Vol. 751 No. 2
1Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Transport; Tourism and Sport when the Booz report on the ownership and management of Cork and Shannon airports will be published; if he has any plans to amend the State Airports Act 2004 to give effect to any of the proposals from the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1754/12]
The Deputy's question refers to the report on the ownership and management of Cork and Shannon airports, whether I intend to publish the report and if I have plans to amend legislation to give effect to the proposals arising from the report.
The report was undertaken by consultants at my request to provide me with wide-ranging advice on all possible options for the future ownership and operation of Cork and Shannon airports in order that I can propose informed recommendations to the Government. The Deputy will be aware that in 2008, my predecessor as Minister for Transport postponed until 2011 making a decision on the separation of Cork and Shannon airports as envisaged under the State Airports Act 2004. It is thus falls on me to consider the future of these two State-owned airports. I consulted Dublin, Cork and Shannon airport authorities on this question and their unanimous view is that there is no support for separation as originally envisaged. As a result, I sought consultancy advice on the way forward for the two airports. I asked the consultants to consult as widely as possible with stakeholders in Cork and Shannon on sustainable options for the two airports.
I received the consultants' report in December and I am currently considering their analysis and recommendations. I intend to bring proposals to the Government as soon as possible. As the report contains commercially sensitive information, much of which was provided on a confidential basis, it will not be possible to publish the report in full. However, I will publish a redacted version in due course. In the context of bringing forward proposals for the two airports, I will take account of the need for legislative changes.
I thank the Minister for his reply and welcome his stated intention to publish redacted elements of the report. However, I am disappointed by the continued delay on this important issue. While I accept the Minister only received the report in December, the issue has been around for some time and his Department possesses quite a lot of corporate knowledge on it. The Minister is correct to point out that a previous Minister put off a decision with an expectation of reviewing market conditions. Much corporate information is available and I am disappointed the issue effectively has been allowed to rest for the past 11 or 12 months.
The difficulty is the Minister made some quite specific promises in his party's manifesto prior to the general election about creating independent airports at Dublin, Shannon and Cork. This has created concerns in the minds of workers who are fearful for their jobs and has created an unrealisable expectation in the minds of some within the tourism sector. The Fine Gael Party and some elements within other parties had sought to suggest that merely breaking up the Dublin Airport Authority was the solution to the problems at all airports and that therefore, in a separated or independent environment, passenger numbers would flourish and the activities and business interests of those in the regions would benefit significantly. Consequently, there was a legitimate expectation of some action but it is clear the Minister has dragged his heels in this regard. I understand he only appointed the Booz & Company consultants last October or November. They have acted well and I accept they consulted widely but I am disappointed that procrastination has been allowed on this issue.
The significant elements of concern that existed in 2008 remain extant. Passenger numbers are falling and it has been necessary to change the forecasts for passenger numbers and growth. The Minister is aware the medium-term forecasts will be well off profile, which creates a significant problem in respect of debt financing or in dealing with the existing debt burden. These issues constitute significant challenges that face the incoming board and executive team. Economic circumstances have changed across the marketplace and the Minister is in a difficult position regarding the company. The company's efforts in attempting to refinance some of the bond undertakings-----
Does the Deputy have a question?
The question is inherent. Why has it taken so long for the Government to act on commitments it made before the last general election, which on the one hand gave an expectation to one group of people, while on the other hand created fear in the minds of others? Can the Government bring this issue to a conclusion? Can the Minister set out his policy proposals and allow everyone to get on with their lives?
First, there really has been no delay but it takes a bit of time to make the right decision. In making the right decision, I wished to ensure I had the advice from the various airport authorities and from independent consultants, as well as having time to give other members of the Cabinet, and other Departments in particular, an opportunity to consider the recommendations and proposals that lie within the Booz & Company report, as this issue also impinges on other Departments and is not simply a matter for my Department.
My own view has been expressed previously, while I also note the Fine Gael manifesto is not the same as the programme for Government. My view is that separation of the airports would be beneficial and that it would be beneficial to have greater competition among the State airports. While that is one proposal, it can only be done on a sustainable basis. It is very important that whatever is done with Cork and Shannon will ensure these airports are sustainable financially and are in a position to prosper, develop and compete. This must be ensured and I must be confident this is the case before proceeding with separation or deciding not to opt for separation.
However what will happen, and I agree with the Deputy on its importance, is that certainty is required as to what is the policy. Rightly or wrongly, between 2008 and 2011, no such certainty existed because decisions were postponed. I anticipate that during the course of this calendar year, we will have certainty as to the future of the airports and will be able to move on from there.
May I ask a supplementary question?
No, we are out of time. I remind Members the Minister has two minutes in which to reply and four minutes overall are available thereafter.
2Deputy Dessie Ellis asked the Minister for Transport; Tourism and Sport the position regarding the report of the Taxi Industry Review group; and his view on the requirements in terms of legislation to enact its recommendations [1573/12]
I announced the taxi regulation review on 8 June last in line with the commitment in the programme for Government. The review group, under my chairmanship, completed its report in December last and I have circulated the report to relevant Ministers and their Departments with a view to early consideration of the outcome of the review by the Government. Once the Government has had an opportunity to consider the review, I expect to be in a position to publish it on my Department's website and to outline the Government's response to it.
I thank all those who made submissions to the review group or participated in it. I was heartened by the constructive contributions of many diverse groups with an interest in the taxi industry. The review considered a wide range of issues relating to the taxi sector, including current regulatory policy and practices, licensing systems, enforcement and future dialogue with the taxi sector. I am confident the recommended measures in the review will enable necessary further reforms of the sector to allow consumers to have confidence in the taxi system, while also ensuring legitimate and competent operators and drivers can be rewarded fairly by operating under a regulatory framework that is adequately enforced.
Amendments to primary legislation will be required to implement some of the review proposals, together with secondary legislation that will be the responsibility of the National Transport Authority. I intend to clarify the primary legislative requirements and their timetable in due course.
I am pleased to learn the report has been completed. The Minister of State should study it as quickly as possible before making its contents available to Members. While I made one submission on behalf of my party, many good submissions were made by others. Many taxi drivers feel under pressure and must be reassured that Members are considering the issues they raised. For example, over the Christmas period, it was reported by many taxi drivers that people were using false identity cards to collect passengers and that this practice was widespread. Moreover, for some reason there was no proper management or supervision over the Christmas period and no one was checking to ascertain whether this was happening. Perhaps this was because it was Christmas, but it is unacceptable and should never happen. Other issues arise in respect of taxis and I draw the Minister of State's attention to the fact that while the identification that is displayed on the screens of the taxis is in English on one side, there is no Irish on the other side. It would be a good idea to have bilingual identification on the taxis and the Minister could put this proposal into the mix. I do not believe this has been done previously.
I welcome the Minister of State's intention to release this report. The Joint Committee on Environment, Transport, Culture and the Gaeltacht probably will have sight of the report before anyone else and its members will study it. I look forward to reading it and I certainly hope it will address many of the taxi drivers' concerns.
I thank the Deputy for his submission on this matter. The issue of enforcement which he correctly stated is very much addressed in the report and it is one that we must address. We need a new process for enforcement of current and future regulations and changes. That is one of the primary and most important aspects of the report. We need to ensure that rogue traders, those who should not be driving cars, operating in the business and those distributing licences etc., can no longer operate. That is a critical component. We need to make it a profession in which it is worthwhile and financially viable to work. All the measures that will be contained in the report will allow us to ensure this.
On the issue of signage, there will be a number of changes in this area which will be of great benefit to drivers, particularly full-time drivers.
Will the signage be displayed bilingually? That issue was brought to my attention and I do not think it has been mentioned previously.
That is an issue that will be addressed in the report.
3Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Transport; Tourism and Sport if he is concerned that there are a number of serious inaccuracies (details supplied) in the Route Selection Report for the proposed Oilgate to Rosslare Harbour, County Wexford road upgrade project; the action he proposes to correct these inaccuracies in a report which fails to justify the proposed project, which has so far cost the taxpayer in excess of €2 million; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41465/11]
This question relates to the route selection report for the Oilgate to Rosslare roads scheme. As Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding of the national roads programme. The planning, design and implementation of individual road projects is a matter for the National Roads Authority under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Therefore, this not a matter in which I have a role. Rather it is a matter for the NRA and I will ask the NRA to write directly to the Deputy in regard to the route selection report. If he does not receive a reply within ten days he should contact my office on the matter.
As I have indicated previously to the Deputy, the Oilgate to Rosslare scheme is one of a range of projects which have reached the route corridor selection phase but cannot proceed to construction for some time given the current difficult economic environment. When the project can be progressed it will be subject to approval by An Bord Pleanála.
I am not much the wiser having heard that reply. As Minister with responsibility for transport, it would great if the Minister had a little more control over the NRA than the previous Minister had. I do not understand the position if it is the case that the legislation does not allow Minister to have more impact in these decisions. Many of the decisions made by the NRA indicate that it seems keen to spend money a good deal of the time but we cannot afford it any more. We have been talking about the impact of severe cuts on people who need our help in this House during the past few months and the notion that roads would be built is a little over the top given the state of our finances. The Minister with responsibility for transport needs to have an impact in this respect and the decision should not be left with the NRA.
We pointed out to the Minister that it is claimed in the report that the project will benefit traffic congestion in the UK midlands - that is off the wall. It is claimed that the existing road is unsafe, which is completely true. It is a good road to travel on. I have travelled on it a good deal, probably as much as anyone. The traffic volumes on it are not bad. The road is fine. Wexford town is already bypassed and it does not need to be bypassed again. We do not need a bypass on the bypass. The traffic volumes that were assessed for the project do not bear up to scrutiny.
The Minister does have a certain role in this regard in the sense that it is the Minister's role to set policy, allocate budgets and oversee corporate governance. In this regard, the decision is not to spend additional moneys on this road for the time being because the money is not available to complete the project. Therefore, it does not make sense to spend further millions just to bring it from one stage of planning to the next.
I have changed the policy of the previous Government which was to spend hundreds of millions of euro planning and designing projects without knowing whether it could afford to build them. I am only proceeding with planning and design where we know that we can afford to build the project, and that is not the case at present. However, it is also my policy position that we should not stop planning for the future. Rosslare is a very large port with great potential. It makes sense that at some point in the future, and it may be the distant future, Rosslare should be connected by a high quality road to the motorway network, which is not the case at present. The road is adequate at present for the port that is there. I visited the port in recent months to see for myself. However, if Rosslare Port were to be expanded as a major port on the east coast in the future, it would require a better road connection. That is why it is important to plan for the future in this regard.
The route selection report, to which the Deputy referred, is available on Wexford County Council's website. I believe the Deputy is mischaracterising it to the extent that what it argues is that Rosslare could be used as a port in the future to access the east coast of Ireland as an alternative to Dublin Port, thus allowing heavy vehicles to avoid the congestion that already exists in the UK midlands, it is not that the road would be built so that people could avoid that. It recognises the fact that there is a good deal of congestion in the UK midlands and it might make sense to develop another port on the east coast of Ireland so that heavy goods vehicles could come that way rather than having to go through the middle of England.
There is potential to develop the existing road to meet the requirements of Rosslare Harbour, if it were developed into a serious port at some point in the future, but in the meantime the notion of freezing the 300 m corridor along it and affecting all the people who have businesses there does not make sense. These people are affected by this decision. For example, a vegetable farmer has lost a grant of €150,000 to build more sheds - his enterprise is labour intensive. Jobs will be lost by freezing the land where that farmer is working. If Rosslare becomes a big port, this corridor may be needed eventually and the Minister has said that this is planning for the future. He might be planning for what will happen in 50 years time but in the meantime he is freezing land on people who are living in the present.
I am conscious of the planning issue the Deputy raised, "planning blight" as it is described in other jurisdictions. The NRA has issued new guidelines to local authorities in the past few weeks giving them the criteria under which they could allow development to occur in these corridors, as in the case of developments such as agricultural sheds. Development in these route corridors is a decision of the planning authority, not the NRA. I would ask local authorities to take a pragmatic view when it comes to development in route corridors. There is a big difference between potting sheds or greenhouses and building a supermarket. Local authorities need to be pragmatic about that.
It is important to plan for the future. The Harcourt Street train line was closed for 30 or 40 years. I am glad it was not developed because if it had been we would not have had the Luas. The Dunboyne reservation and the reservation out to Navan was retained for the best part of 50 years and it is now coming back into use. One could say the same in regard to Midleton. It makes sense sometimes to maintain corridors.
Something like that is fine but this is a different scenario.
4Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Transport; Tourism and Sport if he will outline in percentage terms, the expected fare increases in public transport services provided by CIE in 2013 and 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1755/12]
Public transport fares are a matter for the CIE operating companies in conjunction with the National Transport Authority. I am aware that the NTA approved a range of fare increases in respect of the CIE companies recently which took effect earlier this month. It is the responsibility of the NTA to make a determination on any future fare increases as appropriate.
Notwithstanding the NTA's statutory responsibilities, I would add that Government recognises the need for the CIE companies to respond to the challenges of reduced PSO subvention funding, reduced fares income arising from reductions in passenger numbers and increased costs, such as fuel costs, which are outside their control. As a general principle it is my belief that efficiencies in operational costs should, in the first instance, be examined over fare increases and service reductions. However, in the current environment there has to be a recognition that unfortunately, fare increases will be inevitable if costs cannot be reduced sufficiently in order to maintain a reasonable level of service provision.
While a recovery in passenger numbers could increase company revenues, all concerned in my Department and the NTA must focus on identifying key public transport priorities in our cities and across the country. In turn, the PSO public transport service providers will have to achieve greater efficiency and cost effectiveness in the years ahead based on a realistic assessment of the scope and level of contracted services.
It is clear that the reduction in the PSO subvention provided by the Government for the CIE group of companies has led to a considerable fare increase. Obviously, this is having an impact on people's capacity to travel to work. The Government has made a great deal of the fact that it has decided not to tax work. It could be strongly argued that the increase in the cost of getting to work - either in the form of an increase in the fares charged by the CIE group of companies or in a rise in the cost of motor tax or fuel oil - has led to a correspondingly significant increase in taxes on work.
In the past the Minister indicated that there was a necessity for transport prices to be reduced and argued that this was part of the economic model which showed that the country had the capacity to be competitive. The programme for Government states the Administration recognises the need to rebalance transport policy in favour of public transport. The Government indicated that it would establish a Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure to explore the benefits to the public transport passenger of a more diverse bus service. What has been done to establish such a service? A great deal was promised in this regard. Is the Minister of State satisfied with the response of CIE in the context of its efforts to reduce the cost of its operations and develop a more cost-effective method of providing public transportation which would not, in the first instance, rely on increases in passenger fares?
The Department and the NTA have been working hard in various ways to encourage a greater uptake of public transport services. In the context of fare increases, it is important to point out that serious savings are to be made by consumers who choose, as we are encouraging them to do, to avail of the integrated ticket, the leap card. Using a leap card can lead to savings of as much as 9% in using Dublin Bus services, 16% to 19% in using DART commuter services and 17% in using Luas services. The uptake of the leap card has been so significant that we are confident that many people are being encouraged to use public transport.
The Deputy is well aware that there have been a number of reports on the efforts of the various CIE companies. The Deloitte report on Dublin Bus shows that many cost efficiencies and savings have been made. Of course, the companies in question are always going to be seeking to make further savings. In the context of the financial position of these companies, it is important to note that Dublin Bus, Irish Rail and Bus Éireann have all made significant savings in the past year. These savings will have to be re-examined in the current economic context. However, we are happy with the way in which the companies are going in this regard.
As a result of the time I spent as a member of the Joint Committee on Transport, I am aware of the Deloitte report and the efforts the various companies have made. Is the Minister of State prepared to accept that, in view of the fact that he is not providing the group of companies with adequate resources, it is right and fitting that there should be an increase in passenger fares in order to pay for the subvention for PSO routes? Is he happy with the fare increases?
In an ideal world we would not be contemplating fare increases. Given the costs associated with the various companies, many of which are fixed, and in the light of the price of fuel, there is an inevitability to the imposition of fare increases. However, as the Deputy has acknowledged on previous occasions, there is a way of mitigating the impact of these increases through use of the leap card. We have purposely differentiated the fares in order to encourage more people to use public transport and thereby lower the costs relating to the various companies into the future.
5Deputy Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport; Tourism and Sport his plans to reverse the decline in tourism numbers visiting the west of Ireland, which are down by 37% in the years 2007 to 2010. [1638/12]
All regions were affected by the drop in visitor numbers between 2007 and 2010. While the global recession was a primary cause, it is undeniable the tourism sector had become less competitive and that in many parts of the country it was overly reliant on domestic business. The challenge facing the Government was to help rebuild tourism competitiveness and change the perception in terms of value for money. The jobs initiative reduced the VAT rate to 9% from 1 July last on a range of tourism services, including hotels and restaurants. The Government also halved employers' PRSI and introduced a visa waiver scheme which makes Ireland more accessible from important new and emerging markets. These measures were aimed at supporting employment within the tourism sector across the country, as well as helping businesses to lower their cost base and offer a more competitive product. This was important in order to address a perception of Ireland being an expensive place to visit, particularly for British tourists. The necessary structures and people to deliver The Gathering initiative in 2013 are being put in place. I expect this initiative to have a major impact in the west.
The growth in overseas visitor numbers of 6.8% for the first 11 months of 2011 and the increase in employment in the accommodation and food services sector of 6,000 during the previous two quarters is welcome and shows that we are hopefully turning the corner. Operational responsibility and programming for the promotion and development of tourism in individual regions, including the west, rests with the tourism agencies. The ITIC report from which the Deputy quotes addresses a number of recommendations to both the industry in the west and the agencies. Many of these recommendations are being implemented. I have asked Fáilte Ireland and Tourism Ireland to inform the Deputy of their detailed plans for 2012.
As Deputy Luke ‘Ming' Flanagan is not present, we will move on.
