Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:42 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Public Enterprise the plans, if any, she has to privatise any part of Iarnród Éireann's existing rail network; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4105/00]
Other Questions. - Rail Network Privatisation.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:58 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Public Enterprise if she will give details of the proposals mentioned in her speech in Ballinasloe to end CIE's rail monopoly. [4137/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 42 and 58 together.
I have made no specific proposals to end CIE's rail monopoly or to privatise any part of Iarnród Éireann's existing rail network, either in my speech to Ballinasloe Chamber of Commerce or otherwise. I do not intend to privatise any part of Iarnród Éireann's existing rail network.
Under the National Development Plan 2000 to 2006 we will spend £500 million on the safety study. This sum is comprised of £350 million for the continuation of the railway safety programme and other spending of which the Deputy will be aware. However, investment alone is not enough. I suggested in my Ballinasloe speech that the time had come for a fundamental re-think about how we deliver public transport services and that it was now appropriate to consider if the existing institutional arrangements are adequate for a new era of public transport. I also asked the question whether it is necessary for the State to both procure and provide practically all public transport services and whether it is essential to retain a vir tual State monopoly in the provision of public transport. I hoped that by asking these questions I might begin a constructive debate on these important issues.
I also observed that other European countries have developed partnership models in which both the public and private sectors are involved in the provision of public transport. Such an approach could have a beneficial effect in Ireland, particularly in the present context.
The Government has already committed itself to the use of public-private partnerships. It has endorsed a public-private partnership approach to elements of Dublin rail. This approach may also be appropriate for other public transport facilities and services. Another factor which would have to be taken into account is possible EU legislative proposals in this area.
It is amazing that the Minister can fly these kites about privatisation in front of audiences which would be receptive to such ideas and then come back to the House and say she was only asking rhetorical questions. Does she agree it is bad form for the Minister for public transport to be bad-mouthing her own company when she speaks before the enemy, as it were, who would want to see it cut down and knocked about? Does the Minister agree that if it is the case that, as she states, it is perceived as a poor quality service, unreliable, slow, inefficient and bad value for money, the reason is she and her predecessors have starved the company of finances which would have made it an efficient company that would give a good service and provide good value? Does she agree it is time for her to acknowledge publicly and clearly, without flying kites, that her intention is to allow—
The Deputy's time is up.
I do not know who is the enemy. One may refer to the enemy within, for instance.
The enemy of public enterprise, the private sector—
The Deputy spoke about the chamber of commerce.
—the chamber of commerce.
It is amazing. A Cheann Comhairle, I will have to seek your protection. I cannot talk anymore. I am not being let.
She is not saying much.
I will wait until I am completely gobsmacked. I presume the Deputy is referring to members of the chambers of commerce. Calling them the enemy is an outdated notion.
They are certainly not very favourably disposed to public enterprise.
The Minister, without interruption.
I do not mind not talking, but it is a little unfair. However, members of the Opposition were never known for fairness. It is funny that the members of the chamber of commerce would be members of IBEC, which has just entered into—
Answer the question.
—a partnership arrangement with the trade unions.
That is enough codswollop.
The Deputy is the greatest codswolloper I have met in many a day. He is trying to ride about 40 horses at the one time. He talks about bad-mouthing. That is one thing I do not and will not do.
She is quoted here bad-mouthing public enterprise.
Deputy Stagg, please allow the Minister to continue. She is in possession.
I said "unfortunately the public perception was"; it is not mine.
I will have to—
The Deputy should cease interrupting.
That is the public perception and the Deputy knows that.
She created it and fortified it by her statements.
I accept the Deputy spoke the truth when he stated that predecessors of mine of all parties and persuasions did not give money to CIE. CIE now has the money. Clearly there is a new era, as that nice man with the pigtail tells us on the television advertisement every night.
She did not say that to the chamber of commerce.
I heard so much about the Ballinasloe speech that I got a copy of it and read it, and I found myself in agreement with much of it.
Aithíonn ciaróg ciaróg eile.
On the issue of bus competition, Ireland is the slow learner of Europe. Ireland is furthest behind. The Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, and her colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, have made specific rhetorical utterances about competition. When will there be legislation to provide for bus competition like that which exists in London, where one sees red buses under different franchises? When will there be orderly re-regulation and competition in the bus transport sector? The Minister has talked the talk but little action has emerged from it. When will we see legislation, not consultation?
I intend to consult. I know Deputy Yates does not agree with consultation – he told me that before. He agrees with immediate decisions.
I do not agree with the paralysis of analysis.
Please, Deputy.
He agrees with walloping everybody on the head—
No.
—and then demanding that it be put—
No. I agree with the Minister being decisive.
In November the Cabinet took a decision that between then and February we would engage in a consultation process with the trade unions with a view to improving competition in Dublin city and its environs. That is continuing. Various issues have arisen from that, but I will go back to Cabinet at the end of February with what I hope will be the conclusions of that review process.
When are we likely to hear back?
There will be legislation—
Does the Minister agree there is de facto bus competition already, where there are large numbers of illegal operators providing services throughout the country without standards or controls in competition with CIE buses? The only reason they are not operating in Dublin is they do not have the capacity or the ability to do so. Does she agree it is time to tackle the illegal operators and to apply the law to them? They are breaking the law every day and night and the Minister does nothing except state that she will introduce legislation some time in the future.
The question was on the rail network.
The Ballinasloe speech covered many things.
It did actually, and I went into that. I agree illegal operators should not be encouraged to flourish.
Why does the Minister not do something?
Does Deputy Stagg agree with the 1932 Act?
No, I was attempting to change it when I was—
Good. That is what comes of asking questions instead of always being in receipt of five wallops.
I did some work but the Minister does not seem to have done much since.
We did not find that work very helpful.
Before I ask my question I wish to declare an interest. I am a user and supporter of the railways.
I met the Deputy on the train.
That is why I was interested in the Minister's Ballinasloe speech, which made the following headline in The Irish Times: O'Rourke Suggests Ending CIE Transport Domination. I read the speech and found a number of general references to the need for change etc., but I could not find any specific proposal. The Minister stated that it was time to ask if the existing institutional arrangements are adequate for a new era. If the answer is that they are not, what institutional arrangement does the Minister have in mind? I raise this in the non-political sense as I am genuinely interested in the future of the railways.
I know Deputy O'Keeffe is interested because he comes a long distance to work. Recently I met him on a train and—
The Minister could be on a parallel track.
—therefore, I guessed he uses it often. The institutional arrangements to which I referred are those of the parent company and the three companies. The question we are looking at is whether the 1986 Act, into which the then Minister, Deputy Jim Mitchell, put a great deal of work in setting up the companies, is the correct set up for 2000 and beyond?
Does the Minister suggest answers?
Yes. I am thinking about it.
She is like de Valera, looking into her heart.
The Deputy may or may not like it. I am pleased to hear Deputy Yates say he approved of—
Question No. 43.
I like honesty, and I also liked the Deputy's profile because I thought he was very honest.