest and other extraordinary charges were deducted. Apart from interest charges and capital spending, in terms of its ordinary day to day running costs the DART is losing more than £2 million a year. That is extraordinary. Has the service always operated at such a loss?
As Deputy Molloy has stated here on a number of occasions, it has been operating at a deficit for a number of years. The 1995 figures show that the total deficit, taking into account interest charges and infrastructural costs, was £13.821 million.
It is getting worse.
I understand that is an improvement on the preceding year.
The Minister stated in the House on an earlier occasion that the figures improved during 1995, but we have only got the CIE report. Annual reports of CIE for the previous three years show a drop in the number of passengers using the DART service. That is alarming, particularly in view of the overall annual losses in the operation of DART. It would be very serious if the Dublin commuter was losing confidence in the DART service. Now that the annual report has been published can the Minister confirm that the trend has been reversed and that people are returning to use the DART in greater numbers?
I can confirm that for a number of years there was a decline in the number of people using the DART service. That decline has been arrested and, effectively, there is now an increase in the numbers using the service. A total of 16.7 million passengers used the service in 1995, which is a substantial increase on previous years.
The figure is not as high as it was previously.
