Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 4 Nov 1997

Vol. 482 No. 3

Private Members' Business. - Dublin's Traffic Conditions.

Mr. Dukes

I move:

That Dáil Éireann condemns the Government for its failure to commit adequate resources to tackling the factors contributing to the rapid deterioration in Dublin's traffic conditions.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Yates, Richard Bruton and Clune.

It is no exaggeration to say that traffic in Dublin is a nightmare. That nightmare is worse today than it was a year ago and unless radical and effective action is taken the situation will continue to deteriorate rapidly and in a year's time it will be even worse, the gridlock even thicker, than it is today.

I know from personal experience that a journey through the city centre which can be accomplished in 20 minutes on foot will take up to half an hour by car at most times of the day and could take even longer by public transport, except in the cases where the DART can be used. The problem for public transport is exacerbated by virtue that we now have much more commonly a phenomenon which I used to see in the days of my youth when I regularly took the No. 19 bus, the banana route where the buses come in bunches. That happens now to an even greater degree because the bunching of public transport is an inevitable result of the kind of gridlock which is now common on the roads in Dublin.

Between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. during weekdays there is virtually no lull or valley period in city centre traffic. Very soon that congestion will extend from 7 a.m. until 7 p.m. Even on Saturday city centre traffic is very heavy. The days when Dublin commuters could come into the city on Saturday to shop with some comfort are gone. Whether they come by car or public transport they find similar delays on Saturday to those during the week.

A simple single event like the Horse Show or a major concert can disrupt traffic in the city for hours before and after the event. Last Friday a fire in the city centre caused a monumental snarlup of traffic, the effect of which spread in all directions, as far as the outer edges of the city. I know what I am talking about as I was travelling through the city centre. With two hours in hand I thought it would be possible to travel from Sally's Bridge on the canal to my office in Kildare House and still arrive at RTE in time to keep an appointment. However, when I hit the traffic at Sally's Bridge I forgot any notion of coming into the centre of the city and proceeded directly to RTE. It took me an hour and a half to make that journey.

Like many others I drive from my home to Leinster House, a distance of 35 miles, on most days of the week. Up to a year ago that journey normally took one hour. With each passing month the journey time is becoming longer. It is impossible to rely on doing it in less than an hour and a quarter at almost any time of the day. At the same time, that journey takes me less time than is required by many commuters who live much closer to the city than I do. Commuters who live on the northern edge of the city anywhere from Malahide or Howth in or those who live in the Killiney area — many of them are friends of mine — need as much time to make that journey as I do to travel from Kildare to Dublin, except for those who are fortunate enough to live near the DART line and who have a much more predictable and reliable service. With the exception of commuters who live within reach of the DART line or near the terminal point of a quality bus corridor, commuting involves long periods of waiting, crowded vehicles, slow progress, frequent disruption and uncertain and unpredictable journey times. I doubt if many commuters in Dublin can predict with certainty how long it will take to travel from their home to their place of work whether they travel by private car or by bus. The only people who can give any kind of reliable indication of how long a journey will take are those who have the good fortune to be able to take the DART.

Rail commuters find themselves dogged by frequent delays, breakdowns, inadequate capacity and sometimes the disappearance of trains from the system. That is another day's work and it would require a full day's debate in the House. All this conspires to make commuting and travelling around Dublin a much more stressful business than it needs to be. There are times on the rail system when timetables, even on the Arrow which is the newest part of the system, seem like works of fiction. Commuters whose journey takes them from one point on the edge of the city to another point on the edge of the city are forced by the way the public transport system is organised to join the throng heading for the centre of the city even though their only concern when they get there is to get out of it as quickly as they possibly can. It is an important point as that group of commuters is increasing in numbers. Given the new housing developments taking place at a rapid pace on the perimeter of the city the number of these commuters will continue to increase, as will the number of commuters heading for city centre destinations. Unless there is a fundamental reorganisation of the provision of public transport in Dublin all those people will have to go to the centre of the city and a big proportion of them will have to find their way out of the city centre again instead of going a direct route around the perimeter of the city.

The situation is deteriorating rapidly and there is no prospect of effective relief in sight even though the principal elements of a solution are well known and have been very well thought out. The Dublin Transportation Initiative was launched in 1986. This turned out to be the most comprehensive, detailed, longest and least productive process of public consultation and decision-making this country has ever seen. What have we got to show for 11 years of study, consultation and debate of Dublin's transport problems? We have two or three quality bus corridors, a few bus lanes — I will refer to these later — and precious little else except the most short-sighted decision ever seen in the history of public transport in Dublin taken last July when the Government effectively killed off the Luas. Fianna Fáil has been in Government for eight of the 11 years since the DTI was initiated. During that period it has made no key decision on the integration of traffic management and planning in Dublin but it has on at least two occasions backed off the implementation of measures which would have brought about a substantial improvement.

The first such occasion was the decision in 1987 to scrap the remaining recommendations of the Dublin Rail rapid transit study when the DART between Howth and Bray had been completed. The second such occasion was in July when the Minister for Public Enterprise foolishly persuaded an ill advised Government to back away from the Luas project at a crucial moment and to effectively scrap it for the foreseeable future. That must surely be one of the most short-sighted and mischievous decisions ever taken by Fianna Fáil. I lay responsibility at Fianna Fáil's door. The Progressive Democrats are in Government but I am sure they counted for nothing in this, particularly since the departure of their guru in chief in his usual cloud of self-righteousness. This was the single most ill advised decision, the one most pregnant with all kinds of difficulties for Dublin commuters, which has ever been taken. It effectively rules out European Union aid for the Luas project under the current Community Support Framework. The Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, effectively admitted that in a recent radio interview when she said that funding might be forthcoming under the new framework to be put in place post-1999. That is very disingenuous of the Minister. I remind her of the old saying that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. The bird we now have in the hand, the current Community Support Framework, is much plumper than the birds that will be in the bush after 1999.

If the Minister does not immediately reverse her utterly irresponsible decision to carry out yet another study of the underground option, with terms of reference that seem expressly designed to produce further delay, a future Government, of whatever stripe, will have the most extreme difficulty in securing and providing funding for improvements in mass transit facilities, which our capital city so urgently requires. It will have the greatest difficulty in putting together a system that will meet the needs of the thousands of people who live in Tallaght, along the Luas route between Tallaght and the city centre, in Sandyford and Dundrum and between those areas and the city centre, not to speak of the burgeoning population that would be served by the Ballymun line when that is finally built. The decision by the Government in July of this year puts off until lá philib an chleite, the day when any of those people will have a decent, reliable public transport system that will carry them around their native city.

The damage does not end there. There is much more the Minister, unaccountably, never even thought of. She hinted that EU money not spent on Luas can be made available for other transport systems in Dublin, but that is pie in the sky. CIE has a series of projects for the improvement of commuter rail services in the Dublin region. We know what needs to be done on the Maynooth to Connolly Station service, the northern line, the line linking Heuston to Connolly stations, and the signalling system and track between the northern side of Connolly Station and Barrack Street, all of which are very useful projects of a kind that would substantially increase the carrying capacity of the Dublin commuter rail service. It would, however, be idle to pretend, as the Minister seems to do — I do not like to say this but we are talking about reality — that those projects could be finalised, agreed and carried through between the spring of 1998 when the EU Commission will finally declare that the Minister has killed Luas and the end of the year 2000 when, at the latest, funding under the current CSF must be expended.

Those are all worthwhile projects, largely outside the current Community Support Framework, but not one of them could be put out to contract, agreed with the Commission and constructed by the end of the year 2000. For the Minister for Public Enterprise to pretend there is a stock of such projects waiting to be financed by money that does not go towards Luas is pure pretence.

Apart from averting the damage which the Minister seems hell bent on inflicting on the Dublin commuter system with her shilly-shallying about Luas, a great many other areas need attention. With or without Luas, this city will need a major investment in park and ride facilities, for which there is no provision. A token provision is built into the CSF provision for Luas but no capital funding is provided for. The other problems were well illustrated during the first Operation Freeflow, inspired by Deputy John Bruton as Taoiseach before Christmas last year. The programme to provide 11 quality bus corridors by the end of this year must be not only proceeded with but accelerated. A further quality bus corridor, from Tallaght to the city centre, was to be announced last week but the announcement was cancelled at almost no notice and the people of Tallaght want to know the reason.

Where quality bus corridors are not feasible, the operation of bus lanes must be more effective. They should be clear throughout the working day for exclusive use by public transport and taxis. That is blindingly obvious to anybody driving through the city during the day. How many times do we hear AA Roadwatch on RTE state in the morning that traffic along the north quays is seriously disrupted by one car illegally parked? Current rules about on-street parking must be more rigidly enforced. It must be recognised that in some parts of the city on-street parking, limited as it is, is still a serious hindrance to the flow of traffic, particularly public transport.

The experience of Operation Freeflow is very instructive. It required a major effort of co-ordination and co-operation on the part of Dublin Corporation, the Garda Síochána, Bus Átha Cliath, Iarnród Éireann and the DTO. The effort was so great that it flagged at the slightest impression that political pressure had been relaxed to any noticeable extent. The lesson is clear. We need a traffic authority in Dublin with the statutory powers and the budget to ensure the proper co-ordination and implementation of an integrated traffic management system. Without the statutory powers and the added clout of a budget, the enterprise would be doomed to failure. The current DTO, well-intentioned as it is, is doomed to frustration and futility as long as it does not have the instruments required to draw up and implement an integrated traffic management system. That was evident not long ago when a technical problem arose on the route of Luas. The DTO could do nothing except ask the people who contributed to a decision to get together, talk to each other and come up with a solution.

That is not what the people of Dublin believe the DTO is there for, it is not what the DTO wants to be there for and it is not what the gentleman at the head of the DTO would wish to be there for. The DTO needs powers, clearly defined functions, a budget and to be able to tell other agencies what to do, when to do it and how to do it. We need a body with powers drawn from Dublin Corporation, the other Dublin local authorities, where appropriate, and perhaps other agencies as well as the Garda Síochána to provide a framework within which enlightened investment in public transport facilities can finally begin to offer residents and commuters in Dublin the service to which they are entitled.

Mr. Yates

I endorse everything my colleague, Deputy Dukes, has said. The Fine Gael Party attaches the highest political priority to the problem of gridlock of traffic in our capital city. The deteriorating position is unacceptable to commuters, shoppers, tourists and everybody who uses the city. I will commence where Deputy Dukes ended, on the question of a Dublin traffic authority. It is clear Operation Freeflow worked when 100 gardaí dealt with the issue, but those gardaí have to deal with murder and other serious crime. We need a Dublin traffic authority with the necessary traffic corps that has similar powers to those of the Garda. Dublin Corporation works a computerised traffic management and traffic lights system, but it is not fully synchronised with the other three local authorities in the city. An integrated approach is needed. We do not yet have integrated ticketing between bus and rail, between the Arrow, Dart and the buses. Those who plan Dublin's traffic should be directly involved in establishing the bus and rail timetables and integrated ticketing.

Statutory corporations have a right to dig up our roads causing enormous disruption. At the stroke of a pen an instruction could be given by a Dublin traffic authority that all such works be done at night. The Department of Public Enterprise, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the traffic warden service need to be integrated in such an authority.

It is clear from DTI studies and traffic studies across the world that where there is an average loading of 1.37 persons in a car, public transport is the ultimate solution to the gridlock. Deputy Dukes referred to the DTI report published in 1991 which indicated that 11 quality bus corridors would be put in place. Today we have three bus corridors, which is wholly unacceptable.

The Luas project — in respect of two vital corridors, Tallaght to the city centre and Dundrum to the city centre — is the subject of a further study on whether it should be underground or overground. The most analysed project in the history of public transport, Luas, is subject to a further study. I challenge the Government to state whether there is a hidden agenda and a deliberate deferral of the Luas project, because of the disruption that will occur during construction, which is expected to continue for three years. That must be clarified because the EU money will be jeopardised after the present tranche expires.

Simple things can be done in public transport. At peak hours people have to queue and stand cheek by jowl on the DART. That there is not adequate rolling stock for increased capacity for that line is incredible. The same applies to the Arrow service where more rolling stock could be put in place. Where there is quality public transport, up to half the people will commute by public transport whereas only a quarter will do so if public transport is not adequate.

We need to deregulate our taxi service and to examine the question of road pricing which is probably the most controversial area. Between 1991 and 1996 the number of cars increased by one-third in the greater Dublin area. Should the same tariff per hour apply to those who park before 9 a.m., taking up a car space all day, and to those who park from 10.30 a.m.?

When I was Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry during the past two and a half years I saw how civil servants and others were paid expenses. To claim expenses they had to have a car and take up car space in the Department's carpark. There was a clear disincentive to car pooling despite the obvious benefits for four or five using the same car.

There is a need to support cycling. Some 5 per cent of commuters cycle but this could be increased to 10 per cent. If 6,000 cars were taken out of the system it would allow for 8,000 cyclists — ten bicycles to every car space — and relieve traffic congestion. There is a mixture of public transport and road pricing techniques which can be put in place. There is also the question of infrastructure.

The motion condemns the Government for its failure to commit adequate resources. There is already a menu of infrastructural works to be done — the port tunnel costing £80 million, the Luas project costing £220 million, the eastern bypass proposal has been resurrected again and it will be linked to the C ring road. These are questions that must be dealt with through local democracy but it seems clear that an eastern bypass route of some description must be put back on the agenda.

Dublin is the only capital city in Europe that does not have a rail link to its national airport. It is incredible that if one wants to get from Tralee, Galway or wherever to the airport it cannot be done by rail.

There is also the simple matter of traffic management. Under the regulations a skip parked in a clearway cannot be removed because it is not a mechanically propelled vehicle. That is bizarre. Freight and heavy goods vehicles need to make their deliveries between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. In other capital cities there are freight parks on the outer C-ring route whereby heavy freight is disassembled and all local deliveries done during the day must be of less than three and a half tonne consignments.

I am not a Dublin Deputy but I have some responsibility for the overall transport policy of the Fine Gael Party. This matter deserves the highest possible priority. This cannot be given by a Minister or spokesperson for Public Enterprise or the Environment, it must be given by the Taoiseach setting up a ministerial task force leading to the establishment of a Dublin traffic authority. People are suffering from serious Government neglect, inaction and lack of concerted co-ordinated action. Dublin commuters do not see any real prospect of a solution. At best Government measures are ad hoc and singular in approach. This will be one of the key political issues in Dublin and we in Fine Gael are determined to put forward constructive solutions in terms of new structures to deal with it, a comprehensive approach to implementing it and the necessary resources to ensure we can deal effectively with our massive congestion, particularly at peak hours.

Mr. R. Bruton

There is a lack of understanding by the two Ministers opposite who have responsibility for tackling Dublin's traffic problems. They do not understand the cost of the congestion is £500 million per year. In layman's terms that is £1,500 for every home in the city. That is a massive burden being shouldered by families in the city of Dublin. It is almost the same amount as many are paying in their tax bills and there is no sense of urgency on the opposite benches. The Government, like a rabbit before the headlights of an oncoming car, is frozen and unwilling to move in any direction. It will not be the two Ministers - they are birds of passage and will be gone in time — but Dublin commuters who will be frozen before the headlights. The Dubliners of today and tomorrow will suffer as a result of the Government's prevarication.

The worst decision was to review the Luas project. As Deputy Dukes and others have said, this has been the most analysed project in the city and has been pulled and dragged it in every direction. The only consequence of the review is that we will sacrifice the opportunity of getting funding. In a recent interview with Deputy Alan Dukes the mask slipped when the Minister for Public Enterprise admitted she hoped the Luas would go ahead following the completion of the review. We have moved from having a project, a design and a commitment of funds, to the hope of a Minister that the Luas project might some day come to fruition.

We have witnessed Operation Freeflow slide back. It is no longer the effective programme it was when first instituted. That is through lack of commitment, resources and a willingness to ensure it works. The taxi protest last week was a vivid illustration of Fianna Fáil's attitude.

In Opposition Fianna Fáil cynically stoked up the expectations of the taxi lobby in Dublin by claiming its attitude would be dramatically different when in Government. That is why the taxi men took to the streets. Prior to the last election many of them happily drove around with slogans stating "people first" fluttering from the tops of their cabs and the names of their favourite Fianna Fáil Deputies on their bonnets. Fianna Fáil built up an expectation that it would treat taxi drivers differently and Dubliners must now carry the can for that cynical approach.

Fianna Fáil is happy to run with the hare and course with the hound every time there is a crisis and it is trying to do likewise in the case of Luas. The time has long passed for further studies and prevarication in this area. We need decisions and an action plan. I strongly support the suggestion of the two previous speakers that the Dublin transport authority, which Fianna Fáil abolished in 1987, should be re-established. A great opportunity was missed for that authority to put in place a coherent plan to tackle Dublin's transport problems. A new deal for Dublin will not come from the present occupants of the Custom House or Clare Street. A Dublin transport authority is necessary.

Dublin Bus was not properly supported in the past. It carries 90 per cent of passengers who use public transport in Dublin. Only 10 per cent is carried by the various rail options. A total of 2p per passenger is available from the public coffers to support the development of a coherent public bus transport service. That contrasts dramatically with the 70p per passenger available on the DART and the approximate £8 per passenger available on mainline rail.

There has been a consistent failure to recognise the need to invest in an efficient and effective public bus transport system in our capital city. Dublin Bus is not geared to service the quality bus corridors which are slowly coming on stream. It needs a new deal which can be forged by a Dublin transport authority. That deal must include adequate rolling stock and buses for peak times. It must put in place a system of integrated ticketing and electronic bus timetables. This can be done only with the provision of the necessary funds. It cannot be done with the existing resources of Dublin Bus. The Government must make a conscious decision to invest in this area and make it work. It has not indicated it will do that and we will pay the price. The only resource we have to make public transport attractive is being starved of resources at a time when it should be given a new deal. That new deal should involve more than additional public funding. Public funding was provided in the past and passenger numbers decreased. Investment must include a contract to grow passengers.

Umpteen things could be done if a creative Dublin transport authority existed. A scheme could be introduced whereby those committed to car pooling would have access to city parking in preference to others. Multiple lane roads could be used to take incoming traffic in the mornings and outgoing traffic in the evenings. Many new initiatives could be adopted if a Dublin transport authority with the necessary power, initiative, commitment and single mindedness were set up. We will not see any single mindedness from the Ministers currently occupying positions of responsibility.

Ms Clune

I am a Cork Deputy who lives in Dublin three days a week. People are frustrated with the traffic build-up in the city. One of today's newspapers carried a report from Fortune magazine which stated that Dublin is the best city in Europe in which to do business, but traffic congestion continues to go unchecked. Operation Freeflow had a tremendous impact last December and could be continued all year round for a budget of approximately £8 million. Motorists contribute £1.6 billion to the Exchequer. The Automobile Association stated it would cost the Exchequer a half a penny for every pound collected to do this.

Dublin's ratio of people to cars is 3:18, the second least car populated city in a survey of 14 EU capitals. This is not evident from the daily congestion on the streets. The removal of through traffic and port traffic from the city centre, with proper management of the remaining traffic, would go a long way towards solving traffic congestion. Dubliners drive because of the absence of a good alternative system to get them to work on time. People would gladly leave their cars at home if an efficient, effective and reliable public transport system operated. We are still awaiting the outcome of the Luas project. I also support the re-establishment of the Dublin transport authority. There are many ways in which we could improve traffic conditions in Dublin. Parkand-ride systems, car pooling and the imposition of parking levies would go a long way towards improving the congestion.

We must also consider the impact of such congestion on the environment. Suspended particles, nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds contribute to air pollution. Allowable pollution levels were exceeded in some parts of Dublin last year. We signed up to the Rio Conference and the Minister will visit Kyoto next December to account for Ireland's reduction in pollution emissions into the atmosphere. I hope we will not be sitting in traffic gridlocks while he is in Kyoto. I urge the Minister to examine the problem of traffic congestion, particularly as we are approaching the busiest month of the year in terms of traffic. Operation Freeflow should be reconsidered.

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey)

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "that" and substitute the following:

"Dáil Éireann, recognising that measures to ease traffic congestion in Dublin should be implemented within the framework of the integrated transportation strategy for the Greater Dublin Area as set out in the final report of the Dublin Transportation Initiative, welcomes the commitment of the Government to implementation of the DTI Strategy and, in particular:

notes that the Operational Programme for Transport 1994 to 1999 provides for investment of in excess of £600 million in transport infrastructure in Dublin;

supports the Government's commitment to provide a light rail system for Dublin, within the framework of the Operational Programme, consisting initially of a Tallaght-City Centre-Dundrum line;

welcomes the planning work in progress on extension of light rail to Ballymun and Sandyford;

notes that implementation of the DART extensions to Greystones and Malahide, acquisition of additional DART rolling stock, construction of new DART and suburban rail stations and implementation of quality bus corridors is proceeding as quickly as possible consistent with the need for adequate public consultation and compliance with relevant tendering and contract procedures;

supports the Government's commitment to provide key additional road infrastructure for Dublin, in particular, the Southern Cross and South-Eastern Motorways, to complete the Dublin C-ring, and an access route to Dublin Port;

endorses the policy of promoting better use of road space in Dublin through implementation of a range of traffic management measures and intensified enforcement of traffic regulations; and

notes that the Dublin Transportation Office will shortly begin a formal review of the DTI strategy to update the strategy and renew its impetus."

Traffic congestion has serious economic and environmental consequences of which the Government is aware. We experience this most acutely in the Dublin area, where the Dublin Transportation Office has estimated the economic costs of traffic congestion is approximately £500 million each year. It is right that the House should assess the present position in Dublin and the adequacy of our efforts to promote sustainable transport for the capital.

There is a consensus that these efforts, to be successful, must involve adequate investment in new facilities and infrastructure, effective measures to manage traffic demand in Dublin, parking restraint, enforcement and reallocation of road space and good institutional arrangements to carry forward this integrated approach to transport management in Dublin.

On the positive side, the prescription for better transport management set out in the final report of the Dublin Transportation Initiative is a valid and sound one. That approach was carefully developed between 1991 and 1995 on the basis of active contributions from all major players involved and widespread public consultation. It has also been supported by successive Governments. This debate should not put in question the thrust of the DTI analysis, bearing in mind that the DTI strategy will be reviewed and updated by the Dublin Transportation Office. It is also positive that the Dublin Transportation Office has been established to co-ordinate and drive the DTI strategy and a major programme of supporting investment is being implemented under the Operational Programme for Transport.

On the problematic side, rapid growth in the economy, while beneficial in many other respects, has created greatly increased demand for transport in Dublin. This is demonstrated in a dramatic increase in car ownership in the Dublin area from 275 cars per 1,000 head of population in 1991 to 357 per 1,000 in 1996; an unprecedented increase in shipments through Dublin Port from 7.7 million tonnes in 1991 to 14.5 million tonnes in 1996; and a big increase in passenger numbers through Dublin Airport from 5.5 million in 1991 to 9.1 million in 1996. Each of those elements has added additional traffic to the city street network.

The need to consult democratically on key infrastructural proposals and to deal with environmental, business and property concerns is also leading to some delays in implementing the DTI. Those delays may be frustrating in terms of progressing the DTI strategy, but they are an essential part of implementing major physical changes in a democratic society.

It is superficial and opportunistic to suggest, as the motion before us does, that traffic congestion has suddenly emerged as an issue since the recent general election when this Government took office. Traffic congestion in Dublin has been a long-standing and deep seated problem. It calls for a serious, comprehensive and multi-agency approach to give to Dublin the sustainable mobility it requires. That is what the Government is determined to deliver.

I take this opportunity to reaffirm the Government's commitment to the DTI strategy. The final report of the DTI estimated that it would cost more than £1,280 million to implement its recommendations. It recognised, however, that only part of this would be physically capable of implementation within the present decade. The DTI process significantly assisted the case for EU funding of transport investment in Dublin. The Operational Programme for Transport envisages expenditure in excess of £600 million to implement the DTI's recommendations within its funding period.

Promotion of sustainable transport is at the core of the DTI. This includes the development of a high quality, efficient public transport system and a reduction in the dominance of the private car in Dublin transport arrangements. The DTI proposed a number of measures including a significant improvement in public transport services, selected new road construction, traffic management measures and effective compliance with, and enforcement of, traffic and parking laws. I want to assure the House that I intend, along with my other ministerial colleagues concerned, to press ahead with implementation of the DTI strategy.

Regarding specific elements of the strategy, I want to deal with public transport. A great deal of important work is in progress to improve Dublin's public transportation network. A key element of the DTl's public transport strategy is an on-street light rail system for the capital city. The Government is committed to the provision of the core network recommended in the DTI report which includes a line from Tallaght via the city centre to Dundrum and Sandyford and a line from the city centre to Ballymun. Our programme for Government includes a commitment to re-energise the Dublin light rail project, including the extension to Sandyford and study the option of putting Luas underground in the city centre.

Some commentators and Members opposite have chosen to view the decision to examine the feasibility of an underground LRT option for the city centre as an attempt to abandon the light rail project altogether, but nothing could be further from the truth. The Government remains fully committed to the project, but is anxious that issues raised in relation to the passenger capacity of the proposed system and the potential disruption to traffic, during construction and when in operation, are independently addressed in the underground study. There is simply too much at stake for the city of Dublin to justify taking a decision one way or the other until the underground option has been thoroughly evaluated.

Mr. Dukes

Will the Minister publish the results on the disruption to traffic while tunnelling for an underground system?

Mr. Dempsey

It is therefore vitally important that the underground study be clearly seen to be a fully independent and objective comparative study of the on-street and underground options that settles this matter once and for all.

International consultants, W. S. Atkins, have been appointed to carry out the underground study which will address the many valid and reasonable questions and concerns which have been raised about the on-street proposals and which have not been adequately addressed, despite repeated calls for this to be done. The study will involve a comparative evaluation of both on-street and underground options for the city centre and will take into consideration suggestions made by interested commentators, some of whom would be well known to Deputy Dukes.

Mr. Dukes

What does that mean? Are there no thinkers on the Government side? Fianna Fáil has no thinkers.

Mr. Dempsey

In this regard, the consultants are providing an opportunity for interested persons and groups to outline their views on issues relevant to the study. The consultants are expected to present their findings to the Minister for Public Enterprise by the end of April next. With regard to the proposed Ballymun light rail line, the CIE light rail project team has identified strategic options for the route between the city centre and Ballymun. Further work to provide additional information on these options is now being carried out. However, the light rail project team's efforts will be concentrated to the north of the inner city pending completion of the underground study. The project team hopes to be in a position to initiate the public consultation process in late spring next year when it will be able to take account of the conclusions of the underground study. Planning and design of the proposed extension of the Dundrum line to Sandyford is well in hand and the public consultation process is under way.

The light rail project is only one element of the public transport strategy recommended by DTI. Other important work is under way on a number of fronts to improve Dublin's public transportation network. This includes the Quality Bus Corridor Initiative — four quality bus corridors for Blanchardstown, north Clondalkin, Finglas and Lucan are in place and early completion of the QBC network is a priority for Bus Átha Cliath, the local authorities and Dublin Transportation Office. In the suburban rail development programme, a major DART investment programme has commenced including extensions to Greystones and Malahide, the acquisition of new rolling stock and improvement of existing, and development of new stations. The fruits of this investment can already be seen. Work on the upgrading of track between Bray and Greystones has commenced and preparatory work in respect of electrification of the lines to Greystones and Malahide is well advanced. The Minister for Public Enterprise recently opened the new Clontarf Road DART station and detailed plans for an additional DART station at Barrow Street have also been developed.

The quality of public transport infrastructure must also be matched by the quality of the service to the customer. Even modest investment in this area can provide very important improvements for public transport users. Better passenger information is an important priority. Almost £1 million has been provided in 1997 to replace the obsolete public address system for the DART and Dublin suburban rail network as well as the implementation of the first phase of a state of the art electronic passenger information system. This system has already been installed at some of the busiest DART stations and will be expanded to other stations in the near future.

Major road development, on a selective basis, is also critical to managing Dublin transport and contributing to the implementation of DTI. I want to see rapid progress towards completion of the C-Ring motorway. I am pleased to note that work on the Southern Cross route will commence next spring and that the motorway scheme and environmental impact statement for the south-eastern motorway have been submitted to my Department. On this point, the House may be assured that we will deal with the motorway scheme and the EIS as quickly as possible, while fully respecting the need to adhere to the spirit and the letter of the different statutory procedures. In the same way, I am also concerned to advance the planning of the port access tunnel. These major improvements are vital for the improved road capacity which they will bring in themselves and because they will substantially complete the major road network around the city area.

I agree with Deputies that we also need shorter term management measures to combat traffic congestion while the delivery of these major new infrastructural projects is awaited. Measures to control congestion for the next number of years include, as already stated, continuous improvement of the bus service in quantity and quality to make it an attractive alternative to car travel; improvement of traffic management for all modes of travel; and the removal of the impediments to the use of the bicycle as a mode of transport. There is potential to double the number of cyclists with the provision of adequate safe cycle facilities. This would result in the reduction of car trips in the peak hour by about 6,000.

Each of these areas is being actively pursued. In addition, a director of traffic has been appointed for Dublin city to bring greater concentration and efficiency to traffic administration and to implement a strong enforcement policy. Operation Freeflow, launched in December 1996, demonstrated what could be done with a co-ordinated approach to traffic management. I am glad the previous Government took up the suggestions made by myself and Deputy Eoin Ryan in November last and eventually implemented them in December.

Mr. Broughan

Those were our suggestions.

Mr. Dukes

Deputy Séamus Brennan still advertises himself as the man who opened up the Harcourt Street line.

Mr. Broughan

Why is there no freeflow since the Government took over?

Mr. Dukes

It is mythology.

Mr. Dempsey

It is not mythology. If the Deputy would like to read The Irish Times of 5 November 1996 ——

Mr. Dukes

Give credit where it is due.

Mr. Dempsey

——he will find that all of the suggestions we made were eventually taken up by my constituency colleague, Deputy John Bruton, when he was Taoiseach because he got stuck in traffic at one stage. Operation Freeflow was relaunched by the relevant agencies last September. It has not been nearly as successful this year. Accordingly, I wish to inform the House that I am convening an early meeting of the Ministers and agencies concerned to ensure ——

Mr. Dukes

There is a real sense of urgency; when is that meeting taking place?

Mr. Dempsey

——that Operation Freeflow makes the maximum contribution to efficient traffic management in the coming months.

Mr. Dukes

That is great for the people waiting for the No. 22 bus tomorrow morning.

Mr. Dempsey

It is funny that the urgency given to this matter by Deputy Dukes was not shown by him last year when he was driving around in his ministerial Mercedes.

Mr. Dukes

We gave you Operation Freeflow.

Mr. Molloy

We inherited gridlock from you.

Mr. Dukes

The Minister has said that has been there for years. Deputy Molloy has been here before.

Mr. Broughan

The Minister should get on his bike.

Mr. Dempsey

There will be an early meeting to ensure that Operation Freeflow makes the maximum contribution to efficient traffic management in the coming months.

Mr. Dukes

When?

Mr. Dempsey

There is also a need for the public to take a more responsible attitude to travel. Everyone must "think before they travel".

Mr. Dukes

Listen to this one before leaving the house in the morning, "think before you travel".

Mr. Dempsey

A change of travel mode from car to bus, rail, cycling and walking just one day per week would reduce traffic in the peak hour by 20 per cent. The formation of car pools can reduce the vehicle mileage of the car pool group by up to 80 per cent. We must continue to raise public awareness and to encourage and support attitude changes so as to reduce dependence on the private car through these different measures.

A recent European Commission Green Paper observed that "increasing transport delays have brought down travel speeds in a number of major European cities to levels which prevailed in the age of horse drawn carts". There is a consensus that many present transport trends are unsustainable and that new and more integrated approaches are needed to avert the many negative impacts of urban traffic. The DTI strategy has been designed as an innovative and integrated transport strategy for the Dublin region. It is being supported by all key public sector agencies, as well as by the local authorities and bodies concerned with the commercial and environmental well-being of the city.

The task of delivering sustainable transport for Dublin is not an easy one. Experience elsewhere confirms that urban transport problems are among the most intractable for politicians and administrators to solve. However, the future quality of life of our citizens demands that we apply ourselves actively to this challenge. The Government is determined that we succeed in this important task.

Opposition Deputies said we need a statutory body with powers, such as a transportation authority, which would have its own budget. Whenever there is a problem, Fine Gael seems to resolve it by setting up another quango or nondemocratic organisation.

Mr. Dukes

The Minister's party abolished one in 1987.

Mr. Dempsey

We have enough such bodies. What is needed is a co-ordinated approach between the democratically elected local authorities and other agencies, such as the Garda Síochána.

Mr. Dukes

Why did the Minister set up the National Roads Authority?

Mr. Dempsey

I did not set it up. I do not favour setting up another statutory body with powers in this area. We have the basis for a co-ordinated approach to the problem in Dublin——

Mr. Dukes

The Minister has not.

Mr. Dempsey

——which we intend to implement in the years and months ahead.

Mr. Broughan

Traffic in Dublin has got worse, particularly since this Government, led by a person who prides himself on wearing a blue jersey in Croke Park, came to power. Today I sat for approximately 25 minutes in Capel Street while trying to get to City Hall.

Ms M. McGennis

Was the Deputy driving?

Mr. Broughan

Yes.

Mr. Dempsey

Why did the Deputy not use the bus?

Mr. Broughan

I do not apologise for driving because the public transport system in the west of my constituency is appalling. I have spent 30 to 45 minutes in Pearse Street on other occasions.

One cause of this problem is the huge increase in car ownership. The Minister said there were approximately 250 to 357 cars per 1,000 of the population. Dublin is the shopping, business and administrative centre for up to 1.4 million people. Other causes are a lack of resources and limited local democracy. I note Fine Gael includes the word "resources" in its motion. This city has been systematically starved of resources by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael for 75 years.

Ms M. McGennis

Was the Deputy not in Government recently?

Mr. Broughan

Dubliners do not vote for people who put their interests first.

Ms M. McGennis

The Deputy was in Government longer than we were.

Mr. Broughan

In 1971 CIÉ published a plan to build an extended DART network from one end of the city to the other. However, two Governments, led by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, told CIÉ they were not interested. We remember that our city was starved of resources.

Ms M. McGennis

CIÉ put proposals to the Deputy's party in Government but it threw them out.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Broughan, without interruption.

Mr. Broughan

Our proposal was systematically rubbished by your party, which is anti-Dublin.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I ask Deputy Broughan to address his remarks through the Chair.

Ms M. McGennis

On a point of order, I am a Dubliner and a member of Fianna Fáil and what Deputy Broughan said is claptrap.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is not a point of order.

Ms M. McGennis

It is. The Deputy said Fianna Fáil is an anti-Dublin party. He is talking rubbish.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Broughan is entitled to make his contribution without interruption.

Mr. Broughan

Fianna Fáil is an anti-Dublin party. In the 1970s a major public transport plan for this city was rubbished by successive Governments, most of which were led by Fianna Fáil. They refused to give Dublin the necessary resources. When the DART was being built, people sniped and sneered at its cost. However, it has been hugely successful. I appeal to the Minister for Finance to use the money generated by the Celtic tiger to resolve the traffic problems in Dublin. Additional resources should be given to the light rail project so that there is a public transport system in every part of the city.

The second problem is the system of local government which is dominated by bureaucrats. For decades a dead hand was placed on our city by people who were not elected and who, only recently, were given a seven year appointment. They were aided by the mandarins in the Department of the Environment and they prevented the necessary steps being taken to resolve the traffic problems in our city. It is no wonder our traffic is gridlocked and that we have belatedly appointed the Dublin Transportation Office and a director of traffic.

Five or six years ago when I joined Dublin City Council, with my colleagues in the Labour Party, including Deputy Quinn, I put forward a proposal for an integrated cycleway network. This would have required the extension of a few streets. People risk their lives if they want to cycle from Coolock to Rathmines or from Chapelizod to Ringsend. I also have a bicycle which I use from time to time.

Ms M. McGennis

The Deputy is not usually on it.

Mr. Broughan

However, in our resource starved and undemocratic city——

Ms M. McGennis

The people elect the Deputy.

Mr. Broughan

——there is little opportunity to use it. During the next local and general elections the Labour Party will propose to free our capital city from the bureaucrats and non-elected people and to make it independent by electing a mayor who will do something about its problems.

When the Dublin Transportation Initiative was set up, there was insufficient consultation, although it states in its report that it consulted various interests. People in Raheny, for example, were sent letters asking them to attend a meeting in Coolock about Coolock's problems and vice versa. However, it refused to consult people on a wider basis. I agree with the general objectives outlined in the report but we should have a more dynamic approach. It is incumbent on the Government to look at the fundamental reasons the Dublin Transportation Initiative was set up. I appeal to the Dublin born Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance to address these issues.

One of the key elements in the DTI report was the area of land use, particularly the decline of the city centre in the early 1990s. I am glad some of the initiatives taken over the past four or five years are, at long last, beginning to restore some life to the city centre. Dublin City Council has a proposal to restore O'Connell Street to some of its former glory and to energise the surrounding districts, particularly on the west side, in the new Harp plan. It is incumbent on us with the development of the Dublin C-ring, which borders my constituency, to take an integrated planning approach to the development of the city on which a proper modern transport programme could be based.

When the Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, announced a review of the Luas project to examine an underground option I was sympathetic to her approach. I had asked the previous Minister, Deputy Dukes, and others to consider re-examining the underground option. Most Dubliners felt the construction programme could have resulted in a nightmare of total gridlock. I applauded the Minister for having the courage to review the decision. Some of the concerns which the former Taoiseach, Garret FitzGerald, raised in relation to the capacity of Luas also needed to be investigated. Many Dubliners also feel that the visual appearance of Luas might adversely affect our city.

On the other hand, given how the review has progressed, I wonder if the Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, is serious about it or whether she intends to dither to a point when we could lose the EU Structural Funds. My colleague, Deputy Stagg, is deeply concerned, from his contacts in Europe and elsewhere, that we could be in serious danger of losing the existing tranche of Structural Funds allocated to the light rail project if it is delayed much longer.

Some people have questioned the extent to which the Minister is reviewing the project, in that she seems to be restricting it to the same routes and examining the underground option in a very narrow context. As I said, I have some sympathy for her, which she acknowledged a few months ago, but she will have to increase the pace of the review so that we do not lose the entire light rail project, which would be a disaster.

On the northside of the city the Ballymun and airport line should have been a priority from the start. The Minister acknowledged that, with Dublin Airport beginning to challenge Manchester Airport as the central air hub of these islands north of London, it is incumbent on us to have a modern rail based transport system. The Minister should give serious consideration to the Aer Rianta proposal to provide a link to the DART network, which would protect the green belt area in the north of the city. It would also link Donaghmede in my constituency to the airport at a relatively cheap cost. The bottom line is that we should proceed with the light rail project as soon as possible.

We have talked about all the U-turns made by this Government. Before the general election many commercial interests in Dublin, such as the Chamber of Commerce and the City Centre Business Association, met the Taoiseach, Deputy Ahern, and asked him to take urgent action on the light rail project and the whole public transport system. He, above all people, must be aware of the basic arguments and should be able to bring forward a plan before Christmas whereby we could proceed with the public inquiry early next year and then build the light rail system. That would ensure we do not lose the available funding.

The Minister, Deputy Dempsey, referred to quality bus corridors, which are essential for the development of a sensible transport policy for our capital city. The development of those corridors has been incredibly slow. The Minister mentioned there are four at present, one of which runs through Coolock in my constituency to Clare Hall on the Malahide Road.

There seems to be a difference in this regard between the north side of the city and the west and south sides. For example, there are very few quality bus shelters in areas such as Coolock, despite campaigns by public representatives from all parties, including myself, the local development council and other bodies over the years. Everything we were promised in the DTI report is still a mirage as far as quality bus corridors are concerned on the northside. We were promised, for example, real time information. It seems a joke was played on us by some of the bureaucrats who drew up this document.

I support the bus priority measures. I compliment my city council on the development of the SCAT system which is expected to be extended to 200 junctions. It has prevented total gridlock and has kept the main north-south and east-west routes of the city moving over the last four or five years. The city council must be complimented on proceeding with the development of that system in very straitened financial circumstances. The EU drive project would also fully use information technology in the control of traffic.

CIÉ had plans for a central bus depot, which was to be located in the subsequently revitalised Temple Bar district. However, the basic idea of the plan was a valuable one which should be developed. In recent years our planners in the city council and others allowed all the bus shelters in the city centre to be removed up until two years ago. All the famous shelters in which people could wait on rainy days such as today were removed and one now sees bus drivers looking out at bedraggled waiting passengers. The city council has reversed this somewhat but there still seems to be a view that the appearance of the city in this regard is more important than providing people with some comfort. I do not see the logic of that. Why can we not provide decent waiting spaces for bus passengers?

As I said, the DART system has been a brilliant success. I am very unhappy, however, with the failure by Iarnród Éireann and CIÉ to provide proper facilities for disabled passengers and parents with children. This is an old chestnut in Dublin North East where six or seven DART stations are located, almost all of which are absolute torture for such passengers. Kilbarrack station is currently being rebuilt but still does not seem to have the facilities needed by people who have difficulties in movement. That area must be urgently addressed.

One of the central traffic problems in the city has been the number of vehicles above the weight of three tonnes which often clog up our streets. Radical proposals have been made with regard to this problem and, until the tunnel is built, with regard to the unloading of ships, which will allow vehicles to exit quickly along the quays on the north or south side. That tends to be a major problem.

Dublin City Council and the three county councils have a poor record on the park and ride issue. Three years ago firm proposals were received on my side of the city in connection with Dublin Corporation, Fingal County Council and the Garda preventing access by heavy vehicles to suburban housing estates. An agreement was in place up to a number of years ago but, unfortunately, nothing happened. I understand that the delay lies with Fingal County Council who is fearful it will be left to deal with the consequences of placing park and ride facilities on the edge of the city. It is regrettable that local government has not proceeded because these facilities would enable members of the public to park their vehicles and travel to the city centre on public transport.

Our city has been starved of investment. There have been continuous delays with many of the projects pursued by the county councils over the years. For example, I understand that a Fianna Fáil Minister promised 25 years ago that the Grange Road, which is to be the extension of the M50 and the N32, would be built. It is not now expected to be completed until late 1998. The Coombe relief road has not been built, nor have many of the proposed bridges for the city.

The roads and streets budget for the city confirms that, in terms of funding, a pittance has been provided, despite the fact that it is the biggest population centre in the country, comprising approximately 48 of the Deputies in this House. We always appear to get the rough end of the stick and we are fed up with this. It is a rotten situation for which the two conservative parties have been responsible.

There at last appears to be broad based agreement on the new port access tunnel from Santry to East Wall. Some of the residents in northside estates, such as Marino and Santry, are still anxious about the project. However, the changes made by the city council in consultation with the engineers and the residents are beginning to make it viable. It needs to be completed as soon as possible. If a similar project is provided for the southside, the C-Ring will have been completed, which will allow a channel for bringing traffic out of the city.

The Minister referred to traffic management. Progress has been made in recent years under the DTI and the new director of traffic with regard to the establishment of environmental traffic cells to keep out rat running traffic. My city council is systematically making traffic calming proposals to each of its 12 wards. The quality and finish of the work in some of the more deprived areas of the northside has been very poor compared with the work in some of the southside estates. This irritates the public who believes that the same standard should be applied.

The question of responsibility for Operation Freeflow continues to be vague. The Minister for the Environment tried to take responsibility, as did Deputy John Bruton. However, the proposals were made by the Labour Party in Dublin Corporation. Five years ago the party proposed that the corporation take over traffic management for Dublin from the Garda Síochána. Nothing was done about it until the city manager, John Fitzgerald, decided to implement it. I commend him on his appointment. He came from South Dublin County Council.

Ms M. McGennis

He came from Fingal County Council.

Mr. Broughan

He was in Dublin City Council for a long time and has begun to implement some of the key elements of Labour Party policy on traffic management, which is to be welcomed. Motor cycle gardaí are doing a good job in moving traffic, but there is a general lack of responsibility in this area. For example, there is gridlock on Harcourt Street most weekday evenings for approximately 45 minutes as a huge working population travels home northwards in cars because they consider there is no efficient public transport to many parts of the northside. Traffic control powers should be returned to enhanced democratic local government bodies who would have responsibility for all aspects of traffic management, including wardens, traffic police, vehicle removal and creating new by-laws to deal with situations, such as the double and treble parking on some city centre streets by two, three and five tonne vehicles.

A complete overhaul of traffic management is required. In this regard, I welcome the decision of the corporation to finally and belatedly, at the instigation of councillors, consider the removal of traffic meters and to move towards a more efficient system of road and street pricing. The new director of traffic, Mr. Keegan, is responsible to the city manager. He has a huge area of responsibility here. I expect him to take a much more dynamic role over all aspects of traffic management.

There have been problems with finishing works on traffic calming. The public is opposed to ramps and there is much opposition to the development of a quality bus corridor on the Malahide Road and the cycleway network on the Clontarf Road. There appears to have been a strong ideology on the part of traffic engineers in favour of traffic flow which has meant them opposing simple measures such as pedestrian crossings. They should read the relevant points of the final report of the DTI where the rights of pedestrians and cyclists are also critical.

There has been a long campaign over the past five or six years in response to the demands for a cycleway network. At long last we have provided a fair number of parking facilities for bicycles. Over the last four to five years we have erected approximately 80 to 100 bicycle parking places. There were only three or four in 1991. We could have had an integrated cycleway network. For example, some of the German cities, such as Dusseldorf and Munich, have efficient cycleway networks enabling cyclists to cycle safely throughout the city centre without serious risk. There is no reason they could not have been introduced to Dublin. The failure to create them is a consequence of the two fundamental causes of our problems: lack of resources and the lack of dynamic local government.

Ms M. McGennis

What about the responsibility of the corporation?

Mr. Broughan

Is the Deputy a member of a local authority?

Ms M. McGennis

Of course.

Mr. Broughan

Who is the planning authority, the housing authority or the traffic authority? It is not the councillors.

Ms M. McGennis

The Labour Party is not very effective in local government. It is inefficient.

Mr. Broughan

Power in local government rests with the bureaucrats.

Debate adjourned.